Friday, September 4, 2009

Ritter and Romanoff dirty laundry gets public airing

After Michael Bennet's appointment back in January I wrote,

There was tension between Speaker Romanoff and the govs office as well, no matter how good of a public face they put on. Romanoff was very anxious to get some movement on education reform at the start of the 2007 session and the governor dragged his feet for months and months. When he did jump on board with the Speaker's agenda he took it over and slowed the process down by creating another commission (the P-20 Council) that took many more weeks to create. The governor essentially sunk Romanoff's legacy project. I can't imagine that there's not lingering tension in that relationship.


I'd say today's Denver Post article points to the lingering tension I noted above finally boiling over. Ritter and Romanoff did not have a great working relationship prior to the machinations described by the Post, it's now out there in the open for the public to see.

A few things jump out at me in this article:

1. I find absolutely none of this surprising or shocking, it fits right in with the outlines of the story that have been circulating for some time.

2. More evidence that neither the governor nor his advisers are particularly adept at political strategy

3. The story reads as though Ritter may have deliberately screwed Romanoff. I'm not entirely sure that's true but that's the impression that is left.

4. Does the LG want out or did Ritter and his staff want her gone?

5. Romanoff should run against Ritter if he's hell bent on running for office.

2 comments:

Andrew Oh-Willeke said...

All of the points you make seem solid except number five. Romanoff is a quintessential legislator, not an executive. He is far better suited than Bennet to being a U.S. Senator, but Hickenlooper, for example, would make a much better Governor.

The U.S. Senate job requires someone a bit more partisan that the Governor's office, and Romanoff is a good fit for that. Keep in mind that Romanoff has a lot of foreign policy interests that have so far been suppressed.

redstateblues said...

I disagree Andrew, in part. I think that the fact that we've had someone who's tried so hard to be non-partisan has been the reason we are where we are with Ritter.

Besides, Romanoff was Mr. Bipartisanship in the HoR, so it would stand to reason he'd do a good job balancing that baton.

I agree that he's more qualified to be Senator based on his experience, but his leadership skills alone are why we need him in the Governor's office, rather than Washington.