GOV. RITTER VETO MESSAGE ON HOUSE BILL 09-1170

May 19, 2009

Honorable Colorado House of Representatives
67th General Assembly
First Regular Session
State Capitol
Denver, CO 80203

Ladies and Gentlemen,

I am filing with the Secretary of State House Bill 09-1170, "Concerning unemployment insurance benefits for locked-out employees." I vetoed this bill as of 4:55 p.m. today, and this letter sets forth my reasons for doing so.

There are currently ongoing contract negotiations between the United Food and Commercial Workers No. 7 and several grocery stores, including King Soopers, Safeway, Albertsons, and City Market. The parties to these negotiations have been working hard for several months to try to reach an agreement. I believe it is ill-advised and counterproductive to enact legislation that materially impacts the relative bargaining position of parties in the midst of ongoing negotiations. In these troubled economic times, I am deeply concerned about the effect a strike or lockout of employees would have on grocery store workers and consumers across the state, and I am concerned that signing this bill into law will make a negotiated resolution of the grocery store contract more difficult, not less.

Therefore, under these circumstances, the state should not interject itself into these contract negotiations by enacting House Bill 09-1170 into law.

The merits of this bill, however, are worthy of future discussion and perhaps future legislation. In 1999, the statutory provision that House Bill 09-1170 would repeal and reenact was substantially amended for the first time in twenty-four years, upsetting the longstanding balance governing when locked-out and striking workers were eligible for unemployment benefits. The issue of how best to restore this balance is a debate that we should have. But the debate should be had and legislation crafted outside of the shadow of a major contract negotiation that has the imminent threat of a strike or lockout.

Accordingly, I have vetoed this bill.

Sincerely,

Bill Ritter, Jr.

Governor

This article in today's Denver Post is priceless: "GOP aligns stars to plot comeback."

The "stars" of the GOP, apparently, are former Gov. Bill Owens, former Sens. Hank Brown and Wayne Allard, former congressmen Bob Beauprez, Bob Schaffer, Scott McInnis, Dick "Undefeated Since 2008" Wadhams, and House Minority Leader Mike May.

You have to read the article, but here are a few things that jump out to me.

First, where was Josh Penry? Are the "wise men" of the GOP shutting him out? 

Second, notice something about the race and gender of the GOP's braintrust? And if you're going to have a "members only" meeting of lilly white good old boys, do you really want the press to report on it? You think maybe, just maybe, being the Rich White Guy party is part of the problem?

Restoring Stem Cell Research - now and beyond

President Barack Obama has certainly had his plate full since he took office - the economy, children's health and the housing crisis, all have piled up at once. He continues to take bold action that will ensure the long-term stability of our economy.

And I am proud that he has acted on expanding embryonic stem cell research.

As a pro-science president, he has taken the first step in ensuring that the United States regains it preeminence in cutting-edge research by overturning the current restrictions on embryonic stem cell research. Finally, after eight years of roadblocks, millions of patients and their families now have hope for a cure. As the chief architect of bipartisan legislation passed by both a Republican and Democratic Congress, President Obama's decision is to be applauded.

Embryonic stem cell research holds great promise for alleviating the suffering of more than 100 million American patients who are living with devastating diseases -- from Parkinson's to spinal cord injuries to diabetes.

Even with President Obama's action, our work continues - we need a strong federal role in carrying out this research. It is important to build upon President Obama's executive order reversing these restrictions with supportive legislation that will prevent this issue from becoming a political ping-pong ball between Administrations.

The recent breakthrough of skin cells derived from Parkinson's patients to create personalized stem cells has excited many scientists. These cells were transformed into the undifferentiated state of cells in an early embryo to make the dopamine-manufacturing neurons lost from the disease. This news underscores the urgency with which the Obama administration must address the deficiencies in U.S. funding and ethical oversight.

Although numerous entities have published guidelines for stem cell research, there is currently no overarching set of federal guidelines to serve as the gold standard. As a result, scientists must constantly worry about meeting a patchwork of ethical requirements. And, with the many recent advances in stem cell techniques, it is imperative we allow all forms of stem cell science to flourish.

It is important to outline the differences between embryonic and adult stem cells. Embryonic stem cells are far more versatile. Embryonic and adult stem cells each have advantages and disadvantages regarding potential use for cell-based regenerative therapies. Adult and embryonic stem cells vary in the number and type of differentiated cells types they can become. Embryonic stem cells can become all cell types of the body because they are pluripotent (a cell that can create all cell types except for extra embryonic tissue). Adult stem cells are generally limited to differentiating into varying cell types of their tissue of origin.

Large numbers of embryonic stem cells can be relatively easily grown in culture, while adult stem cells are rare in mature tissues and methods for expanding their numbers in cell culture have not yet been worked out. This is an important distinction, as large numbers of cells are needed for stem cell replacement therapies.

Unfortunately, the previous Administration hobbled our advancement in scientific research by not only placing restrictions on federal funding of embryonic stem cell research, but also by vetoing my legislation. Twice. Adding to this is the absence of funding for the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Despite the doubling of the NIH budget in the late 1990s, research funding was flat-lined throughout the Bush administration's tenure.

By every objective measure, cutting-edge stem cell research has been significantly under-funded. Between 2001 and 2008, the NIH spent $3.7 billion on all types of stem cell research -- a big number, certainly, but not the $4.83 billion received by the National Cancer Institute in one year alone (2005). Despite these limitations, there have been promising discoveries in many types of cell-based research, including embryonic stem cells, somatic cell nuclear transfer, reprogrammed adult stem cells, and more. Without the full efforts of the NIH, important advances have been delayed.

President Obama's action means that scientists home and abroad will have a renewed interest in federal funding for stem cell projects that can move ahead immediately. In working with the Obama Administration on new legislation, we must also address the need for strong ethical oversight and national guidelines for all cell-based research.

In our current economic climate, Congress and the Obama White House will work together to find the resources to make up for lost time in the federal commitment to this research, while private initiative will once again be unencumbered. But, I am encouraged that President Obama has taken an important first step - one that is based on science, not just politics.

U.S. Rep. Diana DeGette, vice chair of the Energy and Commerce Committee, is chief architect of legislation overturning President Bush's 2001 restrictions on embryonic stem cell research.

Republicans better find themselves a Howard Dean, and fast.

The Family Research Council Action Political Action Committee is protesting the National Republican Congressional Committee's decision Wednesday to cancel $400,000 of advertising it had planned over the last week of Rep. Marilyn Musgrave's re-election campaign. The FRC accuses the NRCC of "abandoning social conservative candidates" after it scaled back spending plans for Musgrave and Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn.

Here's the letter from FRC Action PAC President Tony Perkins to Rep. Tom Cole of Oklahoma, chair of the NRCC:

"You have made a grave error in judgment by pulling your funds from the Michelle Bachmann race in Minnesota and the Marilyn Musgrave race in Colorado.

"The left is attacking both of these outstanding women because they are true conservatives. They vote pro-life and pro-family. Both Congresswomen are against taxpayer funding of abortion. Both oppose embryonic stem cell research, and both are for a Marriage Protection Amendment. These are issues that motivate voters. These are issues they and other conservative candidates have won and can win with.

"Reps. Bachmann and Musgrave are both in winnable districts. Pulling funds from their campaigns sends the wrong message to their supporters and gives their opponents a chance to produce headlines that the NRCC has undermined these campaigns. It appears that the NRCC is abandoning social conservative candidates and the issues for which they stand, particularly if they are championed by some of the most promising female legislators in the Congress. This is no time to cut and run from a fight.

"I will urge supporters of the FRC Action PAC to stop giving to the NRCC until it starts supporting and fighting for conservative candidates in close races.

"My supporters and I urge you to reconsider these decisions."

Obama 52, McCain 45
Udall (D) 51, Schaffer (R) 44

Powell was concerned about McCain's response to the economic crisis.

About Palin: I don't believe Sarah Palin is ready.

Powell was angry about the Bill Ayers and how it was used by the McCain camapign and the Republican party.

Supreme Court "I would have difficult with two more (conservative) appointments to the Supreme Court"

On the use of religion as a divisive issue in : "We have got to stop polarizing ourselves this way"