Imagine a Great ColoradoNews

NEIL WESTERGAARD | To move forward, Colorado must move beyond tribal politics

Author: Neil Westergaard - July 31, 2018 - Updated: August 10, 2018

Neil-at-DBJ.jpg
Neil Westergaard (Photo by Kathleen Lavine | Denver Business Journal)

COMMENTARY: This is part of our series of contributed essays, “Imagine a Great Colorado.” See below for more.

Is there really that much disagreement about the biggest problems facing Colorado? I would argue there is not. Coloradans want a sustainable economy, good schools, efficient transportation, a fair tax system, safe communities and reasonable protection of Colorado’s quality of life.

Why then, do these issues never seem to get resolved?

Because the biggest problem is politics. The political decision-making for dealing with these issues is broken and it’s been that way for decades.

That’s the biggest need on Colorado’s “to do” list, in my opinion.

Extreme partisanship, rigid ideologies and lack of respect for opposing views are blocking progress on the fundamental issues facing Colorado. Public policy debates too frequently devolve into tribal conflicts framed starkly in terms “good” and “evil” with no political middle ground.

Lawmakers care more about their tribal ideology than what’s good for the people. And they worry too much about the potential for future political attacks from the extremes of their own party in the next election.

And so, the state makes little progress on the critical issues that we face.

It wasn’t always that way.

There was a time in Colorado, and elsewhere, even in Congress, when Republicans respected Democrats and Democrats respected Republicans even when they disagreed over policy. Sometimes they learned from each other.

There’d be fierce debates on the floor of the House and Senate, a lot of buttonholing in the lobby outside the chambers. But at night, the opponents were able to get together over a drink or a meal and hash things out.

State Rep. Alec Garnett, D-Denver, holds his 2-year-old son Ashton as the Colorado House of Representatives convenes for the start of the 2018 legislative session, Jan. 10, 2018, in the state Capitol in Denver. (AP Photo/David Zalubowski)

They approached political differences with a basic level of respect for the opposition because they recognized that their political opponents were elected by the people, too.

In the 1980s, when I covered the Colorado Legislature for two different newspapers, complicated issues got resolved between Republicans and Democrats that are hard to imagine getting through the Legislature today.

A few examples.

Led by Republicans, the Legislature created the Scientific and Cultural Facilities (SCFD) tax district. That’s right. A new tax, sponsored by Republicans. Supported by Democrats because of what the tax would pay for. And it even got support from some rural Republicans.

A new “flat tax” to replace Colorado’s overly complicated state income tax system. It raised an additional $400 million in revenue. Although it was opposed initially by Democrats who wanted a graduated income tax, they eventually got on board because it raised significant new money for programs they wanted.

Enabling legislation was adopted that eventually led to Denver’s new airport, new convention center and Coors Field. Big government anyone?

All these things happened because elected officials believed that politics really was the art of compromise. Give and take was possible because politicians possessed a basic level of respect for the opposition, even though they might disagree on details. They worked it out.

But then came TABOR and other constitutional measures that put state finances on auto-pilot; term-limits that handed more power to special interests and lobbyists; the weaponization of political ads and the adoption of annihilation politics that attacked character rather than substance, often on exaggerated or false claims.

Today, political compromise is viewed as an act of capitulation. Of disgrace. Of weakness. The parties are largely defined as a series of inviolate principles and litmus tests from which the participants can never deviate.

Campaign finances magnify the differences, too. Republicans dare not side with Democrats less they risk a primary challenge in the next election cycle, financed by a special interests. A Democrat who sides with the Republicans, faces similar risk.

We’ve retreated into tribes. It’s not the loyal opposition anymore. It’s the enemy. Less gets done.

 

We know what Colorado needs. Sensible TABOR reform, equitable school finance, protection of quality of life, but not at the expense of the entire oil and gas industry. A more efficient transportation system.

But we won’t get there until politicians and the political parties jettison the “win at all costs” mentality that pervades public discourse today.

Let’s try to remember we’re in the same tribe. It’s called democracy.


More essays

> DAN NJEGOMIR | Imagine a great Colorado: 7 perspectives on how to lift up the state

> BARBARA O’BRIEN | Five goals for Colorado’s next governor

> MARK HILLMAN | Hold government accountable — and call off the culture wars

> LUCIA GUZMAN | Bridge the partisan divide to pursue our highest priorities

> ELLEN ROBERTS | Resource stewardship, fiscal prudence and independent thinking

> TOM NORTON | Build infrastructure for people, goods, information — and water

> PATTY LIMERICK | Forge new bonds between urban and rural Colorado

Neil Westergaard

Neil Westergaard

Neil Westergaard is former editor of the Denver Business Journal and The Denver Post. He can be reached at noweste@gmail.com