This article is excerpted from a story by Tina Griego, COLab; and Megan Verlee, Colorado Public Radio News; and appeared on Colorado Newsline on June 10, 2024. Read the full story here.
Thousands of Coloradans responding to a survey by their local newsrooms say candidates competing for their votes this year need to be focused primarily on several broad issues: democracy and good government, the economy and cost of living, the environment, climate and natural resources, immigration and abortion.
Which concerns weigh most heavily on respondents’ minds changes with their politics. Conservatives in the survey prioritized immigration and the economy, followed by the state of the government. Moderates and liberals, in contrast, chose democracy and good government as their top issue by a wide margin.
“If we don’t have free and informed citizens with equal access to the ballot box, then we won’t have democracy and the country won’t be worth preserving,” Marcus Pohlmann, a Highlands Ranch resident and a professor emeritus of political science, wrote in a comment that was echoed by many others.
The survey is a part of an ongoing effort among more than 60 Colorado newsrooms, including Colorado Newsline, to ask, listen and respond to what voters in their communities say matters to them most. As part of the Voter Voices project, we are asking our communities, among other things, to rank their top three issues among 13 categories.
An issue’s ranking reveals its importance to voters, but not the nuances of their views. Those nuances are emerging in the answer to the survey’s core question: “What do you want candidates to talk about as they compete for your vote?”
So far, more than 4,500 Coloradans have answered that question. The vast majority to date self-identify as white and liberal or moderate and live along the densely populated — and deeply blue — Front Range. But voters in red, rural communities and purple suburbs are also responding.
And lots of people have lots they want to say to politicians:
From Grand Junction: “I want everyone to be consistent in their framework and philosophies issue to issue. Wanting to control bodies and love and calling for unfettered freedom for guns and LLCs is inherently incongruent. I want somebody who values civil liberty.”
From Fort Collins: “The pursuit of unsustainable (population) growth is inexcusable and should be dropped. This includes the ridiculous YIMBY (aka real estate developer) policies.”
From Fremont County: “Illegal immigration, violations of our constitutional 2nd right amendment, stopping the Trump tax cuts which will result in higher taxes, economy/cost of living, increasing oil and gas production.”
From Fort Morgan: “I would like them to talk about how high and unreasonable the cost of living has become. Do we pay rent and insurance but go hungry?”
From Denver: “Housing, housing, housing. The cost of living is too high and it is primarily driven by the high cost of housing. We need to break down legal barriers and construct housing of all types, especially in dense urban areas and around transit.”
From Durango: “The homeless situation is out of control. Vets, young families, panhandlers on corners, and those without jobs, how do states handle this?? Immigrants brought in who are seeking asylum?? Monies going out to countries in need vs. our own country… I think we need to focus on our economy and our homeland first.”
From Littleton: “Need to address returning Roe vs Wade. Such a big deal that made our country turn back time. No one should govern another person’s body. Period.”
From Aurora: “What would you do to reduce wealth inequity? Would you support/subsidize starter home-building initiatives? Would you support before and after school childcare for elementary students?”
From Colorado Springs: “Enshrining marriage equality in the Colorado constitution… LGBTQIA+ rights are at the top of my list. I identify as lesbian/queer, and my wife (they/them) is nonbinary and masc-presenting. The threat to our personal liberty from the right is terrifying.”
One of the most striking takeaways from the survey so far is how many respondents answered the question of what they want candidates to talk about with how they want candidates to speak: without rancor, without partisanship, posturing or platitudes, and with commitments to compromise, transparency and pragmatism.
“How they will get over petty partisan bickering and actually do the job they were elected to do,” Tim Samuelson, a 42-year-old self-described moderate who lives in Denver, wrote in his survey response. “Form policies together that aren’t fringe issues that the majority of the public doesn’t think about on a daily basis. Get to work, quit the gamesmanship.”
Put more bluntly by another survey respondent: “How they plan to fix this mess, not what a jackass the other guy is. We already know that.”
Hyper-partisanship is a perennial lament about politics. But the sharp — and sometimes plaintive — edge in the call for candidates to work together seems in part intensified by the sense among respondents that the stakes are just too high now to do otherwise.
That sentiment surfaces in the big-picture responses: democracy in peril, the planet in danger, our personal and civil liberties under attack. But anxiety also simmers in respondents’ day-to-day concerns, worries that can be summed up with: can’t buy a house, can’t afford rent, our roads are bad, our schools need help, farming is under threat, taxes are unfairly assessed and distributed, traffic is killing us, our healthcare system is broken, the gap between the haves and have-nots has become a chasm and I’m never, ever, making it to the other side.