COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo., December 11, 2013 — As expected, Democrats from Colorado’s Senate District 19 yesterday nominated Arvada Mayor pro tem Rachel Zenzinger to the seat vacated by the resignation of Evie Hudak. Hudak resigned the day before Thanksgiving under threat of recall for her radical stand on gun control.
Under Colorado law, if a legislator voluntarily resigns, a vacancy committee of that person’s own party convenes to nominate a replacement to serve until the next election. The governor confirms the appointment. Had Hudak not resigned, she would have faced a recall election similar to the ones former senators Morse and Giron faced in September and lost. The Democrats thus preserve their one-seat majority in the Colorado legislature for the spring term starting next month.
They do more than preserve their majority: Zenzinger is cut from the same radical cloth as Hudak and the vast majority of Colorado Democrat legislators. She was Hudak’s campaign chairman in 2012. Both are supported by the unions; Zenzinger is a former teacher and union member. Still, Democrats are already seeking to portray her as “moderate.”
Without a hint of irony, Democrat Party state Chairman Rick Palacio said, “I’m hopeful that Colorado’s Republicans will put partisanship aside, and commit to working with Rachel Zenzinger and our Democratic majority to tackle the issues important to Colorado families and small businesses.”
Could he have meant issues like civil unions, gun control, sex education for kindergartners, and election “reform” like they tackled in the 2013 session? All of the bills associated with those issues were passed on strict party line votes. No Republican-sponsored amendments were allowed.
In her formal letter of resignation, Hudak wrote, “In the interest of preserving the progress made over the last year, I am resigning as State Senator for District 19.” She termed the gun control legislation she supported “sensible.”
It is difficult to read a Democrat’s statement these days without encountering the word “progress,” which begs the question of progress in which direction. For Colorado Democrats, it means progress toward an extreme radical left agenda totally subservient to the national party and to the unions and special interests who brought them to power.
From their point of view, every victory is permanent and every defeat temporary. Progress is the destruction of capitalism and the American republic and movement toward the socialist utopia of their dreams. From that perspective, it was important not to risk losing the senate majority. Evie Hudak had to resign.
Because she resigned, the Recall Hudak Too committee won without having to work through the election phase. But because she was replaced with a clone without Hudak’s baggage, the victory may have been Pyrrhic. It is rumored that Hudak will again be the party’s nominee for her former seat in 2014. Whether Zenzinger is a temporary placeholder or a more lasting replacement remains to be seen but in the short term nothing changes.
In the longer term, the recalls are over. The job of a representative is to represent the people who elected them. The message has been sent. In a letter to Sam Adams after the Revolution, Thomas Jefferson wrote that in the days before the Revolution and the Constitution, they believed that where annual elections stopped, tyranny began.
Think about the implications of that for a moment: in the days of travel by horse or by foot, one year was judged long enough between elections. A state senator in Colorado today serves for four years. Four years is too long to expect people to wait when their representatives clearly don’t represent them.
Recalls, ironically, were a Progressive reform, instituted in Colorado in the 1930s. Recalls were designed to do exactly what they did in September: make representatives responsible to the people, not the party. But today’s Democrats who call themselves progressives are not the late 19th and early 20th century reformers whose ideas formed American Progressivism.
That progressive movement, as a reform movement, has more in common with the Tea Party. Today’s so-called progressives are Marxists who have worn out the term “liberal” and who are now doing the same to “progressive.”
The real answer moving forward — to borrow a phrase — is not to rely on recalls but for an energized and re-awakened electorate to take back their legislatures, parties and government by active involvement in the governing process. Very ironically, the current crop of Marxist-Progressives won office by promising to get rid of special interests and return the government to the people.
The people have since learned that they simply traded one batch of special interests for another, arguably worse batch.
At The Voice of Liberty, we seek to advance the principles of liberty, because tyranny never sleeps.
This article is the copyrighted property of the writer and Communities @ WashingtonTimes.com. Written permission must be obtained before reprint in online or print media. REPRINTING TWTC CONTENT WITHOUT PERMISSION AND/OR PAYMENT IS THEFT AND PUNISHABLE BY LAW.