Thursday, October 13, 2016

Jeff Crank's Ballot Recommendations

I would never try to tell you how to vote, but I am often asked how I am going to vote.  I've put quite a bit of research and thought into El Paso County and Colorado's ballot for 2016.  I've even researched the judicial retention votes and have looked to see which judges tend to be activist liberals and which tend to adhere to the Constitution.

This truly is one of the most important elections, if not the most important in our lifetime.  The next president will appoint three, perhaps four, Supreme Court justices that will set the course for our rights and liberties for the next fifty to one-hundred years.  If you value your gun rights, your religious liberty, your free speech rights or a less intrusive government - this is the election to take heed.  While I'm disappointed by both presidential candidates and wish there was a different option, the choice remains clear and I remain undeterred.  I was not a supporter of Donald Trump in the primary, I supported another candidate.  However, if you are a conservative, not voting in the presidential election or voting for someone other than the Republican nominee is a vote for Hillary Clinton and her Supreme Court nominees.  Either Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump will be the next president of the United States.  If you'd like to make a wager on whether someone other than Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump will be elected President, I'm available to take your money - you can email me with your wager amount at  Payments are due on November 9th.

I don't choose my elected officials based on my feelings but rather their views on the issues and how they will either advance or inhibit my freedoms and liberties.  I hope you use that same criteria - and not personality - to make your determinations.  Please make sure you vote.  If you have any questions about your ballot, please call the El Paso County Clerk and Recorder's office at (719)575-VOTE (8683) or click here to learn more information.

Here are my recommendations:

President             Donald J. Trump/Mike Pence

U.S. Senate         Darryl Glenn

U.S. Congress     Doug Lamborn

State Board of Education              Steven Durham

CU Regent-At Large         Heidi Ganahl

Senate District 10             Owen Hill

Senate District 12             Bob Gardner

House District 14              Dan Nordberg

House District 16              Larry Liston

House District 17              Kit Roupe

House District 19              Paul Lundeen

House District 20              Terri Carver

House District 21              Lois Landgraf

District Attorney 4th Judicial                         Dan May

County Commissioner District 2                  Mark Waller

County Commissioner District 3                  Stan VanderWerf

County Commissioner District 4                  Longinos Gonzalez, Jr.

Judicial Retentions
Colorado Supreme Court

Justice William Hood, Colorado Supreme Court     No

Colorado Court of Appeals

Judge Karen M. Ashby, Colorado Court of Appeals               No

Judge Michael H. Berger, Colorado Court of Appeals          No

Judge Steven L. Bernard, Colorado Court of Appeals           No

Judge Stephanie E. Dunn, Colorado Court of Appeals          No

Judge David Furman, Colorado Court of Appeals                  Yes

Judge Robert D. Hawthorne, Colorado Court of Appeals       Yes

Judge Jerry N. Jones, Colorado Court of Appeals                  Yes

Judge Anthony J. Navarro, Colorado Court of Appeals        Yes

Judge Gilbert M. Roman, Colorado Court of Appeals           Yes

Judge Diana Terry, Colorado Court of Appeals                      No

4th Judicial District

Judge Robin Lynn Chittum            Yes

Judge David A. Gilbert                  Yes

Judge Deborah J. Grohs                 No         

Judge Gilbert Anthony Martinez    Yes

Judge G. David Miller                    Yes

Judge Marla Prudek                        Yes

El Paso County Court Judges

Judge Laura Norris Findorff           Yes

Judge Karla J. Hansen                     Yes

Judge Daniel S. Wilson                   No

State Referred Constitutional Amendments

Amendment T     No

Amendment U    Yes

State Initiated Constitutional Amendments

Amendment 69 – Government Run Health Care                    No

Amendment 70 – Job Killing Minimum Wage                       No

Amendment 71 – Change Ballot Issue Requirements            No

Amendment 72 – Tax Increase on Tobacco                            No

State Initiated Propositions

Proposition 106 – Assisted Suicide            No

Proposition 107 – Allow Unaffiliated Voters to Vote in Presidential Primary               No

Proposition 108 – Allow Unaffiliated Voters to Vote in Political Party Primaries        No


  1. Thanks for the Judge input. I had no clue of any of them!!

  2. Why are you for Amendment T? Do you realize that it will prohibit prisons from requiring prisoners to work? It will also bar judges from imposing sentences of community service.

  3. Why are voting no on 71? Ammendment T should be a No vote, prison is not a place to get paid to work, they are being punished for doing crimes.

    1. A typo which has been corrected.

    2. I am torn on 71, but I think I will vote no. I envision backroom dealings instead of an open process. Yes, we have too many amendments, but at least we can follow what's happening. Look at how hard it is to change the US Constitution and in its place has arisen a political process that basically leaves the people out of it entirely (we rely on our representatives, but how has that worked out thus far?). The upside would be that smaller areas are more heavily conservative and that would prevent liberal measures. But then again, if a special interest is after something, it will get those signatures regardless probably. Let people get their ballots and we will have to due our due diligence to educate others on what we should support or not and why.

  4. I listened to your show for the first time on my way to and from the gym this morning. Having taught both of your children at Challenger I think you understated what good children you and your wife have raised. They are great kids.

    As for your recommendations, I disagree with two. I have never been a big fan of the petition process as it opens the door to the law of unintended consequences. I will be voting for Amendment 71.

    As for the presidential election. In my opinion Trump and Clinton are "I can't" and "I won't". I will be voting for a third party candidate.

    John Koch

    1. Mr. Koch,
      Thanks for your kind words. My wife has done all the hard work of raising our children. I just married well. I understand your position on 71 and the presidential race.

    2. Then in essence, you are voting for Hillary Clinton. Very unfortunate.

    3. A vote for any third part candidate is a vote for Clinton. One of these two, Trump or Clinton will be the next president whether we like it or not. In my opinion, based on most of the big issues, specifically the Supreme Court picks, Trump is the lesser of two undesirables.

  5. Thank you so much for the Judge info. I moved here 3 weeks ago and immediately got registered to vote. I've been having a difficult time knowing what to mark on my ballot and this helps tremendously!!!

  6. Thanks Jeff, Always listen in the AM, always nice to see you. I went the other way a la Kervorkian...not sure why....

    - Ragnar Danneskjöld

  7. Jeff nice chatting with you earlier this morning. Appreciate your recommendations. Please say hello to Joel for me.

    Don Spano

  8. So, just to be clear: you are voting YES on two judges who voted to destroy frozen embryos of a divorcing couple when the mother was fighting to keep those embryos alive?? As a conscientious voter with true conservative (as opposed to blindly Republican) values, I cannot in good conscience keep reading these recommendations.

    1. Who are the two judges you are referring to?

    2. Evie's Mama, don't know who you're referring to. If you gave more information, I'd be happy to reconsider but it seems you'd just rather act as though you know better. I did the best research I could on the judges. If you have thoughts bring them forward -or maybe you're just too conscientious for us less virtuous.

    3. I was able to look it up. The judges in question are Hawthorne and Terry. Here is a link to the case:

    4. I was able to look it up. The judges in question are Hawthorne and Terry. Here is a link to the case:

  9. Trump, hilarious. Utterly hilarious. The man is a woman hating pig.

    1. Hilarious may be better than utterly deceptive, untruthful, dishonest, careless, liberal, pro-abortion, liberal Supreme Court choices, need I go on?

    2. This is definitely a hold-your-nose-and-vote election. I'm actually voting for Mike Pence!! Hillary is a 'go ahead, you have the right to kill your unborn baby' believer. I would NEVER vote for her.

    3. Oh man this is incredibly helpful! All I have to do is vote the opposite of you and we're good to go :D

    4. Good for you. We've had over 6,000 people look at the list online in the last two weeks. So if we get 6,000 good votes to your one, it was time well spent.

  10. Curious why you would vote for Amendment U? While it would save *some* administrative costs, it also gives an unfair tax break to one group, which means the rest of the taxpayers will have to make up the difference.

    Regarding Amendment 71, I'm voting YES. It would not require more signatures, but does require a better sampling from across the state vs. only the more liberal areas. There are other positives as well that far outweigh current opposition. Also see:

    Several of your judicial recommendations are puzzling as well. Further research into individual performance reviews reveals weaknesses, such as bias in favor of prosecution, general understanding and application of law, overall demeanor with attorneys and non-attorneys, as well as sub-par reviews from attorneys, witnesses, jurors, etc. In my opinion, just because they were appointed by a Republican governor doesn't mean they're fit to serve on the court.

    Agree with everything else you recommended. Thanks for the guidelines; very helpful.

  11. Jeff, I need some clarification. I thought I heard on your radio program that Justice Hood had ruled in the Masterpiece Cake vs. Craig case (forcing a Christian baker to create a cake for a same-sex marriage). I cannot find that Justice Hood ruled in that case, but rather Appellate Court Judge Taubman ruled in that case. Please correct me if I heard wrong. I can't find your reasons for your judge retention votes and lacking that supporting info, I'm having a problem with using your recommendations. One good website I used in 2014 also has info for judges in 2016:

  12. Justice Hood, along with other Supreme Court justices (minus Eid) denied the petition of Jack Phillips (owner of Masterpiece Cake). On the Appeals Court, Judge Taubman ruled and Judges Loeb and Berger concurred. I based my recommendations on reviewing cases, who they were appointed by, and discussions with conservative lawyers that I trust. Clear the Bench has some good information but they typically only review three cases - and I'm not willing to make recommendations on three cases alone. I don't have the time to link all of my background research on judges. Rather, I put my information out there for people to see. If they trust me, they can use the information, if they don't that is alright too -and they can do their own research.

  13. This comment has been removed by the author.

  14. Amendment 71: Good goal, bad details. As written, this amendment would "ratchet in" existing amendments that were passed with lesser requirements. Any change to amendment requirements should also state that existing amendments are to be removed with the same requirements that put them in to place. Also, if you really want representation from some minimum percent of the districts, this should be done at the vote stage, not the signature stage.

  15. I agree with you on 108 and 107. I have my Dad and Brother here with me and they were leaning towards yes on these propositions. Can you give more insight on why you went with no.

  16. Yes I can. Political parties are private organizations that people choose to affiliate with or not. Government has no business telling private entities who should vote in elections for their leadership. I compare it to members who choose to join the NRA - and then having the government step in and tell the NRA that they must allow people who chose not to join the NRA vote in their elections. It is wrong. If people want to choose a Republican or Democrat nominee, they should affiliate with that political party. If they don't, they have no business voting in their primary. I don't have any expectation to vote in a Libertarian party primary or a Green party primary because I have chosen to not affiliate with them. This is big government forcing private organizations to change their rules. People opposed to big government should oppose. Those are my reasons.

  17. Excellent write-up. Was not having any luck researching where the judges fall on the conservative/liberal spectrum until i found this article. Many thanks!

  18. Earning a good education is a lifelong investment. This could mean wide range of career opportunities, and job options. However, not everyone has the privilege to continue studies at colleges and universities due to financial constraints. It is the foremost reason that impedes a person to pursue a good education. For this reason, grant for education has been established and has become available to provide assistance for underprivileged individuals in their pursuit of having equal opportunity in obtaining good education.

  19. Here you can find great essay writer service if you are looking for one

  20. Will you be making any recommendations for November, 2017 for local Colorado?

  21. district Atty Dan May is not on the ballot - only Michael Allen is on there alone