Change Address

VOTE411 Voter Guide

Colorado House District 60

The Colorado House of Representatives is the lower house of the Colorado General Assembly, the State legislature of the U.S. state of Colorado. The House is composed of 65 members. Representatives are elected to two-year terms, and are limited to four terms in office but can run again after a two year respite.

Click a candidate icon to find more information about the candidate. To compare two candidates, click the "compare" button. To start over, click a candidate icon.

  • Candidate picture

    Glenn Ingalls
    (Lib)

  • Erin Kelley
    (Dem)

  • James D. "Jim" Wilson
    (Rep)

Biographical Information

What would you cite as the number one issue facing constituents in the district you’re seeking to represent, and specifically what legislation would you champion to address it?

What specific changes, if any, do you think should be made to Colorado laws concerning access to abortion and reproductive health care?

What specifically are the most urgent needs of Colorado’s education system and the best legislative strategies for meeting those needs?

It is projected that Colorado will face a water shortfall by 2050 or sooner. What specific measures would you support to prevent a water crisis?

If elected, what specifically would you do to make health care more affordable in Colorado?

How would you address the growing lack of affordable housing in Colorado in terms of a specific policy or policies?

State and Federal taxes are taking our resources that would be better left with us take care of our local communities. Let's limit our state and federal governments to just the basics Defense, Courts, and law enforcement. Our communities are being largely ignored by the state legislature who are focused on priorities of front range communities and the stresses caused by their growth. Our rural communities have many pressing issues including education, healthcare, mental health and addiction treatment facilities, affordable housing, and internet access just to name a few. Our most urgent issue is to stop the flow of resources being taken by the state and federal governments from our communities and receiving little to nothing in return. We can do better better. As your representative, I would not be championing any one specific legislation, but protecting our communities from legislation that infringes on our resources that would be better applied to priorities in OUR communities.
I would not seek any changes in current Colorado law. Access to birth control and other reproductive services, including abortion, are important to our communities and also highlight how our communities have received the short end of the stick from state and federal funding. Again, our communities send an overabundance of our resources towards state and federal taxes and receive little or nothing in return. It's time for that to stop, leave the resources in our communities so we can apply those resources directly to our priorities. I like to characterize my position on abortion as "pro-choosing-life". We should not be looking to the state and federal government to enforce that choice, but we should be using the enormous resources that lobby these efforts towards providing financial assistance and services through organizations and non-profits that promote and provide the necessary assistance for the choice we would like to see.
Our education system is in desperate need of reform and a complete overhaul. The social promotion model and "teach to the test" with top down mandates and administrative inefficiencies is failing our children and costing our communities more than the benefits we receive in return. We need to move to proficiency based promotion models with local control of curriculum and educational models. Again, the best legislative strategy is not to ask that more be done at a state level, but less - much less. We need to remove state and federal governments from managing and allocating education funding, mandating testing requirements, and forcing a one-size-fits-all education model on our communities. We need to leave the resources for education funding in our communities and let our communities use and direct that funding to find the best innovative and efficient models for education that fit our children's needs.

It is my belief that we need to ensure our water management policies are based on sustainability of aquifers and streamflows rather than the the current focus on the allocation of resources based on demand or perceived need. In the near term, I do believe there is a proper role of state and federal governments to manage water resources and prevent the "tragedy of the commons" when water becomes more scarce and demands based on perceived need exceed availability. The proper way to do this is through defining law that protects sustainable aquifer levels and stream flows, rather than a model that allocates water resources to politically expedient audiences that compromise a model of sustainability (i.e. removes resources from rural areas to quell the thirst of urban areas). When "perceived" need exceeds the renewable scarcity of our water resources, we need to preserve the sustainability and find innovating ways to conserve and replenish the water resources we need and want.
Only transparent, free-market healthcare can promote competition and innovation to provide the lowest costs. State and federal managed healthcare solutions only increase costs through forcing everyone to "buy government healthcare" while increasing regulatory overhead and subsequent healthcare costs and leaving the general public no option other than to pay the highest prices possible that healthcare providers and insurers wish to charge. We have seen this with our insurance premiums and the inability to shop among competing healthcare providers. There is no transparency in pricing that we all deserve before receiving care. This is not to say that we should not help others faced with extreme financial duress do to their healthcare needs. I simply believe that that help should be delivered through existing welfare systems and charitable support from our communities rather than through government managed and monopolized healthcare.
We need to promote on a county level the economics to drive lower housing cost development. I will encourage local communities and county commissioners to specify parameters for what is considered “affordable housing” in their community. Then I would encourage county governments to reduce (or in some cases eliminate) property tax, permit fees, builder and contractor licensing fees, and other regulatory fess for housing development projects that meet those parameters. It is also necessary to ease overly restrictive zoning, historic preservation, and potentially some environmental regulations. The affordable housing market is driven by the laws of supply and demand and profit. If we reduce the costs to developers in providing affordable housing then we can increase the supply. I will seek to reduce state regulations, licensing, and the tax on income generated by affordable housing. I am strongly against state and federal governments investing in, owning, and managing real estate.
Candidate has not yet responded.
Candidate has not yet responded.
Candidate has not yet responded.
Candidate has not yet responded.
Candidate has not yet responded.
Candidate has not yet responded.
Candidate has not yet responded.
Candidate has not yet responded.
Candidate has not yet responded.
Candidate has not yet responded.
Candidate has not yet responded.
Candidate has not yet responded.