The White River Electric Association, a non-profit cooperative, lost several miles of power lines in two fires that burned public and private land just outside of Meeker in August 2025. Power lines are uninsurable, for obvious reasons, and White River has had to take out a $23.6 million loan to rebuild transmission lines and get power to critical gas development projects in the Piceance Basin.

“The loan itself is not a long-term loan. It was issued with the hope that FEMA would help us,” said Alan J. Michalewicz, general manager and CEO of White River Electric Association. “Now, with FEMA being declined, we are exploring the options that are available to us and what it would take to turn this into a long-term loan. It could have up to a 5% rate impact on membership, across the board to all our members.”

Michalewicz said he is grateful for the bipartisan support in Colorado following the fires and lauded the state’s work in the aftermath of the fires. White River rebuilt transmission lines quickly, and full power will be restored next week to oil and gas operators in the area.

We worry that even a 3% rate increase will hurt families, small businesses and oil and gas operations in a time when everyone, including utilities, is facing the pressure of increased fuel prices.

Trump’s denial is the first time in 35 years that the federal government refused to use Federal Emergency Management Act funds to assist a community in Colorado recovering from a natural disaster, but under Trump’s leadership, such denials are now the norm – that is, if you live in a “blue” state.

According to , Trump’s administration has denied 77% of disaster funding requests when the request comes from a state with a Democratic governor and two Democratic senators. When the request comes from a state with a Republican governor and two Republican Senators, Trump’s administration only denied 11% of requests.

Such partisan wielding of federal dollars intended to provide communities and individuals with assistance to rebuild in the wake of natural disasters is unprecedented. Politico went through 45 years of FEMA records and found that no other president, going back as far as Reagan, has denied a majority of requests from any states, let alone singled out states for political retribution using FEMA dollars. While the rate of approval for Republican-state requests has remained mostly unchanged compared to previous administrations, Democratic-state approvals have plummeted.

We are outraged, but far more than anything, we are sad for our neighbors in Rio Blanco, La Plata, Archuletta and Mineral counties.

Sadly, the counties that Trump is denying funds to had a majority of voters support him for president in 2024. In Rio Grande County, 60% of voters cast their ballots for Trump. Now he has denied their request for disaster relief, which will directly result in increased utility costs for the foreseeable future. Did they vote for this? Surely they did not expect Trump to wield federal funds as a cudgel to punish them for the politics of their neighbors.

Colorado’s leaders cannot drop this issue until Trump reverses this bad decision.

Every single member of Colorado’s congressional delegation — Republicans and Democrats — signed off on . Now that Trump rejected the appeal, our elected officials must increase the political pressure.

No one should be talking about this more than U.S. Rep. Jeff Hurd, who represents all four affected counties in Congressional District 3. Hurd is facing a primary for re-election, and he has until June to prove he can deliver for his constituents. Hurd should be spending time on the campaign trail explaining how he is fighting for these federal funds.

But he can’t do it alone. Colorado’s U.S. senators — John Hickenlooper and Michael Bennet — have decrying Trump’s denial of these funds.

“The president is solely responsible for this abdication of responsibility; the consequences of which will continue to be severe and long-lasting,” the statement reads.

But that doesn’t go far enough.

We need our elected officials to be a thorn in Trump’s side, requesting meetings, talking at every public event about the detailed repercussions of this decision and lauding Gov. Jared Polis for his ongoing support of these counties.

The emphasis from our leaders should be on the unprecedented and politically motivated nature of Trump’s decision. Trump is setting a dire precedent. Will future presidents withhold federal disaster aid unless a state’s leaders laud her achievements, bow to her every demand, and kiss the ring?

We want to live in a country that is free from the tyranny of an executive branch with unlimited power and unlimited spite. Now is the time for Colorado leaders to push back on this bad decision and fight for a future where disaster declarations are considered on their merits and qualifications, not on the angry whims of one man.

To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.

Re: “In defense of the Democratic caucuses and grassroots organizing,” and “Republican Party hung the heavy price on health care,” April 12 letters to the editor

Pop quiz:

Letters to the editor published in the Post are

a) an accurate reflection of the political leanings of its readership

b) a reflection of the Post¶¶Òőap editorial bias and accompanying discretion

c) all of the above

Hint: there is no right answer.

But whatever the reason, it¶¶Òőap obvious the published letters skew left and even hard left, Sunday after Sunday. One fellow in defense of the caucusing process in our state asserts, regarding Sens. John Hickenlooper and Michael Bennet, that “their centrist pandering to Republican colleagues in the Senate is deeply unpopular.” Wait, what? Plenty of adjectives apply to Colorado’s Democratic senators, but centrist isn’t any of them. Unless, of course, you skew hard left — really hard left.

And then there’s the writer who, as the headline summarizes, hangs the heavy price of health care on Republicans. “The reasons for our health care situation fall in the lap of the Republican Party ” before backtracking with “This is not a Republican or Democratic issue…” That¶¶Òőap not atypical for those who are somewhere left of center who want it both ways and deny the fact that health care policy is a political issue and nothing more. Rather than recognize that reality, they choose to occupy an imaginary moral high ground with empty phrases like “people will die…” .

The good news for those of us who are somewhere right of center is that the Op-Ed page doubles as the entertainment section for us.

Jon Pitt, Golden

‘Leftward’ movements that have benefited Colorado’s residents

Re: “Can Colorado’s GOP recover?” April 12 commentary

Columnist Kafer, mourning the loss of Republican power during the Trump decade, attributes the rise of Democrats in part to “some very smart, strategic decisions to move the state leftward.” The tone implies that leftward is undesirable and in need of correction by a revived Republican Party.

What if, though, leftward succeeded over the past 10 years because leftward policies create results that Coloradans want and value? What if leftward means good for the people? What if leftward eases people’s burdens and makes Coloradans’ lives better, fairer and healthier?

Leftward created:

1. , a state-wide, universal paid family leave program that allows workers to have babies, care for loved ones, and recover from illness in dignity.

2. Universal free full day kindergarten and pre-school, relieving some of families’ still enormous childcare burdens while improving early childhood education for all.

3. A mandate that employers post in job announcements, thus increasing applicants’ control in their job searches.

4. Prohibitions against landlords’ most abusive and practices, making tenants’ lives easier without endangering the landlord class.

5. A 2026 minimum wage of and hour, where the federal minimum wage remains at an aughts-era .

6. An attorney general who courageously fights the abuses of a federal executive branch and the monopolization efforts of grocery conglomerates, compared to a Republican attorney general who sought to destroy the Affordable Care Act (he failed).

Floy Jeffares, Lakewood

I suppose it is ironic that Krista Kafer’s column lamenting the changes in the Colorado GOP is published the day after the Colorado GOP has their state nominating meeting in Pueblo where they nominated two candidates, one of whom wants to “DOGE the mess out of everything” at the state Capitol (since that worked so well in Washington) and claims there is a pedophile ring at the state Capitol that he will reveal after he is elected. Both have stated they will free Tina Peters

The sad fact is that the Republican Party, both in Colorado and nationwide, has lost its mind and moral compass and is incapable of governing. When all you want to do is tear things down, rather than build things up, then you are incapable of making rational decisions and making things better. Unfortunately, this is where the Republican party is today, and they are no alternative to the Democrats in running the state (or nation), given the binary choice between the two visions of democracy.

I keep hoping for the day that the fever will break in the Republican Party and they return to the country-club Republican party I grew up around, where making things work was the call of the day, but it is increasingly looking like that will not happen in the remainder of my days on this mortal coil.

Martin Ward,ÌęAurora

Falsely claiming genocide

Re: “Bennet’s shortsighted move to back out of a forum,” April 12 editorial

In Sunday’s editorial criticizing Sen. Michael Bennet, the writer casually tossed out the accusation that “Israel waged a genocidal war” against the Gazans. Quite the opposite is true.

If Israel intended to eradicate Gazans, why hasn’t it over the past 2 1/2 years?ÌęIsrael has killed perhaps under 2% of Gaza’s civilians, while nearly all of Hamas’ deeply embedded military capability is gone. Why did Israel facilitate the delivery of over a million tons of aid, send millions of messages to civilians instructing them how to flee, execute elaborate evacuation plans, and abort a large portion of its military strikes due to civilian presence?

Clearly, Israel’s intent was to minimize civilian casualties while pursuing fighters in the complex, civilian-threatening, 3D battlespace that Hamas created.

“Israel has doneÌęmore to prevent civilian casualtiesÌęin war than any military in history,” according to , a U.S. war scholar.

Agreed, genocide is very bad. Falsely accusing genocide is also bad. Many agencies, media, and so-called experts are lining up to hurl the pithy genocide accusation at Israel. The editorial board should take a few moments to learn about the false accusation (see the 100-second by Dr. Sara Brown or the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies debunking genocide) before queuing up in that line.

Mark Brown, Littleton

Acknowledge the real potential harms to girls in transgender sports

Re: “Proposed initiative on transgender athletes puts our daughters at risk,” April 12 commentary

Mike Smith’s commentary against falsely claimed that it “puts our daughters at risk”. Initiative 109 focuses on designating a school athletic team or intramural sport, based on biological sex, whereby a team or sport designated for girls does not allow on the team persons who are biologically boys. That reduces the risk of injury to girls on the team or on an opposing girls’ team. That far outweighs Smith’s stated concerns about his tall daughter being falsely accused of being a biological boy. Most tall teenage daughters would not be mistaken for being a biological boy. Colorado schools have records of their students’ biological sex.

Read the full initiative on the secretary of state’s website to appreciate Smith’s many nonsensical remarks, such as his “When you write laws that treat every child as a potential suspect, you are not protecting kids,” and his “Initiative 109 is vague and poorly written, leaving critical questions unanswered about how it would actually be enforced.”

Smith mentions that a Utah State Board of Education member incorrectly implied on social media that a teenage girl was a biological boy. Smith falsely called it “one among many examples of the harm these policies cause to female athletes,” whereby he claims “you are not protecting kids – you’re endangering them.” He did not mention that the offending board member was by the Utah legislature and governor and was recently forced off the board.

Joseph B. Feiten,ÌęWestminster

Managing water rights is an unenviable — yet necessary — task

Re: “,” April 12 commentary

Kudos for the article on depleted water supplies in the Colorado River Basin, as that has critical, far-ranging impacts beyond just that watershed. It has long been recognized that management of the Colorado’s water supplies had a “structural deficit” (more water was allocated than is actually available), in part because the 1922 Colorado River Compact was based on a series of exceptionally wet years.

Additionally, the compact ignored the rights of Native Americans (who hold the senior water rights), did not consider Mexico’s water claims, and did not address any water needs for the basin’s environment.

Furthermore, the situation has been made much more dire because of “aridification,” which has increased temperatures, modified precipitation, and reduced river flows throughout the basin.

Now state and federal officials are faced with the daunting task of determining how the river should be managed in the future. I do not envy those individuals, for politically, it is a no-win situation. They must deal with the realities of nature and can no longer “kick the can down the road,” for the can has fallen off the cliff!

Given the ongoing rhetoric, I can’t say I’m optimistic, but hopefully, collective wisdom may prevail, and a solution will be found that provides equitable water supplies for all involved (states, tribes, and our environment). However, if agreement cannot be found and the situation results in litigation, there will be a lengthy and costly process, and no one wins.

Water touches every aspect of our lives as it is essential for our very existence, a key aspect of our quality of life, necessary for the environment, and critical to our economy. Therefore, I hope The Denver Post will continue to cover water issues beyond just the Colorado River.

ÌęGene Reetz, Denver

Editor’s note: Reets is a retired EPA senior water resources scientist.

To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.

Kirkmeyer, of Brighton, will face off against state Rep. Scott Bottoms and political newcomer Victor Marx in the June 30 Republican primary. Bottoms and Marx, both pastors who live in Colorado Springs, qualified for the ballot through the GOP state assembly on Saturday.

Bottoms, who led a wide assembly field and won support from 45% of attendees, will get the top spot in the race.

Kirkmeyer took the petition route to the ballot. She submitted more than 15,000 valid signatures, including more than 1,500 from each of Colorado’s eight congressional districts, according to the Colorado Secretary of State’s Office, which certified the signatures.

“This campaign has been built by thousands of real people, in real communities, all across Colorado,” Kirkmeyer said in a statement about her ballot qualification. “I’m incredibly grateful to everyone who took the time to sign our petition, share our message, and be part of something bigger. This is your campaign.”

The Democratic slate was mostly set at the end of March with that party’s state assembly. Attorney General Phil Weiser, who won support from more than 90% of that event¶¶Òőap voting members, will face U.S. Sen. Michael Bennet, who petitioned onto the primary ballot.

Also on Wednesday, the Secretary of State’s office certified University of Colorado Regent Wanda James’s spot in a primary challenge to incumbent U.S. Rep. Diana DeGette, a Denver Democrat. Melat Kiros, a Denver lawyer who stunned DeGette by outpolling her during the county assembly in March, has also qualified for that primary race. Republicans have nominated Christy Peterson, who is unopposed.

Earlier in the week, the Secretary of State’s Office certified Hetal Doshi and Boulder County District Attorney Michael Dougherty for the Democratic primary ballot for attorney general. They will face Secretary of State Jena Griswold and attorney David Seligman in that party’s nominating contest.

Democratic and Republican primary ballots

Here are the candidates who qualified for the major-party ballots in the June 30 primary in statewide races. Voters affiliated with a party will receive its ballot in the mail in June. Unaffiliated voters can participate in primaries and will receive both parties’ ballots in the mail, but they can return only one of them.

The four state offices are all open races this year, with the incumbents term-limited.

Governor

• Democratic primary: U.S. Sen. Michael Bennet, Attorney General Phil Weiser
• Republican primary: state Rep. Scott Bottoms, state Sen. Barbara Kirkmeyer, Victor Marx

Attorney general

• Republican primary: El Paso County District Attorney Michael Allen, David Willson
• Democratic primary: Hetal Doshi, Boulder County District Attorney Michael Dougherty,ÌęSecretary of State Jena Griswold, David Seligman

Secretary of state

• Democratic primary: state Sen. Jessie Danielson,ÌęJefferson County Clerk Amanda Gonzalez
• Republican primary: James Wiley (a former Colorado Libertarian Party official), unopposed

Treasurer

• Republican primary: Fremont County Commissioner Kevin Grantham, unopposed
• Democratic primary: state Sen. Jeff Bridges, unopposed

U.S. Senate

• Democratic primary: state Sen. Julie Gonzales,ÌęU.S. Sen. John Hickenlooper (incumbent)
• Republican primary: state Sen. Mark Baisley, unopposed

Both men will appear on the June 30 primary ballot. Bottoms, who is one of the most conservative lawmakers in the state Capitol, won slightly more than 45% of the 2,145 ballots cast, comfortably beating Marx’s 39% and topping a field of more than a dozen candidates who vied for gubernatorial ballot access. When Marx’s total was announced and Bottoms’ victory assured, the lawmaker’s supporters shouted and jumped around him in the bleachers of Colorado State University-Pueblo’s arena.

“This is our year. This is the year we’re going to do this,” Bottoms, who is in his second term in the statehouse, said in brief remarks earlier Saturday. He promised to work with federal immigration authorities, to build nuclear reactors and to “reclaim safety and security.” He also pledged to “DOGE the mess out of everything in this state,” a reference to billionaire Elon Musk’s “Department of Government Efficiency,” which gutted a number of federal programs last year.

State Sen. Barbara Kirkmeyer, who also is running for governor, did not participate in the assembly process and has instead submitted signatures to appear on the primary ballot. Marx also submitted signatures while also seeking the assembly nomination.

The party also nominated state Sen. Mark Baisley for U.S. Senate, former Colorado Libertarian Party official James Wiley for secretary of state, and Fremont County Commissioner Kevin Grantham for state treasurer. All those candidates will be appear on the ballot alone in June, virtually assuring them places on the November general election ballot.

For attorney general, the assembly sent Michael Allen, the district attorney in El Paso County, and attorney David Willson to the primary election in June.

The day was marred by delays, mistakes, long lines and, as afternoon turned into evening, a voting discrepency: About 80 more ballots had been cast than delegates had been credentialed to cast them. The assembly then voted to accept the new ballots as legitimate (the official running the meeting said they likely were).

The winner of the June gubernatorial primary will face off against U.S. Sen. Michael Bennet or Attorney General Phil Weiser, each of whom are seeking the Democratic nomination to replace Gov. Jared Polis next year.

The Republican candidates who emerge from the primaries will face a Colorado Democratic Party that has held all four constitutional statewide offices since 2018. No Republican has won the governor’s office since 2002, and the last statewide win for a GOP candidate was Heidi Ganahl’s win for a University of Colorado governing board seat in 2016.

Repubican contenders repeatedly promised to reverse those trends Saturday. Eighteen gubernatorial candidates initially were slated to speak, although several didn’t turn up and their candidacies did not advance. One candidate — Kelvin “K-Man” Wimberly — appeared to have no supporters present to nominate him. That prompted someone from the crowd to run up to the microphone, gesture to Wimberly and offer to nominate “this guy.”

As party members slowly trickled into the building Saturday morning, campaign volunteers wandered, handing out bags with posters for Marx or walking in slow arcs with signs for fellow chief executive hopeful Robert Moore. Scott Pond, who hopes to take on U.S. Sen. John Hickenlooper in November, signed a pair of baseball caps for one supporter. Many attendees — including the conspiratorial podcaster Joe Oltmann — wore “Free Tina Peters” stickers, a sentiment echoed by a banner hanging behind the assembly stage.

Several candidates, including Marx, pledged to free the former Mesa County clerk, who was convicted for orchestrating a plot to sneak a third party into a secure area to examine voting equipment after the 2020 election.

Oltmann briefly ran for governor before declaring his candidacy to become the state GOP’s chairman.

On Friday, former state lawmaker Ron Hanks was nominated to launch a right-wing primary challenge against U.S. Rep. Jeff Hurd, the freshman Republican who represents the Western Slope’s 3rd Congressional District. Hurd’s previous primary opponent, Hope Scheppelman, dropped out of the contest last month, after President Donald Trump re-endorsed Hurd.

Instead, Bennet backed out of a candidate forum hosted by Muslim leaders. His campaign cited concerns that the event for Democratic candidates for governor would not be a productive place for dialogue on a complicated issue. Attorney General Phil Weiser, who is also pursuing the Democratic nomination for governor, attended the event Sunday,

The message was clear — Bennet was more afraid of the optics of fumbling tough questions about Israel’s war tactics or getting shouted down by angry constituents than he was the optics of agreeing to attend an event and then not showing up for the community.

Bennet’s job as an elected official is to talk publicly about his votes and policy decisions and indicate to voters how he will act as governor of Colorado. Candidate forums can sometimes be more show than substance, and we have all seen clips of uncomfortable town halls and even aggressive confrontations with elected officials. We always want debates to be productive and nuanced, but the reality is that not every outcome can be controlled by organizers of an event. We hope Bennet shows greater resolve in the future to attend these events despite the risk of outbursts or confrontations.

Because of the weight of the subject, passions run high on both sides of the issue. Several investigations by human rights groups indicate Israel waged a genocidal war with the intent to kill, displace, starve and injure Palestinian civilians. Israel, meanwhile, was responding to the horrendous terrorist attack on Oct. 7, 2023, and the worst of their bombing campaign ended when the last hostages — alive or dead — were finally released by Hamas.

It is especially myopic for Bennet to skip the event because the U.S. senator, who wants to lead Colorado soon, has a heartfelt message about his support of Palestinians and his opposition to the actions of Israeli President Benjamin Netanyahu.

Bennet made good on his pledge to answer tough questions about Gaza and Israel in a brief phone interview Friday with The Denver Post. For that, we are grateful. During his long time serving Colorado in the Senate, Bennet has always proven himself willing to take difficult questions and be transparent about his actions.

“Over and over again, I pushed both the Biden administration and the Trump administration to reflect the deep, deep concerns that I think many Americans have over the number of casualties and deaths in Gaza, which now amount to 70,000,” Bennet said, but he refused to use the term genocide to describe the war.

“This is obviously not a word I take lightly, given my own mother being born in Warsaw in 1938. My mother, her parents and her aunt were the only people (from my family) to survive the Holocaust. It is not a word I would use to describe the situation in Gaza,” Bennet said. He later said that his mother sees herself in the children of Gaza, and he has also taken that to heart as he pushes for peace in the Middle East and a two-state solution in Israel.

We now know that the candidate forum hosted by Colorado Muslim Vote was well run and that there were no outbursts or dramatic interruptions. We know that because Weiser showed up and spent a long time on stage answering tough questions in front of a tough audience.

Weiser also refused to call Israel’s attacks genocide, but did say there had been human rights violations in the war campaign.

“I will say that the Netanyahu government has had actions and policies that I find abhorrent and that pain me,” Weiser told the audience, who did not at all seem placated by the careful equivocation about whether we are talking about a genocide, war crimes or human rights violations.

Neither candidate would take a position on a 2016 state law that requires the state to divest from companies or funds that refuse to do business with Israel. Bennet said he’d need more time to consider the legislation, and Weiser said he opposes using investment funds to make international policy statements.

The election is still several months away, and we think constituents on both sides of the issue deserve an honest answer now from the candidates about whether they would veto or sign a bill repealing the 2016 divestment law.

Earnest transparency goes a long way with voters, even if they disagree with the answer, as does showing up to events with voters who are likely to disagree with you. Colorado deserves the very strongest candidates for governor in 2026.

To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.

Re: “Advocacy group: Bennet backed out of forum to avoid Gaza questions,” April 8 news story

To me it is absurd that a U.S. senator is unwilling to answer questions in public about his votes to spend billions of taxpayer dollars.

I attended the gubernatorial forum on Sunday. About 200 people attended. The large majority were members of Colorado’s Muslim community, who organized the event. It was a family affair with Muslims of all ages attending. They were all eager to have a dialogue with Sen. Michael Bennet and Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser.

Weiser came knowing that he would face difficult questions. People in the audience asked many questions, and every question was respectful. The attorney general held his ground on the issues that are dear to him. He also truly listened and learned from what people had to say.

Nothing in the entire evening was disruptive or threatening in any way. Why would Sen. Bennet request to meet in private, behind closed doors, where any statements or promises he made would not be public?

Steve Brown, Denver

Dark history of presidents’ spins on military operations

I’m old enough to remember multiple presidents and their administrations’ lack of transparency and outright deceit about wars and other military operations: LBJ and Nixon (Vietnam), Reagan (Iran-Contra), George W. Bush (Iraq). So understand if we neither trust nor believe President Donald Trump and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth about this unauthorized war in Iran, we have a solid historical basis for that.

We have a long chain of presidencies since the 1960s that have put our troops at risk in war and military operations for little to no logical reason, while running up the national debt, sometimes alienating our allies, and hiding the truth. This one is only the latest, but it seems to be the most egregious and dangerous.

John W. Thomas, Fort Collins

Trump can’t reinterpret NATO charter to his liking

Re: “Rift widens when Trump lashes out at NATO allies,” April 2 news story

The recent reports of President Donald Trump’s frustration with our NATO allies regarding the ongoing conflict with Iran raise a fundamental question about the nature of the alliance itself. Since the launch of “Operation Epic Fury,” the administration has criticized nations like Britain, France, and Germany for their refusal to join a war that was initiated by the United States without prior consultation with the North Atlantic Council.

As a resident of Colorado who has watched our global commitments evolve over decades, I find this criticism deeply misguided. NATO is, and always has been, a defensive pact. of the North Atlantic Treaty is very clear: it is a collective response to an armed attack against a member state. It is not a blank check for offensive maneuvers or preemptive strikes in the Middle East.

When the president suggests that the U.S. might withdraw from NATO because allies refuse to join an elective war, he ignores the very principles that have kept the West stable since 1949. Allies are not “paper tigers” for refusing to be dragged into a conflict they did not start and do not support. On the contrary, their restraint upholds the rule of law and the specific geographic and legal boundaries of the treaty.

If we want the support of our allies, we must respect the defensive framework that binds us. To demand they participate in an offensive campaign — especially one that risks regional stability and energy security — is to demand they violate the very charter we helped write. We cannot expect “all for one” when the “one” chooses to act alone.

Al White,ÌęWinter Park

Enduring the president’s national address

While enduring the “supreme leader’s” nationally televised comments (speech isn’t deserved) last week, with nothing of substance regarding the beginning, current or future plans for the maelstrom in Iran, the only thing garnered was the fact that those 19 minutes of life are never to be recaptured.

RC Lloyd, Longmont

To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.

A clear majority of likely voters — 55% — predicted the economy would worsen over the next year, compared to 46% who answered the same way in a similar survey also conducted for the Colorado Polling Institute in November.

Meanwhile, opinions of some of Colorado’s top elected officials — Gov. Jared Polis and U.S. Sens. Michael Bennet and John Hickenlooper, all Democrats — have grown only more unfavorable. And that fall has largely been driven by disenchanted Democrats.

“We’ve seen Democrats become quite frustrated with incumbent legislators and executives across the state and across the country,” Kevin Ingham, principal of Democratic polling firm Aspect Strategic, said.

In a poll conducted around the same time last year for the Colorado Polling Institute, Polis sat at 51% of Coloradans holding a favorable opinion of him, to 40% unfavorable. In its November poll, he landed underwater by 1 percentage point. Now he’s down a net 4 percentage points, with 44% favorable to 48% unfavorable.

Bennet and Hickenlooper saw similar slips, though neither landed in explicitly negative territory in this latest poll.

Bennet, who is running for governor this year to succeed the term-limited Polis, moved from 45% favorable in March 2025 to 40% favorable now, and from 31% unfavorable then to 39% unfavorable now. Hickenlooper, who is running for reelection, moved from 49% favorable a year ago, with 36% of voters holding an unfavorable view, to an even split of 43% for each view.

In each case, the difference between favorable and unfavorable now is roughly within the margin of error of the poll, which surveyed 613 likely voters statewide through online interviews March 20-25. Its margin of error is plus or minus 3.96 percentage points. It was released by the Colorado Polling Institute and conducted by a team of Democratic and Republican pollsters.

The increasingly unfavorable feelings toward the officials could have some ties to overall economic malaise, but other data points indicate that “maybe what we’re seeing here is more general frustration among the Democratic base toward their party in the way they are resisting — or not — the Trump administration,” Ingham said.

The poll did not offer a head-to-head question surveying support in the Democratic primary for governor between Bennet and Attorney General Phil Weiser, his chief rival.

But the poll found name recognition continues to plague Weiser. While he had overall higher favorability than unfavorable feelings, at 26% to 23%, a majority of respondents, 51%, said they either hadn’t heard of him or had no opinion of him. That is an improvement from six months ago, when 58% said they had no opinion of him or had not heard of him.

For Bennet, 21% of respondents had either never heard of him or had no opinion.

Views on economy dive as gas prices surge

Views of the state’s economic future have also grown more sour amid general nationally and rising prices.

Three-quarters of Colorado voters were extremely or very concerned about the availability of good-paying jobs in their communities. More than 90% considered the price of housing, health care, home and car insurance, food and utilities to be a problem.

The cost of gasoline is now considered a very big problem by 41% of Coloradans, up from 17% a year ago.

Over the past year, the average price of regular unleaded gasoline has risen from $3.10 a gallon to $3.82, according . The price of diesel has risen from $3.38 to $5.14 per gallon. Prices spiked after the United States and Israel launched in late February, prompting Iran to choke off a key access point for .

In the aftermath, 55% of Coloradans predict the state economy will worsen in the next year, up from 46% who felt the same way last November.

Lori Weigel, principal of the Republican polling firm New Bridge Strategies, a partner in the new poll, said economic worries split most heavily along educational lines — not partisan ones. Among Republicans, 48% of respondents felt the economy would worsen, while 51% of Democrats and 62% of unaffiliated voters felt the same.

Meanwhile, the higher a person’s education level, the more likely it was that they would think the economy would worsen, Weigel said. The poll found 36% of people with a high school diploma or less were sour on the economy’s prospects, rising to 52% among people with some college education and 62% for people with a college degree.

“There was a pretty direct relationship with education level for predicting the state’s economy was going to get worse,” Weigel said.

In a separate poll question, Weigel also found strong ongoing support for the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights, the amendment to the state constitution that limits the growth of government and requires a vote of the people to raise taxes.

The poll asked a general question about support for TABOR, finding 62% viewed it favorably, compared to 22% who felt unfavorable about it. Republicans supported it at the highest level, 74%, while 63% of unaffiliated voters supported it. A plurality of Democrats, 48%, also supported the amendment.

Weigel warned that such support might bode ill for pushes to reform the state tax code at the ballot box this year.

One measure, which is being pursued through the legislature, would exempt state education spending from TABOR’s spending growth cap, freeing up potentially billions of dollars for other state priorities; it would still need approval by voters in November to become law. A second proposal, being pursued as a ballot initiative, would create a graduated income tax in which high-income Coloradans would pay a higher income tax rate than low- and moderate-income Coloradans.

“I would say most people think about TABOR as the thing that gives them checks sometimes, or money back, and then they think about being able to vote on tax increases,” Weigel said.

While a state senator backed up that account, Bennet’s campaign disputed the characterization on Tuesday.

For the Sunday event in Englewood hosted by , organizers initially wanted Bennet and his Democratic primary opponent, Attorney General Phil Weiser, to share the stage. But they changed the format to a forum with each candidate at Bennet¶¶Òőap request — with the senator set to speak first, followed by Weiser.

Bennet¶¶Òőap team also raised several concerns early last week, six days before the event. Azra Taslimi, an attorney and a co-founder of Colorado Muslim Vote, said that in addition to raising concerns about security and about how organizers planned to handle disruptions, Bennet¶¶Òőap campaign manager also requested no questions related to Gaza or Israel’s war in the Palestinian territory.

Taslimi declined the campaign’s request and also declined to provide specific questions in advance, she told The Denver Post. But she said she told Bennet¶¶Òőap team that she would work with them on framing the questions appropriately and that she shared the topics of the questions.

The campaign then said that Bennet would not participate, Taslimi said, because the forum wasn’t the appropriate place to talk about his record on Gaza. Instead, the campaign said Bennet would be willing to meet with Muslim leaders privately to discuss the issue, Taslimi recalled.

State Sen. Iman Jodeh, an Aurora Democrat, said in an interview that she also spoke with Bennet¶¶Òőap campaign, which provided the same reasoning for backing out of the event.

“How can we not ask about a thing that affects so many people in our community?” Taslimi said Tuesday.

She said her group had sought security for the event and had taken steps to curb any disruptions. During the forum, when some audience members interjected as Weiser answered questions about Israel and Gaza, Taslimi — who moderated the event — intervened.

Bennet¶¶Òőap campaign “absolutely, unequivocally said: ‘No questions on his record about Gaza,’ ” she said in an interview. “The takeaway was, if we agreed to not ask questions about his record, that he would still participate.”

In a statement Tuesday afternoon, Bennet spokeswoman Jordan Fuja said the campaign “did not demand to approve questions in advance nor refuse to answer questions about his record.”

“Michael is deeply committed to having meaningful conversations with the Muslim community,” Fuja wrote. “As we received details about the forum, it became clear that this event would not lend itself to a genuine dialogue where Michael can listen to the community and provide the clarity people deserve.”

“Michael has never refused to answer difficult questions,” she continued, “and will continue to have these conversations, as he has his entire career.”

Bennet — who, like Weiser, is the son of Holocaust survivors — has in Gaza but has limiting . He’s faced public questioning over Israel before: He was repeatedly interrupted by pro-Palestinian protesters during an event last May, and audience members to Israel during another town hall in Colorado Springs earlier last year.

“I do think the Gaza situation is a tragic, tragic situation,” he said at that event. As he started to talk about a two-state solution for Israelis and Palestinians, audience members interjected.

The latest disagreement comes as Democratic politicians nationwide try to navigate growing criticisms from their own voters about American support for Israel. The Middle Eastern country has been accused of human rights violations in the West Bank and Gaza, where by the Israeli military since the Oct. 7, 2023, terror attack by Hamas, according to Gaza’s Health Ministry.

As the death toll in the Palestinian territories has mounted, public polling has shown a stark decline in support for Israel among U.S. voters. In February 2022, 55% of voters had a favorable view of the country. Four years later, that figure had fallen to 37%, .

The decline is even sharper among national Democrats: According to Pew, 80% of Democrats and likely Democratic voters hold an unfavorable view of Israel, a 27-point increase from 2022.

The shift among Democrats has played out in Colorado, too. Nearly two years after the Colorado Democratic Party rejected a resolution calling for a ceasefire in Gaza, the party last month at its state assembly that accused Israel of committing genocide in the territory.

The state party also called for the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, or AIPAC, the U.S.-based lobbying group that spends heavily to support pro-Israel candidates, to register as a foreign agent under federal law.

, Weiser was peppered with questions about Israel and Gaza, alongside questions about how he would address anti-Muslim bigotry, according to a video of the event. He pledged to “listen and work with you” and noted the rise in both antisemitic and Islamophobic rhetoric.

That earned him applause. He received a much more muted response when he said that, though he didn’t agree with all of AIPAC’s actions, he didn’t support requiring the group to register as a foreign agent.

Weiser did not directly answer when asked if he supported repealing a Colorado law that requires the state employees retirement fund to divest from any company that boycotts Israel. He argued that the fund should be focused on making the best investments it can, not “seeking to advance foreign policy goals.”

Another audience member then asked if Weiser agreed with the state party’s recently adopted policy platform, which labeled Israel’s government as “extremist” and said the country’s campaign in Gaza was genocidal.

“I will answer your question this way: I recognize the human rights violations that we’ve talked about. I will say that the Netanyahu government has had actions and policies that I find abhorrent and that pain me,” Weiser said, referring to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. “I will say that at my Passover Seders, I and others were praying for peace and were pained by the suffering of so many innocent Palestinians and kids who have suffered so greatly.

“I feel and I understand the pain that so many have been affected by. I recognize the need and the work ahead for repair.”

That drew murmurs that Weiser hadn’t directly answered the question. Taslimi then asked Weiser if he was disagreeing with the state party’s platform.

“I’m saying that this is a word” — genocide — “that I use very, very” carefully, he said, adding: “I will condemn the suffering, the pain, the human rights violations.”

Weiser’s plan, released Tuesday, calls for the state to shift investment toward preventive care, build on the Colorado Option and use the courts to challenge health care consolidation and enforce laws limiting surprise medical bills and aggressive debt collection.

Colorado Option health insurance plans have lower upfront costs for primary care and, in some cases, lower monthly premiums than other plan types on the individual marketplace.

“We need to address care upfront to keep Coloradans healthy whenever we can and avoid the high costs and quality-of-life impacts of caring for people once they are sick,” Weiser said in an emailed statement.

Bennet says he’ll seek public option for health insurance if elected Colorado governor

The plan didn't give details on what new versions of the Colorado Option plans might look like, though Weiser said he would work with stakeholders to come up with something more affordable for people earning too much to qualify for Medicaid.

Weiser said he thought a public option likely wouldn't be feasible, but called for "learning from and working to take action on" an upcoming study of the possibility of a single-payer health insurance system.

Weiser and U.S. Sen. Michael Bennet are the two leading candidates for the Democratic gubernatorial nomination. Bennet's plan, which was also light on details, included a public option for people earning slightly above the cut-off for Medicaid. Both candidates' plans call for expanding who can buy into the state employee health plan, with the idea that a larger patient pool can negotiate lower health care prices for everyone.

Weiser's plan summary only included one clear new initiative, related to youth mental health, but didn't provide enough information to assess what his ideas might cost. He pointed to savings if the state can keep patients healthier -- a perennial goal for candidates that often proves difficult to attain.

"Our plan is to focus on the underlying costs of care to reduce the costs to our system, not add to them," he said.

More than 1,600 Democratic faithful filled Memorial Hall in Pueblo on Saturday, even as thousands of Coloradans joined protests against the Trump administration as part of the national No Kings movement, to cast their lots for their party’s candidates for some of the state’s top offices. The event doesn’t completely settle the field, but it helps winnow out candidates and determine which candidate’s name will appear at the top of the primary ballot. Republicans will hold their state assembly to do the same thing, also in Pueblo, in two weeks.

Attendees at the assembly heard from more than a dozen candidates total seeking Colorado’s top statewide offices: treasurer, attorney general, secretary of state, governor and U.S. Senate. Candidates who won 30% support or more from the delegates in Pueblo won a spot on the June 30 primary ballot, and the overall winner will hold the top spot in the list of nominees when ballots go out.

State Sen. Julie Gonzales, a progressive from Denver, will hold the top-line spot in the primary election against U.S. Sen. John Hickenlooper after she boxed out two other Democrats seeking the nomination. Attorney General Phil Weiser, meanwhile, won more than 90% of the delegates at the Colorado Democratic Party’s state assembly in his bid for governor. He will face U.S. Sen. Michael Bennet. Hickenlooper and Bennet skipped the assembly in favor of petitioning onto the ballot.

And in the treasurer’s race, state Sen. Jeff Bridges was the only candidate to clear the 30% threshold necessary to qualify for the primary ballot. His competitors, state Rep. Brianna Titone and John Mikos, fell just short of qualifying for the primary ballot.

The other races, however, ended the day in approximately the same spot as they were at the start. Secretary of State Jena Griswold edged out attorney David Seligman to win the top slot on June’s primary ballot for Colorado attorney general, with 42% of delegates to Seligman’s 41%. Democrats Michael Dougherty and Hetal Doshi have submitted petitions for that race.

The race for the nomination for secretary of state, between state Sen. Jessie Danielson and Jefferson County Clerk Amanda Gonzalez, will go forward with both candidates still in it. Gonzalez won the top-line spot with 63% of the assembly vote to 37% for Danielson.

As notable as the candidates on stage were, the people not there were equally notable. Neither Hickenlooper, who is seeking reelection, or Bennet, who is running for governor, appeared at the event. Both opted to petition onto the ballot vs. relying on party activists to win a spot in the primary.

Recent Colorado history shows victory at the state assembly may not matter much. Bennet in 2010 and Hickenlooper in 2020 lost the assembly vote before going on to win the party’s nomination at the primary and eventually a seat in the U.S. Senate. Gov. Jared Polis likewise lost the assembly in 2018 before going on to win two terms as the state’s chief executive.

The assembly hall also represented a small fraction of people who ultimately will determine the nomination. Some 1 million Democrats and 2 million unaffiliated voters will be eligible to vote in the primary.

Bennet’s and Hickenlooper’s decision, however, meant the Memorial Hall auditorium was stacked with supporters for their opponents. Gonzales, one of three candidates who challenged Hickenlooper and the only one to win a spot on the ballot at the assembly, walked onto the nomination stage to some of the loudest applause of the day and led raucous call-and-response of “when we fight, we win” as she walked off.

In her speech, she acknowledged long odds in her bid to unseat Hickenlooper, who was Denver mayor and governor before he turned to Washington, D.C.

“I am not going to outraise the John Hickenlooper incumbent protection program,” Gonzales said in an interview after her speech. “That’s fine. I’m not trying to. We’re going to outwork him. And the energy and fire you saw reflected in this room tonight, from Coloradans all across the state, is a testament and demonstration — exhibit A — in terms of what we will do.”

Other races, however, featured the candidates taking veiled shots at their competition and navigating outside political attacks.

Griswold faced new allegations Saturday morning from a disgruntled former employee who accused her of creating “a hostile and volatile workplace” and a “climate of fear of retaliation” as secretary of state. The statement didn’t derail her assembly showing, as she still won the top-line spot

“I am speaking on behalf of those who we abused, bullied and ultimately discarded by Secretary Griswold,” Reese Edwards, the former employee, said in the statement. The statement was sent through the NMFAction Fund. According to the letter, Edwards worked as Griswold’s director of government and public affairs in 2019 and 2020. “I am speaking for them because they fear retaliation and retribution for their jobs and their careers. They fear what she might try to do to them if she gets her hands on the most powerful judicial position in Colorado.”

NMFAction Fund did not respond to a request for comment from The Denver Post. Its statement did not name employees other than Edwards. Griswold’s campaign also did not respond to a request for comment about the letter Saturday. When approached by a Denver Post reporter at the assembly, a staffer for Griswold simply said “no” and walked away.

But Griswold, who’s held a commanding fundraising advantage, alluded to other attacks she’s faced during the campaign.

“A candidate in this race has decided that his best shot is to launch misleading attacks on me,” Griswold said during her nomination speech. Her campaign later singled out Dougherty. “Let’s call it what is is: Desperation … If your focus is on bringing me down, and not on the racist lunatic in the White House, then you’re not ready for this job.”