Colorado – no longer a swing state – loses its sway
The path to the presidency runs through a dozen battleground states. Colorado is not one of them. We’ve become a flyover state and while you may not miss the barrage of attention that comes with the designation of being a battleground state, this development does not bode well for our collective interests.
As recently as 2016, Colorado was identified by FiveThirtyEight, a respected political analysis website, as one of the twelve perennial swing states that would decide the presidential election. “It’s the holy grail of presidential election campaigns: knowing which states will be decisive in the Electoral College,” political writer Nathaniel Rakich aptly said.
Colorado’s place in the presidential beauty pageant alongside states like Florida, Michigan, Ohio and North Carolina once seemed secure. Yes, even with our nine electoral votes, Colorado mattered. We were a key target to the two major presidential candidates in their race to 270 electoral votes.
And while the vast majority of states have voted for the same party in presidential contests over the last six presidential contests, Colorado has voted for the Republican and Democratic ticket three times each.
Peak battleground status for Colorado was between 2004 and 2016. Our state’s importance was reflected in being selected as the site of the 2008 Democratic National Convention.
In 2012, President Barack Obama made more first- term trips to Colorado than any president in 40 years. Obama had 16 days of public events in his first term including his February 17, 2009, trip to Denver to sign the $ 787 billion stimulus American Recovery and Reinvestment.
Colorado was even home to the first presidential debate in the 2012 election and as many as 13 days in state visits by then- Republican nominee Mitt Romney.
Electorally important states get disproportional attention. According to the Brookings Institute, 75% of campaign dollars are poured into advertising and campaigning in these swing states.
From the beginning of the general election through the beginning of October, 12 states have had 69 of the 70 general election campaign events while 38 states, have not had a single event by the major- party nominees. Neither major candidate has visited Colorado since February. And, with ballots about to be placed in the mail, there has been virtually no campaign advertising either.
What I miss is Colorado’s influence. Issues are often framed by candidates with these key battleground states in mind.
In real terms, candidates aren’t directly answering our questions, meeting with voters, or addressing Colorado’s needs and concerns. And, it’s not just Colorado. Today, Nevada and Arizona are the only two states west of Iowa that are even considered swing states.
Colorado is perceived as a Democratic state despite the meteoric rise in voters describing themselves as unaffiliated and a slight Democratic edge in registration numbers.
Time will tell if this is the Trump effect or a more permanent demographic change. Colorado has swung back and forth before. Since 1972, Colorado has voted for the Republican candidate in eight of 13 presidential elections. And, while Democratic candidates have won Colorado in the last three cycles, Republicans won the three consecutive races before that.
In his book “Presidential Pork: White House Influence over the Distribution of Federal Grants,” author John Hudak wrote in 2014 about how presidents target funds toward battleground states and electoral strategic policy goals.
“The numbers show definitively that presidents seek to get the most they can out of federal funding allocations. On average, swing states receive 5- 7 percent more grants and grant dollars than do non- swing states. In advance of election years, those numbers increase even more. Within agencies where political appointees, rather than careerists, fill many high- level positions and in agencies structured in ways that enable presidential influence ( noncommission structures), the swing- state advantage can exceed 30 percent.”
Now that Colorado has been relegated to a flyover state, Proposition 113 is even more relevant. Coloradans will decide whether we would be better served to join the National Popular Vote Compact. Wouldn’t Colorado and Western states be better off with a system that guarantees that everyone’s voice is heard and that the presidential candidate with the most votes nationwide wins?