By Vianes Rodriguez
The Republican Governors Association released an ad on Oct. 6 entitled, “Actions” that targets Gov. John Hickenlooper for his support of Colorado’s gun control laws, stance on illegal immigration, and the death penalty.
Playing off the idea that “actions speak louder than words,” the ad takes the audience on a journey of Hickenlooper’s actions and argues of those actions: “We notice” and “It’s shocking!” The ad makes three claims against Hickenlooper.
1. Ignored Colorado Sheriffs on Gun Control
In March of 2013 Hickenlooper signed a series of laws that placed tougher measures on firearms throughout the state. Colorado sheriffs — who sued the governor over the laws — said they were upset that Hickenlooper failed to meet with them and hear their concerns while the gun control measures were being debated at the Capitol.
At a conference of the County Sheriffs of Colorado in June 2014, Hickenlooper was questioned by Weld County Sheriff John Cooke about not meeting with the sheriffs to gain their perspective on the pending legislation.
A of the encounter was recorded by someone in the audience, and was posted to Youtube by . Revealing Politics is a conservative-leaning “501(c)4 organization that tracks political opponent’s public statements.
In the video Mr. Cooke asked, “When these gun laws came up, why wouldn’t you listen to the sheriffs?”
“Why wouldn’t, when a couple of sheriffs wanted to meet with you, you wouldn’t hear our side of the story?”
Hickenlooper replied, “I would say in the gun stuff, we certainly could have done a better job. … I didn’t find out the sheriffs were trying to talk to me until the week after, 10 days after, that time frame. I’m happy to sit down any time you want. … I have to say I apologize. I don’t think we did a good job on any of that stuff. And we have worked very hard since then to open those doors of communication.”
Sheriff Justin Smith of Larimer County further Hickenlooper on the sheriffs’ attempt to make their opinion heard.
“There were days we’d have 40 sheriffs at the Capitol,” Smith said. “We were well known to be there with an opinion. … I personally came by your office, talked to your staff, I know our organization president sent a letter…”
Hickenlooper interrupted, replying, “How many apologies do you want? What the (expletive deleted)? I apologized!”
This claim receives an A. It has been undisputed by the governor’s office that there were attempts by Colorado sheriffs to share their opinion about the pending gun control legislation. Furthermore, Hickenlooper personally apologized for not meeting with Colorado sheriffs prior to signing the gun legislation. This claim is true and is supported by Hickenlooper’s own words.
2. As Mayor, allowed Denver to be a sanctuary city for illegal immigrants
The ad itself does not reference a specific policy on which to base this criticism against Hickenlooper. Upon contacting the RGA, spokesperson Jon Thompson, Fact Lab was directed to an executive order from 1998, and the shooting of Denver Police Officer Donnie Young in 2005.
In 1998, the former mayor of Denver Wellington Webb issued Executive Order No. 116, according to The Denver Post in 1998, “Affirmed the rights of immigrants and all residents against unlawful discrimination.” The executive order restricted police officers from directly seeking a suspect’s immigration status without prior approval from a supervisor or commander. As mayor of Denver, Hickenlooper left the executive order in place.
In 2005, Raul Gomez Garcia, who was in the country illegally, shot two police officers, killing one named Donnie Young. Garcia worked as a busboy at the Cherry Cricket restaurant Hickenlooper owned. Garcia had shown fraudulent papers in order to gain employment at the restaurant. While Hickenlooper was the owner of the Cherry Cricket, he had placed his business dealings in a Garcia did not have a criminal record. But critics seized on the fact he had traffic violations, a fact that opened Hickenlooper to criticism for allowing Webb’s order to stand. Had Hickenlooper lifted the order, his critics said, Garcia might have been deported and the shooting never would have occurred.
This claim requires a large amount of extrapolation to truly understand the underpinnings of the claim. The argument against Executive Order No. 116 is misleading because the order itself did not change the arrest policies of the Denver Police. According to a 1999 summarized by Denver City Attorney, Daniel Muse, “Executive Order No. 116 has no impact on the arrest policies and procedures regarding undocumented aliens as presently written and proposed.” Furthermore the word “sanctuary” evokes a political critique rather than public policy. According to César García Hernández, a law professor at University of Denver Sturm College of Law, the sanctuary claim against Hickenlooper, “Is an attempt to draw Hickenlooper as pro-migrant by using the word ‘sanctuary” because it is a dirty word to certain constituents the Republican Party tries to woo.”
The claim seems to imply that the executive order was partially responsible for Gomez Garcia not being deported upon receiving his speeding tickets. This too is false. Muse’s legal opinion states, “Executive Order No. 116 merely codifies what the courts have already decided and that is, state and local officials have no jurisdiction to enforce civil provisions of federal immigration laws.” The logic of this claim is a, “Huge leap in logic with a long chain of inferences, it’s unfair.” according to García Hernández.
This claim receives a C, as it is tainted by misinformation. While Hickenlooper did not overturn Webb’s executive order, it is a stretch to imply that his decision resulted in Denver suddenly becoming a safe “hub” for those in the country illegally. The claim does not cite the executive order or the shooting within the ad itself. As a result the claim is misleading by relying on huge assumptions to reach an improbable conclusion.
3. Suggested giving a mass murderer clemency if he loses a political campaign
On May 22, 2013, Colorado was on its way to execute its first prisoner on death row in more than 15 years. Hickenlooper had two choices: allow the execution of Nathan Dunlap, who was convicted of murder in 1993, or grant Dunlap clemency. Hickenlooper decided to a take a different approach by issuing an executive order that gave Dunlap a “temporary reprieve.” This temporarily halted Dunlap’s execution but it is not permanent. Hickenlooper or his successor could reverse the executive order at any time. The executive order resulted in heated of Hickenlooper from some victims’ families and other state officials.
In February of 2014 Hickenlooper was interviewed by CNN for a documentary on the death penalty. Hickenlooper was asked a hypothetical question, if a political challenger continued to make the death penalty a central issue of the gubernatorial election and won the race, what were the options available to Hickenlooper? Hickenlooper responded,
“Well we aren’t going to let Nathan Dunlap become a political football. … And you know if that becomes a political issue, in that context within a campaign, obviously there’s a period of time between the election and the end of the year where individuals can make decisions, such as a governor can.”
The full recording was obtained through a request through the Colorado Open Records Act and was posted by a conservative blog, . A spokesperson from the Hickenlooper campaign responded to an article in The on August 25th about Hickenlooper’s comments to CNN. The Post published these comments from the Hickenlooper campaign, “The governor has no plans to revisit his (reprieve) decision in this case,” said his campaign spokesman, Eddie Stern. “He expressed his position on the clemency issue in May 2013 when he signed the executive order on this matter, and his position has not changed since then.” Stern said the governor was responding to hypothetical questioning in the CNN interview and that he was “discussing the legal options that are provided in the state’s constitution.”
This claim receives an A. While it’s true the question is hypothetical, Hickenlooper’s statement does seem to imply the possibility he would grant clemency should he lose to a pro death penalty candidate.
