Isgar deserves four more years

 


Published/Last Modified on Wednesday, October 11, 2006 10:05 AM MDT

Daily Press Editorial

Bipartisanship is more than talk for Colorado Senate candidate Jim Isgar, D-Hesperus. This rancher walks the walk, enabling him to serve Western Colorado’s interests. The result is a sterling record and experience that earns him our wholehearted endorsement.

A quick picture:

Advertisement
  • Isgar supported efforts to give landowners in split-estate parcels more rights. At the same time, he recognizes the need for energy extraction and the jobs the energy industry creates. Bill 1185, sponsored by Isgar and State Rep. Kathleen Curry, D-Gunnison, progressed farther than any previous measure had before being withdrawn. Though some felt it didn’t offer enough protection, the energy-extraction industry had for the first time agreed it was responsible for compensating surface owners. That’s significant.

    “The industry is important, but we do care a lot about the environment and our way of life,” Isgar said, pledging involvement in whatever new efforts are brought to address the issue. “We can’t sacrifice one for the other.”

  • He opposed Referendum A, which would’ve given a $2 billion blank check for undefined water projects. Instead, Isgar carried a bill that created roundtables for every Colorado River basin, by which those who actually have a vested interest in the basin were able to evaluate its needs.

  • Another bill he supported identified the means through which such roundtables could receive funding for their needs. Isgar is a pro when it comes to water issues.

  • He’s committed to making sure rural counties receive severance tax payments.

  • He understands the importance of being a politcal moderate. Issues like those highlighted above affect everyone; they don’t stop at the party line. Isgar says he considers issues in terms of how they affect the Western Slope. He’s also received the endorsement of Republicans, including State Rep. Mark Larson, from neighboring House District 59.

  • In the long term, Isgar knows we’re going to have to seriously look at how to fund infrastructure and higher education. He’s smart enough to know, as well as bold enough to say, that these issues need addressed now. Not when the reprieve afforded by Referendum C expires, but now.

  • As an added bonus, Isgar’s commitment to his community shows. He’s served on numerous boards in his home county, including agricultural bureaus and the Animas La Plata Water Conservancy District. In the Senate, he chairs the agriculture committee, is a member of the transportation committee and former chair of the natural resources and energy committee.

    His opponent, biochemist Ron Tate, is no slouch when it comes to water knowledge. Tate owns a water quality consulting firm, and, with his degree in biochemistry and molecular biology, understands the importance of attracting light industry to Colorado’s economic lineup. He’s also pledged to defend wildlife, private property rights and public lands.

    Still, it is Isgar who has earned our trust and who has actively fought for our water and other rights with commonsense initiatives. He deserves four more years — and Senate District 6 deserves his committed public service. It’s a win-win.
  •  

    ¤ Please read our Disclaimer and Privacy Policy before participating in our online community.

    Post a comment


    You must register with a valid email to post comments. Only your Member ID will be posted with the comments.

    Registered users sign in here:

    Become a Registered User

    *Member ID:
    *Password:
    Remember login?
    (requires cookies)
      Forgot Your Password?
     

    Do not use usernames or passwords from your financial accounts!

    Note: Fields marked with an asterisk (*) are required!

    *Create a Member ID:
    *Choose a password:
    *Re-enter password:
    *E-mail Address:
    *Year of Birth:
     

    (children under 13 cannot register)

    *First Name:
    *Last Name:
    *City:
    *State:
    *Zip Code:
     

    Comments