Sen. Barb Kirkmeyer (R-23) joins Ryan live in-studio to respond to primary opponents Victor Marx and Rep. Scott Bottoms (R-15) and outline her own campaign policy positions for the full hour.
Home | Barbara Kirkmeyer for Colorado
Home | Barbara Kirkmeyer for Colorado
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
In November of twenty twenty four, my mom was visiting
us from out of town and we were at a
doctor's appointment for my oldest son and he just wanted
McDonald's before we took him to school, so we were expecting,
you know, a normal day. We went through the drive through,
(00:22):
we ordered our food, and they directed us to park
in the front of the store to wait for our food. Well,
I arked into the spot that I was instructed to
and there was a vehicle next to me, and when
that vehicle pulled out, they side swiped my car. That
vehicle was driven by Joel Lang, and when my mom
(00:43):
and I got out to exchange information, he instead of stopping,
just hit the gas pedal, hit my mom and drug
her body under his van for three hundred feet and
I was running alongside the van trying to get to stop,
begging him to stop. And when I finally let go
(01:04):
and I fell, I went back to where my mom
was initially hit, and I had bystanders coming at me
from every direction, and I thought my mom was okay
for a split second until I realized everybody was looking
behind me and she was laying lifeless in the street,
(01:26):
and I remember when he turned himself in, it was
like a sigh of relief, but it was so short
lived because instead of going to court to go to trial,
we were going to court because he's not competent. And
(01:46):
he walked away a completely freeman on August first. He
still has his driver's license. There were absolutely no consequences
for him.
Speaker 2 (01:56):
That's Brittany curse. She joined me on this program relating
that whole horrific tale of her forty seven year old mother, Christy,
who was dragged to her death several hundred feet in
McDonald's parking lot in Colorado Springs. But that's just the
tip of the iceberg, as she alluded to there, this
is what happened when Joel Laying, the aforementioned offender, was
brought to court.
Speaker 1 (02:17):
And Joel's own words, he said, I knew I hit her.
I knew I was dragging her. I knew this would
kill her. I just had to get out of there.
And also we heard when the competency evaluator asked him
if he understood what it means to be incompetent, he said,
it means this problem goes away.
Speaker 2 (02:37):
It means this problem goes away. Now this has all
been made possible by the absolutely disastrous adult Competency to
Stand Trial bill that passed through the General Assembly and
was signed into law by Governor Polis. This is just
one example. And Senator Barb Kirkmeyer, candidate for governor, joins
us now on Ryan Schuling Live. Barb, thank you for
(02:57):
your time, appreciate.
Speaker 3 (02:58):
It, thank you, thank you for having me in today.
Speaker 2 (03:00):
Now I got to walk you through this because I
know there's a lot of you know, the sausage factor
that goes on behind the scenes. But the vote looks bad.
It was unanimous in the Senate. There were amendments that
were added to this, but every Republican, including yourself, voted
for this bill.
Speaker 3 (03:16):
Why the intent of the bill? Well, first of all,
let me just say this. I've spoken with Brittany, and
I've met and talked with Brittany, and it's a horrific story.
And there's there are a few others as well, and
it is horrific. But the intent of the bill was
to ensure that we were meeting our constitutional requirements that
if someone is found to be incompetent and non restorable,
(03:38):
that they can't just linguish in jail. And that's that's
in the constitution. So the intent was is that if
they are could be restored, that they would go to
a criminal you know, an institution for people who have
criminals and get restored. If they can't be restored, if
they have, for example, a brain injury or dementia, or
you know, they're intellectually disabled, that they would there would
(04:00):
be a civil commitment. And that's what the intent of
the bill was. That's what happened, and so we had
these discussions. In fact, this legislation didn't just start you know,
out there in somebody's netherland thinking about it. It went
through an interim committee who actually had a lot of
discussion about it and how to try and make this
work and make sure that we were following the constitution one,
(04:20):
and that we were ensuring that these individuals that have
done these horrific things that they're either in an institution
like in Pueblo where it's if there's a criminal offense,
and if not, if they're not going there and they're
deemed unrestorable and incompetent at the same time, that they
could go to a civil placement. What happened was is
(04:41):
the bill did pass and it was you know, I
would just say this. Even in the House, there wasn't
any debate on this bill, even on the House floor,
regardless of what folks have said, there just was not
even debate there either. And it did fly through. In
the Senate. It went through. In fact, at one point
it was on our consent calendar or consent agenda, which
means we would have just voted on it up and down,
(05:02):
and there wasn't really any discussion because again, the intent
was is that they would either be in a institution
or they would be in jail. And what happened was
is in talking with the district attorneys, is we changed
the burden of proof, and that's the problem.
Speaker 2 (05:18):
Barb Kirkmeyer, the senator in studio with us for the
full hour. I appreciate her time this morning. This has
become a national story, though, Barb, and an embarrassment. Laura
Ingram profiled Solomon Gallaghan. He attempted to kidnap a fifth
grader from an elementary school playground in broad daylight, and
along those same lines, Amy Padden was the district attorney
(05:39):
and she said her hands were tied by this new law.
Another example in your backyard with our mutual friend Sheriff
Steve Raimes. This from CBS for Colorado on Fraim Debiza,
a man.
Speaker 4 (05:51):
Charge with trespassing and possession of a gun on UNC's campus,
appeared in court this afternoon.
Speaker 5 (05:56):
Ivring the visa. Appeared in for a bond hearing today,
but by the end of the hearing there were requests
to suppress information for other officers to get involved in.
That hearing was eventually postponed to next month. We've reported
on de Visa for the past few weeks, as previous
cases exposed a loophole in state law. That loophole allows
people deemed incompetent to stay on trial, to be set
(06:19):
free and have their charges dropped even if they don't
qualify for civil commitment.
Speaker 2 (06:24):
So Sheriff Steve Reims was basically his hands were tied.
He was forced to release this maniac into the public.
And then the framed Debisa goes on in this story
claims that he was politically or racially targeted. I mean
this has gotten out of control. You talk about the
intent of it, Senator Kirkmeier, I get that, but the
practical effect are these names that I'm mentioning. Joel Lang
framed a visa Solomon Gallaghan. Those are just three examples
(06:46):
off the top of my head. So the horses out
of the barn on this one. Do you regret your
vote in retrospect which you have done it differently? And two,
how can we possibly fix this? Now?
Speaker 3 (06:58):
Look, I don't get to pick and choose which portions
of the Constitution that we uphold. You know, we take
an oath of office to up hold every portion of
the Constitution. So again, the intent was is that these
folks would either be in a jail or that they
would be in an institution, and that's what was supposed
to be happening.
Speaker 2 (07:14):
But it's not things.
Speaker 3 (07:15):
You're right, it's not and I'm not saying it wasn't.
And I didn't try to hide my vote and say
that I didn't vote for it or anything of that nature.
I just know what the intent was and a mistake
was made and we need to fix it. And that's
why I sent a letter to the governor requesting or
request it from the governor that we have a special
session we get it fixed sooner rather than later. That's
why on the Joint Budget Committee, I have been working
(07:35):
with Senator Mobley and the other members of the Joint
Budget Committee to ensure that there's funding there, that we
do have civil beds in place, that we do have
the ability to put these people into an institution, because
what's happening now is certain institutions are just saying no,
we're not We're not going to take them because these
are too violent of people. And so the state has
a responsibility there, and so trying to make sure that
(07:57):
we're fulfilling our responsibility, have pushed to ensure that we
are going to make changes to this law and as
soon as possible and as quickly as possible, again asked
the governor, let let's do a special session. Let's do
it now. No sense in waiting till January and February
to get this done. Let's do it now. I have
worked with and spoken with the district attorneys to find
out what was the problem, what happened here, because I think,
(08:20):
you know, we all kind of missed this one, and
we you know, what we thought was supposed to be
happening is not what happened. So we need to go back,
we need to get it fixed, and that's what I've
been working on.
Speaker 2 (08:30):
Senator Barb Kirkmeyer, our guest Senator Mark Baisley will also
be joining us. Three major candidates in this field voted
on this bill. Scott Bottom's the representative from the fifteenth
district also joining me on this program. He was against
this from Jump Street. He stayed against it, voted against it. Barb,
He's no doubt going to use this. I would think
(08:51):
in the campaign against you and Senator Baisley, would you
acknowledge though, that in retrospect, Representative Boddom's got this right
and you and Senator Baisley got this wrong.
Speaker 3 (09:02):
In retrospect, sure, I mean, we can see what the
consequences are. It wasn't, like I said, was not what
the intent was of the bill. No one could have
I mean, I don't think anyone foresaw this. If they did,
I'm not sure why they didn't tell us, or we
didn't have that discussion, and or it didn't happen at
a task force level and an interim committee level, and
then during both the House and the Senate. I'm not
(09:23):
sure why that didn't happen. But yeah, in retrospect, we
got it wrong and we need to fix it.
Speaker 2 (09:27):
Have you spoken with Sheriff Steve Reams about this, Like
the practical impact effect of this, and has that kind
of factored into how you're choosing to handle this issue
going forward.
Speaker 3 (09:38):
I speak to Steve Rms about a lot of things,
and so yes, you know, I have talked to him
about this, and that's my center in retrospect. Yeah, it
would have been great if we would have gotten it
right the first time again, following the constitution and making
sure that people aren't supposed to be able to languish
in jail forever if they're incompetent and they're unrestorable, and
there's there's just a lot of issues here that to
(10:00):
be taken care of, and we need to get going
on it. I mean, yeah, it happens, Unfortunately, Ryan, it
happens more than just this time. There are things that happen.
Bills that you think are going through that are right,
the intent is there, and then they get implemented something
totally different than what the intent is, and you have
to go back and fix them. Just I just don't
(10:20):
know why we waited, why we had to wait.
Speaker 2 (10:22):
I understand that. But the point that a lot of
listeners have expressed to me is the Democrats were intent
on driving this bus over the cliff. On this issue,
on this bill, why join them in that? Why not
just stand on principle politically and say, you know, you
go ahead and do that. We're not going to vote
along with it. Where Republicans are going to do like
the twelve did in the House, vote against it. Why
(10:44):
even vote for it though at all? Why not just
vote against it knowing that it's going to pass? But
why does it have your signature on it at that point?
Speaker 3 (10:51):
Okay, So again, this bill started with a task force
that was working through trying to make sure that we
were meeting our constitutional requirements with regard to the treatment
of people who have committed crimes and are not restorable
or competent, and that they can't languish in jail. That's
a decision that happened all the way back in nineteen
(11:11):
seventy two. I don't believe the law actually changed that much.
And the intent was in this law again went through
a task force who sent recommendations to an introim committee
of legislators. This was a bipartisan bill. This was not
just the Democrats trying to shove something through. I'm not
sure where that message came from, but that was not
how this was played out, and in fact, this went
(11:32):
through an interim committee where it came out unanimously as
one of their five bills to be presented, so an
additional bill that a legislator gets to carry. So there
was a Democrat and Republican on it in the House.
I'm not sure who carried it in the Senate, but
I do know that we had a discussion about this
in our Republican caucus about the need for this bill
to again to make sure that we're one meeting constitutional
(11:55):
requirements and two that we are getting to the intent
of making sure that these individuals are either in an
institution or they're in the criminal justice system and they're
in a correctional facility, but that they're in the right
place and that we are following the constitution. So those
are the things that I'm looking at when I'm looking
at bills, and that's what we looked at here. Now.
The intent was, and in talking with district attorneys who
(12:17):
were involved to some degree on this bill as well,
I mean, and other folks were as well involved in
this bill, was to again ensure that they're either in
an institution or they're in the criminal justice system, and
that they're in a correctional facility someplace, and that we're
meeting the constitution. And what happened was apparently according when
I talked to the district attorneys and like, how do
(12:37):
we fix this? And again I didn't just sit around
and wait and say, oh, I'm going to wait for
somebody else to try and find a solution. I actually
went and started speaking with district attorneys and said, how
do we fix this? And that's when we found out.
It's like, look, we changed I don't know if we
changed the burden approof, but the burn and a proof
became on the prosecution instead of on the defense. And
that's why we have this increase of cases where all
(12:58):
of a sudden, I mean, this was not again what
was intended. This is not what was trended out, none
of those things. I mean I read through the fiscal
note because I was like, there was no fiscal note
on this bill. I mean I remember reading through this
like where is the fiscal note? And there was no
fiscal note. So again a mistake was made, not intended.
We should fix it as soon as we possibly can.
(13:20):
I have done everything that I possibly can, including asking
the governor to have a special session talking to district
attorneys and working through my role on the Joint Budget
Committee to make sure that the funding is going to
be in place, that we have the beds that are
needed to put these folks who are deemed incompetent and
unrestorable because of whatever situation they're in, that we have
(13:40):
civil commitment beds in place that they can go to
and they're not out on the street.
Speaker 2 (13:45):
Well, Governor Polis may not call that special session, but
as Governor Barb Kirkmeyer could call that special session. You
can find out more at her website Kirkmeyer for Colorado
dot com. That's k I R k m E y
er fo r Colorado dot com. To her credit, she
is one of five candidates that will be participating in
a Republican governor candidate forum at the Double Tree by
(14:06):
Hilton and Greeley at Lincoln Park that's coming up Saturday,
January tenth, one thirty to three thirty pm. Andy Connell,
my colleague yours truly, will be moderating this event. Participating
in it will be several of the other candidates, including
Senator Mark Baisley, including Representative Scott Bottoms, Greg Lopez is
where well as Sheriff Jason mike Sel passing on this
(14:26):
opportunity was Victor Marx. I had a chance to ask
him about that on Tuesday. Here is what he had
to say. And I'm chuckling, because do you think all
five are colluding against you? Not all five? No, I
do not know. You think maybe some of the five
are coluding against.
Speaker 6 (14:41):
I think that when they put the text out and
four of the five responded within seven minutes, that's some
people are eager to get to a debate. Is the
first I heard of it, And I'm like, wow, that
sounds fun. I let me check. I checked with my schedule.
He goes, No, we had those events in Florida, So.
Speaker 2 (15:02):
I polite, you understand how that just what you said there,
That's kind of a bad look for Colorado voters to
know that an event in Florida, no matter when it
was scheduled, takes precedence over debate in front of Colorado
voters and constituents. Why would a fundraising event in Florida
be more prominent, be more important than talking directly to
(15:23):
voters in a debate.
Speaker 6 (15:23):
For Ryan, if the goal of my candidacy is to win,
and I have a discipline, structured approach, and we set
the strategy. Who says that this is going to hurt me.
Speaker 2 (15:37):
I don't know whether it's going to help or hurt you,
But I don't know why you wouldn't be focused on
fundraising events in Colorado, for instance, rather.
Speaker 6 (15:43):
Than past Sunday fundraiser event.
Speaker 2 (15:48):
Well, that was his reason as to not participating in
this forum. I asked before that, Senator kirk Meyer whether
his time was more valuable than those of the other candidates.
He pushed back on that, But it's true to come
across that way. I'm sure you have other obligations, you
have other events, you have other fundraisers that you could
rather be doing. But with the month's notice on December tenth,
(16:08):
you immediately accepted participation in this forum. Why was that
important to you? And in your estimation? Why is it
not as important it seems, at least to Victor Marx
to be there on that day.
Speaker 3 (16:21):
I cannot speak for mister Marx. That's not my position,
but it was important for me to be there, and
you know, I'm actually let me just say this, first
of all, I'm disturbed by the fact that mister Marx
likes to say that we were colluding. I don't know
where that came from or why he even thinks that,
But the reason I responded when I did is because
I look at my emails and my text messages either
(16:42):
late at night or early in the morning, and that
message came through later at night when I had the
availability to look at it. I looked at my schedule
and I responded just like he did. It's not my fault.
He didn't look at it until the next day. That's
his own fault. But I think, you know, and I
just think it's important to go to forums because voters
deserve to hear from everybody what their platform is, what
their policy is, how they're going to act as a governor,
(17:04):
what they're going to do, and who they are. I mean,
going through a campaign is much like going through an interview,
you know, an interview process to get a job, and
people have the right to ask those questions and ask you,
and you should be out there talking about who you are.
And in fact, when I saw that, mister Marx said
that he could not attend. You know, he's not my
(17:26):
opponent at this point, None of us are on the
ballot at this point, both just candidates and he's also
not my colleague. He's not a legislator like Senator Basley
or Representative Bottoms, who are my colleagues. But anyways, I
sent him, I sent a text to the whole group
and I said, Hey, I'm willing, you know, to try
and rearrange my schedule. Are available the next weekend, maybe
we could move it, you know, and so everyone could
(17:49):
be there, because I think the voters should be able
to see everyone and get to hear from everyone. And
that's just who I am. And you know, so that's
not colluding. That's me trying to be a comedy and
I'm thinking of being a nice person. And all of
a sudden, well it just kind of blows up.
Speaker 6 (18:04):
Man.
Speaker 3 (18:04):
You know, he's accusing people of colluding and that you know,
we're like in high school or something, and I just
think that's ridiculous, quite frankly.
Speaker 2 (18:11):
Both you and Greg Lopez. I was in that text
thread responding with that offer, Hey, if we can move
it to a different date that makes it work for you,
that we want to make sure that we do that
to accommodate your appearance on the stage. He declined that
offer as well, we'll see what happens going forward from here.
Senator Barb Kirkmeyer, candidate for governor, joining us in studio.
We continue with more after this.
Speaker 4 (18:34):
I'm so far ahead of all the rest of the
Republicans in this race, and they know it. That's why
when Senator Kirkmeyer has conversations and she said this in
a room, she says things like, well, we Scott and
I agree on like ninety five percent of stuff. Well
we don't. We don't agree on almost anything.
Speaker 2 (18:50):
Senator Barb Kirkmeyer joining me in studio to respond to
that and other statements made by Representative Scott Bottoms, one
of her opponents in the primary field for the Republican
candidacy for governor. And again, both of those candidates will
be participating in a forum coming up on January tenth.
That's a Saturday, from one thirty pm to three thirty
pm at the Double Tree by Hilton Greeley at Lincoln Park.
(19:12):
Senator kirk Meyer, welcome back, Thank you again for your time.
Represented Bottoms claims that he's way ahead and that you're
basically drafting off of him, claiming that you agree on
ninety five percent of issues, but you don't, do you
maintain that number, or do you disagree with him on
a lot of things? How would you characterize that.
Speaker 3 (19:29):
I think that we actually do agree on most issues.
I mean we both our Republicans. I know that our
votes are the exact same on bills, because I think
Representive Bottom's just votes. Know most of the time, I
do not. You know, my job is as a state
Senator is to go down there and try and make
things better for the people of the state of Colorado.
And so that's what I intend to do, and that's
(19:50):
what I have done as a state Senator and as
a county commissioner. But on the issues, I would say
that we're probably pretty close and pretty similar on where
we stand on the issues. I may not be as
far to the right as Representative Bottoms is on some issues,
but I would say that we're pretty close.
Speaker 2 (20:09):
He also states some numbers here, and my head's spinning
because Victor Marx gave me numbers. I don't know where
they're pulling these out of, or Scott Bottom's saying thing there.
I'm sure you may have different numbers at this point.
Who knows. But this is what he had to say
about the state of.
Speaker 4 (20:22):
The race, his support has moved backwards. He's in single
digits right now. Talk about when it comes to support
across the state of Colorado. Senator Kirkmyer is the only
one that's not in single digits. She's in double digits,
and it's very small. But everybody else is in single digits,
including Victor. And I'm in the seventy five to eighty
percentile range.
Speaker 2 (20:41):
And so this is.
Speaker 4 (20:43):
Why, all of a sudden, now everybody's trying to tag
on to me and Victor included.
Speaker 2 (20:47):
Barb, where do you have the numbers? What are your
sources for those numbers?
Speaker 1 (20:50):
Are?
Speaker 2 (20:50):
Are they just arbitrary at this point? Can we know
those numbers at all?
Speaker 3 (20:53):
I don't think anybody actually knows numbers. I mean, I
don't know what polling they're doing. I haven't seen their polling.
Have you done internal polling I've done. No, I have not.
But I've seen other polls that show where like Police
is and Bennett is and what the what an affiliates
are saying where you know, close to sixty percent are saying, hey,
we're going on the right, We're in the wrong direction,
We're going the wrong track. So no, I haven't looked
(21:15):
at that and it is pretty arbitrary now and now,
you know, I start thinking about it. When I was
talking and I responded to a question because Represented Bottoms
and I were at the Highlands Ranch Republican breakfast and
we are having a discussion, and someone asked me about
my votes, you know, because they were calling me names basically,
and I said, on the issues, basically, myself and Representive
(21:37):
Bottoms are fairly close, and it could be about ninety
five percent of the time. I don't know if that
number is exact or not, but for the most part,
we are both Republicans. I am very fiscally conservative, and
our votes aren't going to be the exact same. But
I would say that we both believe in limited government,
personal responsibility, private property rights, the whole Constitution, you know,
(21:58):
every every amendment in the Constitution matters. We don't get
to pick and choose. We both took an oath of office,
and so on those types of core base what I
deemed as Republican issues and Republican core values, I would
say we're probably fairly close. There are some things that
we don't agree on, and maybe it's not ninety five percent,
but I don't know. It's going to be it's going
to be a lot.
Speaker 2 (22:19):
But he says the state of the race is he's
saying he's in like, yeah, seventy five to eighty percent,
you're low double digits.
Speaker 3 (22:26):
Yeah, I would probably disagree with that. I mean, and like,
it's been my experience. I mean, I've been in a
lot of races, a lot more than Representative Bottoms, who's
been a representative now for three years, I think three
or four years somewhere in there. And it's my experience
that when people start talking about how they're in the
lead and they're doing all these things that usually they're not,
and you can usually look at their fundraising numbers to
(22:47):
figure out if they're in the lead or not and
how well they're doing and how much support they're actually getting.
So my fundraising numbers after three weeks basically almost doubled
what everybody else had raised in all the whole time
they'd been there. So I just think he's in the lead.
But whatever, we'll see how it goes. We'll see who
gets on the ballot, and then we'll see how the
vote goes.
Speaker 2 (23:05):
You said you were being called names of this breakfast
was Rhino. One of those names yeah, how do you
respond to that?
Speaker 3 (23:12):
I say, I asked people to explain to me. I mean,
one of the issues that they want to call me
a rhino on is that I try to get rid
of the caucus because I don't think that's grassroots. I
think when only two people show up to my caucus
and I'm one of them, that's not grassroots. That's not
getting a true flavor. I think when I go out
and you know, get petitions and signatures and go out
(23:33):
and door to door. I mean I knocked on over
my daughter and I knocked on over five thousand doors
to get signatures. We're bringing in more Republicans, We're engaging
more people into the race and say hey, here's what's
going on, because a lot of people aren't following, especially
in a primary. So it's things like that. And so
we were having that discussion, and I was talking about
it because I think at one point during that conversation,
(23:55):
because representing Bottoms what before me and we had like
ten minutes to speak, five minutes for questions, And somebody
asked him and he made a comment about but he
could cut the budget by ten billion, and I'm like,
where where could.
Speaker 5 (24:06):
You do that?
Speaker 2 (24:06):
Well you're a numbers person too.
Speaker 3 (24:08):
Yes, And then but then he also said that you
know that he could do that, and that you know
he votes he votes against the budget. Well, I vote
for the budget. But you know, I've been probably one
of a handful of Republicans that have actually been able
to cut spending at the state and I'm pretty proud
of that. And I yes, I do vote for the budget.
(24:28):
Because here's here's what's going on. If you vote no
on the budget, you're saying, no, we're not going to
fund the Department of Corrections. Well, I'd like to know
where they think they're going to place those criminals, right,
you know what correctional facility are they're going to go in?
How are we going to fix the issue that we
have with ten thirty four? If you continue to vote
know on the budget. If you vote know on the
budget when the Constitution says we have to have a
balanced budget, how is that you adhering to and keeping
your oath of office? When you vote KNOW on the
(24:50):
budget and the constitution says we have to fund an
education system and you refuse to fund it, how is
that being responsible? Is that what you're going to do
as a governor, because it's not what I'm going to do.
I'm going to go work with people to make sure
that we meet the needs of the people of this
state and that we make their lives better, and that
we get rid of this mess that has been caused
by this one party control for the last seven years,
(25:10):
where we're unaffordable, we're unsafe, we're unraveling, and our streets
are crumbling.
Speaker 2 (25:15):
Right.
Speaker 3 (25:15):
So as a governor, I'm going to go work for that.
And if you want to know what I'm going to do,
just look what I've done, because I'm going to build
on everything I've done and I'm going to go make
things better for the people of the state of Colorado.
Speaker 2 (25:25):
Well, the one thing I respect most about you, Senator Kirkmeyer,
is you are a budget hawk, and I think you
would here to some of the same things I do.
One of the reasons I supported, for instance, Ron DeSantis
in the primary for president was I want somebody who
is as a pragmatic, practical approach with priorities based in principle,
but also knows how to pick their battles. So maybe
(25:47):
people are criticizing you, Rhino Republican and name only for
not fighting every battle or dying on every hill. But
what would you say to somebody that is a grassroots Republican,
that is a MAGA America first Republican, very conservative, that
might have some apprehension about you, about the battles that
you will pick, that you will fight for and not
(26:09):
just go along to get along with Democrats.
Speaker 3 (26:12):
I would say, first of all, go look at my record. Yeah,
I have a great record, and I'm willing to stand
on my record against anybody, any anybody, whether they're Democrat
or Republican. With regard to my record, I have kept
my oath of office. I've never compromised my principles. I
have upheld the Constitution, which is required. And you know,
I don't necessarily like everything in the Constitution, but I
don't get to pick and choose. So we all have
(26:34):
to uphold our constitution. And so when you're voting against
it that I find that disconcerting. But go back and
even look at my record, going all the way back
to being a county commissioner, I have I led my
county to zero debt, cut the mill I he cut taxes,
built roads. My record is eyeing pretty tarn good compared
to most folks, and I've worked with people across the
(26:56):
aisle to get things done for the betterment of the
people of the state Colorado. You know, I may have
been elected from a district in the state, but we
are state senators, we are state representatives, and we're supposed
to be looking out for everybody in the state. And
as governor, ought's what I'm going to do. So if
you want to know what I'm going to do as governor,
go look what I've accomplished. I've been able to cut
property taxes at the state not once, but twice, largest
(27:19):
property tax cut in history. I've been able to make
sure that we fund education, that we balance our budget,
that we don't balance the budget on the backs of students,
but that we fund education as required under the constitution.
And I've been able to cut spending in that budget.
So there are a lot of other things that I've done.
So go look at my record. I'm very proud of
my record. I'm happy to explain it to anybody, but
(27:40):
go look at it. I'm happy to explain and I
can justify every vote I've made, and I don't just
go side with the Democrats. But there are issues like
transportation that are not partisan, you know. They they should
be by partisan. We should be finding fixes, you know,
and that's why I put out that plan that shows
where we can do six billion dollars worth of funding
to fix our roads in the first four years of
(28:03):
my governor's office term. So you know, there are things
that we should be working on. We're supposed to be
working for everybody in the state of Colorado, not just
a few people. But go look, I'm as conservatives as
they come. But because I haven't changed my platform, the
platform of some people in our Republican Party has changed
and they've made it more extreme, and that's not where
I'm at.
Speaker 2 (28:23):
You find out more about her platform at her website,
Kirkmeyer for Colorado dot com. That's k R k M
E y E R f O R Colorado dot com.
We come back. We'll wrap up this hour with Senator
Barb Kirkmeyer, candidate for governor. And there are many that
consider her to be the biggest threat to the opposing side,
most likely Senator Michael Bennett. And you only have to
(28:44):
look at the Apple research that they do as to
why they may fear her the most as an opposing candidate.
We'll take this time out, We'll come back wrap up
with Barb after this on Ryan Schuling Live. Senator Bob
Kirkmeyer kind enough to spend an entire hour with us
here live and studio. We appreciate her time and appreciate
this text. It's an interesting question at five seven seven
(29:06):
thirty nine, Ryan, I like kirk Meyer, but we need
someone to run for Senate. Why did she decide governor instead?
And who will Republicans get to run? Barb? What say you?
Speaker 3 (29:17):
Yeah? I've been a state senator for the last five years.
Prior to that, I was a county commissioner. Here's the
bottom line. I'm a mom and a grandmother, four generation
Colorado and this is my state. The state's in a mess.
I think my experience, my proven record, trusted record that
I have, demonstrates that I'm best suited to run for governor,
that I know how to govern. As a county commissioner,
(29:39):
I led my county to zero debt. I built the
only help help to build. I didn't do it by myself, obviously,
but you know helped. It was instrumental in building the
only county highway in the state of Colorado, and went
and got it called a county highway, and we did
that with cash. We didn't go into debt doing that.
And so I do know how to govern. That's why
I wanted to be on the Joint Budget Committee, so
I could go make a difference and and improve the
(30:00):
lives of the people in my state. And I think
this is where I'm supposed to be. And this is why,
you know, why all of the experiences that I've had.
I've owned a dairy farm. I grew up on a
dairy farm, you know. I grew up from, you know,
a very modest background. I worked my way through college
and then I owned a small business, and I was
a county commissioner for twenty years. I was an executive
(30:21):
director of department underneath Governor Owens. And so I have
all this experience and it's time to put it to
work for the people of the state of Colorado. I
care about this state. I have six grandchildren. They are
six generation Coloradoans. You know, we're supposed to be leaving
things better than when the way we found them. And
I don't think we're there. I think we're off track.
I think I'm the person who can get us back
(30:42):
on track and make a difference in the state of
Colorado for the people that live here.
Speaker 2 (30:46):
One issue we've been dealing with over these last several
days were getting notices on our phone or via email
from Excel Energy. Is that what might have to shut
down the grid here? The winds are very high. This
feels a lot like California, and that feeling is not
unique to this issue. Don't California my Colorado bar but
we know that's been happening here. What's going on with
energy in this state and how would you choose to
(31:08):
address it?
Speaker 3 (31:08):
Well, I mean just recently with the PUC, the Public
Utilities Commission basically pushing out natural gas. I mean it's
a clean, reliable, sustainable source of energy, and they're saying, yeah,
we're going to do away with that and we're going
to go to unreliable wind and solar. And here's what's
going on right now is Excel is being preventive because
of what happened with the Marshall fire on December twenty
(31:28):
eighth a couple of years ago, you know, and they
got blamed for it. So it's a liability issue and
they're being preventive. They don't want to see that happen
and they don't want to get blamed for it, and
so they're being very cautious about it because of the
litigious situation we're in in this state. So you're right,
we don't want to California our Colorado. They've gone after
not only the utilities, but they've gone after the energy
industry in this state and tried to wipe them out.
(31:51):
And that's very detrimental not only to our state revenues
and the state that you know, revenues that come into
the state, but to the number of jobs that are
great paying jobs that they just kind of tossed aside.
They meaning that one party control again. So there's a
lot of policies. We didn't get to be one of
the most unaffordable states in the nation because of great
(32:11):
policy that's been passed by the Democrats in the last
seven years, or by this administration, this police administration. We
didn't get to be one of the second we're either second, third,
or fourth most dangerous, depending on what day you're looking
at the numbers or whose source you're looking at, most
dangerous state in the nation, and we're the sixth most regulated.
Those are big numbers, and we didn't get there because
(32:31):
of great policy. It's because of poor policy, poor planning,
no vision, no sight, and then they've just totally messed
up our state with our budget. We're a billion dollars
in the hole every year. That's uncalled for. So as governor,
I know I can turn us around.
Speaker 2 (32:47):
I have used this true crime analogy before, but the
Democrats have basically run rough shot over this state. You
mentioned the budget, and it's this buzzword now of affordability
that Democrats are trying to run on. And I imagine
Michael Bennett would try to run on in a general
election against you. But it's like the arson is showing
up to the fire that the arson is set and sing,
I know how to put it out. How would you
(33:07):
address the affordability issue in Colorado? Where has it gone
so far off the rails? How can we rein it in?
If at all?
Speaker 3 (33:15):
So we can reign it in? First of all by
starting to look at some of the rules and regulations
that have been passed. The executive branch has given broad authority,
and that is something as governor that you can actually
go after and start working on on day one. There
are hundreds of boards and commissions that the governor gets
to point the people to that are deciding these rules
and regulations, starting with the Public Utilities Commission, for example.
(33:37):
And so those are areas where we can reign in
those rules and regulations, where we put plans in place
with regard to affordable housing, and we stop trying to
tell local governments what to do and passing unfunded mandates
to them and start working with them and partnering with
them to find solutions. That's what I did as a
county commissioner, and that's what I would do as a governor,
is work together and partner for the betterment of everybody.
(33:58):
Go look at Well County. When I left Well County,
we were one of the counties that is in the
best shape in the state of Colorado. No debt, lowering
the taxes, affordable housing, working counties and cities, working together
for everybody, building our own roads, paying cash for everything.
Go look at what I did in Well County. Go
look what I've done as a state senator, stabilizing the
(34:18):
healthcare stafey net, making sure that we're going to continue
to have access and working on access to healthcare in
this state when nobody else is, making sure that we
are funding education and making sure that our kids are
getting the opportunity to the education that they deserve. Things
of that nature. Go look what I've done, and that's
what I'm going to do as a governor.
Speaker 2 (34:36):
Finally, Barb, why should Michael Bennett, if he's the presumptive
nominee on the Democratic side, fear you the most as
a candidate? And what would be the one thing you'd
like to go after him on on the debate stage?
Speaker 3 (34:46):
He should fear me the most because even the Denver
Post said I'm the best Republican candidate that we filled
it in the last ten years, and I happen to
agree with them. So he should fear me because he
doesn't know the numbers. And the reason he should fear
me the most is because he's basically done nothing in
his last seventeen years of being a US like nobody
can really tell you. I don't even think he can
tell you. So he should for me the most because
the number one question is I'm going to say, what
have you actually done for the people of Colorado that
(35:08):
has made our lives better? And now I don't think
he can answer that question.
Speaker 2 (35:12):
Senator Barb Kirkmeyer certainly answering the questions here today with me,
and again she'll be participating in the Republican Governor candidate
Forum coming up after the first of the year, So
enjoy your holidays. That means you too, Barb okay, And
on Saturday, January tenth, from one thirty to three thirty
pm at the Double Tree by Hilton in Greeley at
Lincoln Park, She'll be among five candidates participating in that
along with Representative Scott Bottoms, Sheriff Jason Mike Soul, State
(35:36):
Senator Mark Baisley, and Representative Scott Bottoms. Barb always appreciate
your time. Thank you so much for being.
Speaker 3 (35:41):
Here today, thank you for having me. And it's great
to know that you're not biased. Thank you so much.
You going to help us get the message out in Colorado.
Speaker 2 (35:49):
Appreciate that, Barb very much. Her website one more time.
Kirkmeyer four Colorado dot Com back with more after this
on Ryan Schuling Live.
In November of twenty twenty four, my mom was visiting
us from out of town and we were at a
doctor's appointment for my oldest son and he just wanted
McDonald's before we took him to school, so we were expecting,
you know, a normal day. We went through the drive through,
(00:22):
we ordered our food, and they directed us to park
in the front of the store to wait for our food. Well,
I arked into the spot that I was instructed to
and there was a vehicle next to me, and when
that vehicle pulled out, they side swiped my car. That
vehicle was driven by Joel Lang, and when my mom
(00:43):
and I got out to exchange information, he instead of stopping,
just hit the gas pedal, hit my mom and drug
her body under his van for three hundred feet and
I was running alongside the van trying to get to stop,
begging him to stop. And when I finally let go
(01:04):
and I fell, I went back to where my mom
was initially hit, and I had bystanders coming at me
from every direction, and I thought my mom was okay
for a split second until I realized everybody was looking
behind me and she was laying lifeless in the street,
(01:26):
and I remember when he turned himself in, it was
like a sigh of relief, but it was so short
lived because instead of going to court to go to trial,
we were going to court because he's not competent. And
(01:46):
he walked away a completely freeman on August first. He
still has his driver's license. There were absolutely no consequences
for him.
Speaker 2 (01:56):
That's Brittany curse. She joined me on this program relating
that whole horrific tale of her forty seven year old mother, Christy,
who was dragged to her death several hundred feet in
McDonald's parking lot in Colorado Springs. But that's just the
tip of the iceberg, as she alluded to there, this
is what happened when Joel Laying, the aforementioned offender, was
brought to court.
Speaker 1 (02:17):
And Joel's own words, he said, I knew I hit her.
I knew I was dragging her. I knew this would
kill her. I just had to get out of there.
And also we heard when the competency evaluator asked him
if he understood what it means to be incompetent, he said,
it means this problem goes away.
Speaker 2 (02:37):
It means this problem goes away. Now this has all
been made possible by the absolutely disastrous adult Competency to
Stand Trial bill that passed through the General Assembly and
was signed into law by Governor Polis. This is just
one example. And Senator Barb Kirkmeyer, candidate for governor, joins
us now on Ryan Schuling Live. Barb, thank you for
(02:57):
your time, appreciate.
Speaker 3 (02:58):
It, thank you, thank you for having me in today.
Speaker 2 (03:00):
Now I got to walk you through this because I
know there's a lot of you know, the sausage factor
that goes on behind the scenes. But the vote looks bad.
It was unanimous in the Senate. There were amendments that
were added to this, but every Republican, including yourself, voted
for this bill.
Speaker 3 (03:16):
Why the intent of the bill? Well, first of all,
let me just say this. I've spoken with Brittany, and
I've met and talked with Brittany, and it's a horrific story.
And there's there are a few others as well, and
it is horrific. But the intent of the bill was
to ensure that we were meeting our constitutional requirements that
if someone is found to be incompetent and non restorable,
(03:38):
that they can't just linguish in jail. And that's that's
in the constitution. So the intent was is that if
they are could be restored, that they would go to
a criminal you know, an institution for people who have
criminals and get restored. If they can't be restored, if
they have, for example, a brain injury or dementia, or
you know, they're intellectually disabled, that they would there would
(04:00):
be a civil commitment. And that's what the intent of
the bill was. That's what happened, and so we had
these discussions. In fact, this legislation didn't just start you know,
out there in somebody's netherland thinking about it. It went
through an interim committee who actually had a lot of
discussion about it and how to try and make this
work and make sure that we were following the constitution one,
(04:20):
and that we were ensuring that these individuals that have
done these horrific things that they're either in an institution
like in Pueblo where it's if there's a criminal offense,
and if not, if they're not going there and they're
deemed unrestorable and incompetent at the same time, that they
could go to a civil placement. What happened was is
(04:41):
the bill did pass and it was you know, I
would just say this. Even in the House, there wasn't
any debate on this bill, even on the House floor,
regardless of what folks have said, there just was not
even debate there either. And it did fly through. In
the Senate. It went through. In fact, at one point
it was on our consent calendar or consent agenda, which
means we would have just voted on it up and down,
(05:02):
and there wasn't really any discussion because again, the intent
was is that they would either be in a institution
or they would be in jail. And what happened was
is in talking with the district attorneys, is we changed
the burden of proof, and that's the problem.
Speaker 2 (05:18):
Barb Kirkmeyer, the senator in studio with us for the
full hour. I appreciate her time this morning. This has
become a national story, though, Barb, and an embarrassment. Laura
Ingram profiled Solomon Gallaghan. He attempted to kidnap a fifth
grader from an elementary school playground in broad daylight, and
along those same lines, Amy Padden was the district attorney
(05:39):
and she said her hands were tied by this new law.
Another example in your backyard with our mutual friend Sheriff
Steve Raimes. This from CBS for Colorado on Fraim Debiza,
a man.
Speaker 4 (05:51):
Charge with trespassing and possession of a gun on UNC's campus,
appeared in court this afternoon.
Speaker 5 (05:56):
Ivring the visa. Appeared in for a bond hearing today,
but by the end of the hearing there were requests
to suppress information for other officers to get involved in.
That hearing was eventually postponed to next month. We've reported
on de Visa for the past few weeks, as previous
cases exposed a loophole in state law. That loophole allows
people deemed incompetent to stay on trial, to be set
(06:19):
free and have their charges dropped even if they don't
qualify for civil commitment.
Speaker 2 (06:24):
So Sheriff Steve Reims was basically his hands were tied.
He was forced to release this maniac into the public.
And then the framed Debisa goes on in this story
claims that he was politically or racially targeted. I mean
this has gotten out of control. You talk about the
intent of it, Senator Kirkmeier, I get that, but the
practical effect are these names that I'm mentioning. Joel Lang
framed a visa Solomon Gallaghan. Those are just three examples
(06:46):
off the top of my head. So the horses out
of the barn on this one. Do you regret your
vote in retrospect which you have done it differently? And two,
how can we possibly fix this? Now?
Speaker 3 (06:58):
Look, I don't get to pick and choose which portions
of the Constitution that we uphold. You know, we take
an oath of office to up hold every portion of
the Constitution. So again, the intent was is that these
folks would either be in a jail or that they
would be in an institution, and that's what was supposed
to be happening.
Speaker 2 (07:14):
But it's not things.
Speaker 3 (07:15):
You're right, it's not and I'm not saying it wasn't.
And I didn't try to hide my vote and say
that I didn't vote for it or anything of that nature.
I just know what the intent was and a mistake
was made and we need to fix it. And that's
why I sent a letter to the governor requesting or
request it from the governor that we have a special
session we get it fixed sooner rather than later. That's
why on the Joint Budget Committee, I have been working
(07:35):
with Senator Mobley and the other members of the Joint
Budget Committee to ensure that there's funding there, that we
do have civil beds in place, that we do have
the ability to put these people into an institution, because
what's happening now is certain institutions are just saying no,
we're not We're not going to take them because these
are too violent of people. And so the state has
a responsibility there, and so trying to make sure that
(07:57):
we're fulfilling our responsibility, have pushed to ensure that we
are going to make changes to this law and as
soon as possible and as quickly as possible, again asked
the governor, let let's do a special session. Let's do
it now. No sense in waiting till January and February
to get this done. Let's do it now. I have
worked with and spoken with the district attorneys to find
out what was the problem, what happened here, because I think,
(08:20):
you know, we all kind of missed this one, and
we you know, what we thought was supposed to be
happening is not what happened. So we need to go back,
we need to get it fixed, and that's what I've
been working on.
Speaker 2 (08:30):
Senator Barb Kirkmeyer, our guest Senator Mark Baisley will also
be joining us. Three major candidates in this field voted
on this bill. Scott Bottom's the representative from the fifteenth
district also joining me on this program. He was against
this from Jump Street. He stayed against it, voted against it. Barb,
He's no doubt going to use this. I would think
(08:51):
in the campaign against you and Senator Baisley, would you
acknowledge though, that in retrospect, Representative Boddom's got this right
and you and Senator Baisley got this wrong.
Speaker 3 (09:02):
In retrospect, sure, I mean, we can see what the
consequences are. It wasn't, like I said, was not what
the intent was of the bill. No one could have
I mean, I don't think anyone foresaw this. If they did,
I'm not sure why they didn't tell us, or we
didn't have that discussion, and or it didn't happen at
a task force level and an interim committee level, and
then during both the House and the Senate. I'm not
(09:23):
sure why that didn't happen. But yeah, in retrospect, we
got it wrong and we need to fix it.
Speaker 2 (09:27):
Have you spoken with Sheriff Steve Reams about this, Like
the practical impact effect of this, and has that kind
of factored into how you're choosing to handle this issue
going forward.
Speaker 3 (09:38):
I speak to Steve Rms about a lot of things,
and so yes, you know, I have talked to him
about this, and that's my center in retrospect. Yeah, it
would have been great if we would have gotten it
right the first time again, following the constitution and making
sure that people aren't supposed to be able to languish
in jail forever if they're incompetent and they're unrestorable, and
there's there's just a lot of issues here that to
(10:00):
be taken care of, and we need to get going
on it. I mean, yeah, it happens, Unfortunately, Ryan, it
happens more than just this time. There are things that happen.
Bills that you think are going through that are right,
the intent is there, and then they get implemented something
totally different than what the intent is, and you have
to go back and fix them. Just I just don't
(10:20):
know why we waited, why we had to wait.
Speaker 2 (10:22):
I understand that. But the point that a lot of
listeners have expressed to me is the Democrats were intent
on driving this bus over the cliff. On this issue,
on this bill, why join them in that? Why not
just stand on principle politically and say, you know, you
go ahead and do that. We're not going to vote
along with it. Where Republicans are going to do like
the twelve did in the House, vote against it. Why
(10:44):
even vote for it though at all? Why not just
vote against it knowing that it's going to pass? But
why does it have your signature on it at that point?
Speaker 3 (10:51):
Okay, So again, this bill started with a task force
that was working through trying to make sure that we
were meeting our constitutional requirements with regard to the treatment
of people who have committed crimes and are not restorable
or competent, and that they can't languish in jail. That's
a decision that happened all the way back in nineteen
(11:11):
seventy two. I don't believe the law actually changed that much.
And the intent was in this law again went through
a task force who sent recommendations to an introim committee
of legislators. This was a bipartisan bill. This was not
just the Democrats trying to shove something through. I'm not
sure where that message came from, but that was not
how this was played out, and in fact, this went
(11:32):
through an interim committee where it came out unanimously as
one of their five bills to be presented, so an
additional bill that a legislator gets to carry. So there
was a Democrat and Republican on it in the House.
I'm not sure who carried it in the Senate, but
I do know that we had a discussion about this
in our Republican caucus about the need for this bill
to again to make sure that we're one meeting constitutional
(11:55):
requirements and two that we are getting to the intent
of making sure that these individuals are either in an
institution or they're in the criminal justice system and they're
in a correctional facility, but that they're in the right
place and that we are following the constitution. So those
are the things that I'm looking at when I'm looking
at bills, and that's what we looked at here. Now.
The intent was, and in talking with district attorneys who
(12:17):
were involved to some degree on this bill as well,
I mean, and other folks were as well involved in
this bill, was to again ensure that they're either in
an institution or they're in the criminal justice system, and
that they're in a correctional facility someplace, and that we're
meeting the constitution. And what happened was apparently according when
I talked to the district attorneys and like, how do
(12:37):
we fix this? And again I didn't just sit around
and wait and say, oh, I'm going to wait for
somebody else to try and find a solution. I actually
went and started speaking with district attorneys and said, how
do we fix this? And that's when we found out.
It's like, look, we changed I don't know if we
changed the burden approof, but the burn and a proof
became on the prosecution instead of on the defense. And
that's why we have this increase of cases where all
(12:58):
of a sudden, I mean, this was not again what
was intended. This is not what was trended out, none
of those things. I mean I read through the fiscal
note because I was like, there was no fiscal note
on this bill. I mean I remember reading through this
like where is the fiscal note? And there was no
fiscal note. So again a mistake was made, not intended.
We should fix it as soon as we possibly can.
(13:20):
I have done everything that I possibly can, including asking
the governor to have a special session talking to district
attorneys and working through my role on the Joint Budget
Committee to make sure that the funding is going to
be in place, that we have the beds that are
needed to put these folks who are deemed incompetent and
unrestorable because of whatever situation they're in, that we have
(13:40):
civil commitment beds in place that they can go to
and they're not out on the street.
Speaker 2 (13:45):
Well, Governor Polis may not call that special session, but
as Governor Barb Kirkmeyer could call that special session. You
can find out more at her website Kirkmeyer for Colorado
dot com. That's k I R k m E y
er fo r Colorado dot com. To her credit, she
is one of five candidates that will be participating in
a Republican governor candidate forum at the Double Tree by
(14:06):
Hilton and Greeley at Lincoln Park that's coming up Saturday,
January tenth, one thirty to three thirty pm. Andy Connell,
my colleague yours truly, will be moderating this event. Participating
in it will be several of the other candidates, including
Senator Mark Baisley, including Representative Scott Bottoms, Greg Lopez is
where well as Sheriff Jason mike Sel passing on this
(14:26):
opportunity was Victor Marx. I had a chance to ask
him about that on Tuesday. Here is what he had
to say. And I'm chuckling, because do you think all
five are colluding against you? Not all five? No, I
do not know. You think maybe some of the five
are coluding against.
Speaker 6 (14:41):
I think that when they put the text out and
four of the five responded within seven minutes, that's some
people are eager to get to a debate. Is the
first I heard of it, And I'm like, wow, that
sounds fun. I let me check. I checked with my schedule.
He goes, No, we had those events in Florida, So.
Speaker 2 (15:02):
I polite, you understand how that just what you said there,
That's kind of a bad look for Colorado voters to
know that an event in Florida, no matter when it
was scheduled, takes precedence over debate in front of Colorado
voters and constituents. Why would a fundraising event in Florida
be more prominent, be more important than talking directly to
(15:23):
voters in a debate.
Speaker 6 (15:23):
For Ryan, if the goal of my candidacy is to win,
and I have a discipline, structured approach, and we set
the strategy. Who says that this is going to hurt me.
Speaker 2 (15:37):
I don't know whether it's going to help or hurt you,
But I don't know why you wouldn't be focused on
fundraising events in Colorado, for instance, rather.
Speaker 6 (15:43):
Than past Sunday fundraiser event.
Speaker 2 (15:48):
Well, that was his reason as to not participating in
this forum. I asked before that, Senator kirk Meyer whether
his time was more valuable than those of the other candidates.
He pushed back on that, But it's true to come
across that way. I'm sure you have other obligations, you
have other events, you have other fundraisers that you could
rather be doing. But with the month's notice on December tenth,
(16:08):
you immediately accepted participation in this forum. Why was that
important to you? And in your estimation? Why is it
not as important it seems, at least to Victor Marx
to be there on that day.
Speaker 3 (16:21):
I cannot speak for mister Marx. That's not my position,
but it was important for me to be there, and
you know, I'm actually let me just say this, first
of all, I'm disturbed by the fact that mister Marx
likes to say that we were colluding. I don't know
where that came from or why he even thinks that,
But the reason I responded when I did is because
I look at my emails and my text messages either
(16:42):
late at night or early in the morning, and that
message came through later at night when I had the
availability to look at it. I looked at my schedule
and I responded just like he did. It's not my fault.
He didn't look at it until the next day. That's
his own fault. But I think, you know, and I
just think it's important to go to forums because voters
deserve to hear from everybody what their platform is, what
their policy is, how they're going to act as a governor,
(17:04):
what they're going to do, and who they are. I mean,
going through a campaign is much like going through an interview,
you know, an interview process to get a job, and
people have the right to ask those questions and ask you,
and you should be out there talking about who you are.
And in fact, when I saw that, mister Marx said
that he could not attend. You know, he's not my
(17:26):
opponent at this point, None of us are on the
ballot at this point, both just candidates and he's also
not my colleague. He's not a legislator like Senator Basley
or Representative Bottoms, who are my colleagues. But anyways, I
sent him, I sent a text to the whole group
and I said, Hey, I'm willing, you know, to try
and rearrange my schedule. Are available the next weekend, maybe
we could move it, you know, and so everyone could
(17:49):
be there, because I think the voters should be able
to see everyone and get to hear from everyone. And
that's just who I am. And you know, so that's
not colluding. That's me trying to be a comedy and
I'm thinking of being a nice person. And all of
a sudden, well it just kind of blows up.
Speaker 6 (18:04):
Man.
Speaker 3 (18:04):
You know, he's accusing people of colluding and that you know,
we're like in high school or something, and I just
think that's ridiculous, quite frankly.
Speaker 2 (18:11):
Both you and Greg Lopez. I was in that text
thread responding with that offer, Hey, if we can move
it to a different date that makes it work for you,
that we want to make sure that we do that
to accommodate your appearance on the stage. He declined that
offer as well, we'll see what happens going forward from here.
Senator Barb Kirkmeyer, candidate for governor, joining us in studio.
We continue with more after this.
Speaker 4 (18:34):
I'm so far ahead of all the rest of the
Republicans in this race, and they know it. That's why
when Senator Kirkmeyer has conversations and she said this in
a room, she says things like, well, we Scott and
I agree on like ninety five percent of stuff. Well
we don't. We don't agree on almost anything.
Speaker 2 (18:50):
Senator Barb Kirkmeyer joining me in studio to respond to
that and other statements made by Representative Scott Bottoms, one
of her opponents in the primary field for the Republican
candidacy for governor. And again, both of those candidates will
be participating in a forum coming up on January tenth.
That's a Saturday, from one thirty pm to three thirty
pm at the Double Tree by Hilton Greeley at Lincoln Park.
(19:12):
Senator kirk Meyer, welcome back, Thank you again for your time.
Represented Bottoms claims that he's way ahead and that you're
basically drafting off of him, claiming that you agree on
ninety five percent of issues, but you don't, do you
maintain that number, or do you disagree with him on
a lot of things? How would you characterize that.
Speaker 3 (19:29):
I think that we actually do agree on most issues.
I mean we both our Republicans. I know that our
votes are the exact same on bills, because I think
Representive Bottom's just votes. Know most of the time, I
do not. You know, my job is as a state
Senator is to go down there and try and make
things better for the people of the state of Colorado.
And so that's what I intend to do, and that's
(19:50):
what I have done as a state Senator and as
a county commissioner. But on the issues, I would say
that we're probably pretty close and pretty similar on where
we stand on the issues. I may not be as
far to the right as Representative Bottoms is on some issues,
but I would say that we're pretty close.
Speaker 2 (20:09):
He also states some numbers here, and my head's spinning
because Victor Marx gave me numbers. I don't know where
they're pulling these out of, or Scott Bottom's saying thing there.
I'm sure you may have different numbers at this point.
Who knows. But this is what he had to say
about the state of.
Speaker 4 (20:22):
The race, his support has moved backwards. He's in single
digits right now. Talk about when it comes to support
across the state of Colorado. Senator Kirkmyer is the only
one that's not in single digits. She's in double digits,
and it's very small. But everybody else is in single digits,
including Victor. And I'm in the seventy five to eighty
percentile range.
Speaker 2 (20:41):
And so this is.
Speaker 4 (20:43):
Why, all of a sudden, now everybody's trying to tag
on to me and Victor included.
Speaker 2 (20:47):
Barb, where do you have the numbers? What are your
sources for those numbers?
Speaker 1 (20:50):
Are?
Speaker 2 (20:50):
Are they just arbitrary at this point? Can we know
those numbers at all?
Speaker 3 (20:53):
I don't think anybody actually knows numbers. I mean, I
don't know what polling they're doing. I haven't seen their polling.
Have you done internal polling I've done. No, I have not.
But I've seen other polls that show where like Police
is and Bennett is and what the what an affiliates
are saying where you know, close to sixty percent are saying, hey,
we're going on the right, We're in the wrong direction,
We're going the wrong track. So no, I haven't looked
(21:15):
at that and it is pretty arbitrary now and now,
you know, I start thinking about it. When I was
talking and I responded to a question because Represented Bottoms
and I were at the Highlands Ranch Republican breakfast and
we are having a discussion, and someone asked me about
my votes, you know, because they were calling me names basically,
and I said, on the issues, basically, myself and Representive
(21:37):
Bottoms are fairly close, and it could be about ninety
five percent of the time. I don't know if that
number is exact or not, but for the most part,
we are both Republicans. I am very fiscally conservative, and
our votes aren't going to be the exact same. But
I would say that we both believe in limited government,
personal responsibility, private property rights, the whole Constitution, you know,
(21:58):
every every amendment in the Constitution matters. We don't get
to pick and choose. We both took an oath of office,
and so on those types of core base what I
deemed as Republican issues and Republican core values, I would
say we're probably fairly close. There are some things that
we don't agree on, and maybe it's not ninety five percent,
but I don't know. It's going to be it's going
to be a lot.
Speaker 2 (22:19):
But he says the state of the race is he's
saying he's in like, yeah, seventy five to eighty percent,
you're low double digits.
Speaker 3 (22:26):
Yeah, I would probably disagree with that. I mean, and like,
it's been my experience. I mean, I've been in a
lot of races, a lot more than Representative Bottoms, who's
been a representative now for three years, I think three
or four years somewhere in there. And it's my experience
that when people start talking about how they're in the
lead and they're doing all these things that usually they're not,
and you can usually look at their fundraising numbers to
(22:47):
figure out if they're in the lead or not and
how well they're doing and how much support they're actually getting.
So my fundraising numbers after three weeks basically almost doubled
what everybody else had raised in all the whole time
they'd been there. So I just think he's in the lead.
But whatever, we'll see how it goes. We'll see who
gets on the ballot, and then we'll see how the
vote goes.
Speaker 2 (23:05):
You said you were being called names of this breakfast
was Rhino. One of those names yeah, how do you
respond to that?
Speaker 3 (23:12):
I say, I asked people to explain to me. I mean,
one of the issues that they want to call me
a rhino on is that I try to get rid
of the caucus because I don't think that's grassroots. I
think when only two people show up to my caucus
and I'm one of them, that's not grassroots. That's not
getting a true flavor. I think when I go out
and you know, get petitions and signatures and go out
(23:33):
and door to door. I mean I knocked on over
my daughter and I knocked on over five thousand doors
to get signatures. We're bringing in more Republicans, We're engaging
more people into the race and say hey, here's what's
going on, because a lot of people aren't following, especially
in a primary. So it's things like that. And so
we were having that discussion, and I was talking about
it because I think at one point during that conversation,
(23:55):
because representing Bottoms what before me and we had like
ten minutes to speak, five minutes for questions, And somebody
asked him and he made a comment about but he
could cut the budget by ten billion, and I'm like,
where where could.
Speaker 5 (24:06):
You do that?
Speaker 2 (24:06):
Well you're a numbers person too.
Speaker 3 (24:08):
Yes, And then but then he also said that you
know that he could do that, and that you know
he votes he votes against the budget. Well, I vote
for the budget. But you know, I've been probably one
of a handful of Republicans that have actually been able
to cut spending at the state and I'm pretty proud
of that. And I yes, I do vote for the budget.
(24:28):
Because here's here's what's going on. If you vote no
on the budget, you're saying, no, we're not going to
fund the Department of Corrections. Well, I'd like to know
where they think they're going to place those criminals, right,
you know what correctional facility are they're going to go in?
How are we going to fix the issue that we
have with ten thirty four? If you continue to vote
know on the budget. If you vote know on the
budget when the Constitution says we have to have a
balanced budget, how is that you adhering to and keeping
your oath of office? When you vote KNOW on the
(24:50):
budget and the constitution says we have to fund an
education system and you refuse to fund it, how is
that being responsible? Is that what you're going to do
as a governor, because it's not what I'm going to do.
I'm going to go work with people to make sure
that we meet the needs of the people of this
state and that we make their lives better, and that
we get rid of this mess that has been caused
by this one party control for the last seven years,
(25:10):
where we're unaffordable, we're unsafe, we're unraveling, and our streets
are crumbling.
Speaker 2 (25:15):
Right.
Speaker 3 (25:15):
So as a governor, I'm going to go work for that.
And if you want to know what I'm going to do,
just look what I've done, because I'm going to build
on everything I've done and I'm going to go make
things better for the people of the state of Colorado.
Speaker 2 (25:25):
Well, the one thing I respect most about you, Senator Kirkmeyer,
is you are a budget hawk, and I think you
would here to some of the same things I do.
One of the reasons I supported, for instance, Ron DeSantis
in the primary for president was I want somebody who
is as a pragmatic, practical approach with priorities based in principle,
but also knows how to pick their battles. So maybe
(25:47):
people are criticizing you, Rhino Republican and name only for
not fighting every battle or dying on every hill. But
what would you say to somebody that is a grassroots Republican,
that is a MAGA America first Republican, very conservative, that
might have some apprehension about you, about the battles that
you will pick, that you will fight for and not
(26:09):
just go along to get along with Democrats.
Speaker 3 (26:12):
I would say, first of all, go look at my record. Yeah,
I have a great record, and I'm willing to stand
on my record against anybody, any anybody, whether they're Democrat
or Republican. With regard to my record, I have kept
my oath of office. I've never compromised my principles. I
have upheld the Constitution, which is required. And you know,
I don't necessarily like everything in the Constitution, but I
don't get to pick and choose. So we all have
(26:34):
to uphold our constitution. And so when you're voting against
it that I find that disconcerting. But go back and
even look at my record, going all the way back
to being a county commissioner, I have I led my
county to zero debt, cut the mill I he cut taxes,
built roads. My record is eyeing pretty tarn good compared
to most folks, and I've worked with people across the
(26:56):
aisle to get things done for the betterment of the
people of the state Colorado. You know, I may have
been elected from a district in the state, but we
are state senators, we are state representatives, and we're supposed
to be looking out for everybody in the state. And
as governor, ought's what I'm going to do. So if
you want to know what I'm going to do as governor,
go look what I've accomplished. I've been able to cut
property taxes at the state not once, but twice, largest
(27:19):
property tax cut in history. I've been able to make
sure that we fund education, that we balance our budget,
that we don't balance the budget on the backs of students,
but that we fund education as required under the constitution.
And I've been able to cut spending in that budget.
So there are a lot of other things that I've done.
So go look at my record. I'm very proud of
my record. I'm happy to explain it to anybody, but
(27:40):
go look at it. I'm happy to explain and I
can justify every vote I've made, and I don't just
go side with the Democrats. But there are issues like
transportation that are not partisan, you know. They they should
be by partisan. We should be finding fixes, you know,
and that's why I put out that plan that shows
where we can do six billion dollars worth of funding
to fix our roads in the first four years of
(28:03):
my governor's office term. So you know, there are things
that we should be working on. We're supposed to be
working for everybody in the state of Colorado, not just
a few people. But go look, I'm as conservatives as
they come. But because I haven't changed my platform, the
platform of some people in our Republican Party has changed
and they've made it more extreme, and that's not where
I'm at.
Speaker 2 (28:23):
You find out more about her platform at her website,
Kirkmeyer for Colorado dot com. That's k R k M
E y E R f O R Colorado dot com.
We come back. We'll wrap up this hour with Senator
Barb Kirkmeyer, candidate for governor. And there are many that
consider her to be the biggest threat to the opposing side,
most likely Senator Michael Bennett. And you only have to
(28:44):
look at the Apple research that they do as to
why they may fear her the most as an opposing candidate.
We'll take this time out, We'll come back wrap up
with Barb after this on Ryan Schuling Live. Senator Bob
Kirkmeyer kind enough to spend an entire hour with us
here live and studio. We appreciate her time and appreciate
this text. It's an interesting question at five seven seven
(29:06):
thirty nine, Ryan, I like kirk Meyer, but we need
someone to run for Senate. Why did she decide governor instead?
And who will Republicans get to run? Barb? What say you?
Speaker 3 (29:17):
Yeah? I've been a state senator for the last five years.
Prior to that, I was a county commissioner. Here's the
bottom line. I'm a mom and a grandmother, four generation
Colorado and this is my state. The state's in a mess.
I think my experience, my proven record, trusted record that
I have, demonstrates that I'm best suited to run for governor,
that I know how to govern. As a county commissioner,
(29:39):
I led my county to zero debt. I built the
only help help to build. I didn't do it by myself, obviously,
but you know helped. It was instrumental in building the
only county highway in the state of Colorado, and went
and got it called a county highway, and we did
that with cash. We didn't go into debt doing that.
And so I do know how to govern. That's why
I wanted to be on the Joint Budget Committee, so
I could go make a difference and and improve the
(30:00):
lives of the people in my state. And I think
this is where I'm supposed to be. And this is why,
you know, why all of the experiences that I've had.
I've owned a dairy farm. I grew up on a
dairy farm, you know. I grew up from, you know,
a very modest background. I worked my way through college
and then I owned a small business, and I was
a county commissioner for twenty years. I was an executive
(30:21):
director of department underneath Governor Owens. And so I have
all this experience and it's time to put it to
work for the people of the state of Colorado. I
care about this state. I have six grandchildren. They are
six generation Coloradoans. You know, we're supposed to be leaving
things better than when the way we found them. And
I don't think we're there. I think we're off track.
I think I'm the person who can get us back
(30:42):
on track and make a difference in the state of
Colorado for the people that live here.
Speaker 2 (30:46):
One issue we've been dealing with over these last several
days were getting notices on our phone or via email
from Excel Energy. Is that what might have to shut
down the grid here? The winds are very high. This
feels a lot like California, and that feeling is not
unique to this issue. Don't California my Colorado bar but
we know that's been happening here. What's going on with
energy in this state and how would you choose to
(31:08):
address it?
Speaker 3 (31:08):
Well, I mean just recently with the PUC, the Public
Utilities Commission basically pushing out natural gas. I mean it's
a clean, reliable, sustainable source of energy, and they're saying, yeah,
we're going to do away with that and we're going
to go to unreliable wind and solar. And here's what's
going on right now is Excel is being preventive because
of what happened with the Marshall fire on December twenty
(31:28):
eighth a couple of years ago, you know, and they
got blamed for it. So it's a liability issue and
they're being preventive. They don't want to see that happen
and they don't want to get blamed for it, and
so they're being very cautious about it because of the
litigious situation we're in in this state. So you're right,
we don't want to California our Colorado. They've gone after
not only the utilities, but they've gone after the energy
industry in this state and tried to wipe them out.
(31:51):
And that's very detrimental not only to our state revenues
and the state that you know, revenues that come into
the state, but to the number of jobs that are
great paying jobs that they just kind of tossed aside.
They meaning that one party control again. So there's a
lot of policies. We didn't get to be one of
the most unaffordable states in the nation because of great
(32:11):
policy that's been passed by the Democrats in the last
seven years, or by this administration, this police administration. We
didn't get to be one of the second we're either second, third,
or fourth most dangerous, depending on what day you're looking
at the numbers or whose source you're looking at, most
dangerous state in the nation, and we're the sixth most regulated.
Those are big numbers, and we didn't get there because
(32:31):
of great policy. It's because of poor policy, poor planning,
no vision, no sight, and then they've just totally messed
up our state with our budget. We're a billion dollars
in the hole every year. That's uncalled for. So as governor,
I know I can turn us around.
Speaker 2 (32:47):
I have used this true crime analogy before, but the
Democrats have basically run rough shot over this state. You
mentioned the budget, and it's this buzzword now of affordability
that Democrats are trying to run on. And I imagine
Michael Bennett would try to run on in a general
election against you. But it's like the arson is showing
up to the fire that the arson is set and sing,
I know how to put it out. How would you
(33:07):
address the affordability issue in Colorado? Where has it gone
so far off the rails? How can we rein it in?
If at all?
Speaker 3 (33:15):
So we can reign it in? First of all by
starting to look at some of the rules and regulations
that have been passed. The executive branch has given broad authority,
and that is something as governor that you can actually
go after and start working on on day one. There
are hundreds of boards and commissions that the governor gets
to point the people to that are deciding these rules
and regulations, starting with the Public Utilities Commission, for example.
(33:37):
And so those are areas where we can reign in
those rules and regulations, where we put plans in place
with regard to affordable housing, and we stop trying to
tell local governments what to do and passing unfunded mandates
to them and start working with them and partnering with
them to find solutions. That's what I did as a
county commissioner, and that's what I would do as a governor,
is work together and partner for the betterment of everybody.
(33:58):
Go look at Well County. When I left Well County,
we were one of the counties that is in the
best shape in the state of Colorado. No debt, lowering
the taxes, affordable housing, working counties and cities, working together
for everybody, building our own roads, paying cash for everything.
Go look at what I did in Well County. Go
look what I've done as a state senator, stabilizing the
(34:18):
healthcare stafey net, making sure that we're going to continue
to have access and working on access to healthcare in
this state when nobody else is, making sure that we
are funding education and making sure that our kids are
getting the opportunity to the education that they deserve. Things
of that nature. Go look what I've done, and that's
what I'm going to do as a governor.
Speaker 2 (34:36):
Finally, Barb, why should Michael Bennett, if he's the presumptive
nominee on the Democratic side, fear you the most as
a candidate? And what would be the one thing you'd
like to go after him on on the debate stage?
Speaker 3 (34:46):
He should fear me the most because even the Denver
Post said I'm the best Republican candidate that we filled
it in the last ten years, and I happen to
agree with them. So he should fear me because he
doesn't know the numbers. And the reason he should fear
me the most is because he's basically done nothing in
his last seventeen years of being a US like nobody
can really tell you. I don't even think he can
tell you. So he should for me the most because
the number one question is I'm going to say, what
have you actually done for the people of Colorado that
(35:08):
has made our lives better? And now I don't think
he can answer that question.
Speaker 2 (35:12):
Senator Barb Kirkmeyer certainly answering the questions here today with me,
and again she'll be participating in the Republican Governor candidate
Forum coming up after the first of the year, So
enjoy your holidays. That means you too, Barb okay, And
on Saturday, January tenth, from one thirty to three thirty
pm at the Double Tree by Hilton in Greeley at
Lincoln Park, She'll be among five candidates participating in that
along with Representative Scott Bottoms, Sheriff Jason Mike Soul, State
(35:36):
Senator Mark Baisley, and Representative Scott Bottoms. Barb always appreciate
your time. Thank you so much for being.
Speaker 3 (35:41):
Here today, thank you for having me. And it's great
to know that you're not biased. Thank you so much.
You going to help us get the message out in Colorado.
Speaker 2 (35:49):
Appreciate that, Barb very much. Her website one more time.
Kirkmeyer four Colorado dot Com back with more after this
on Ryan Schuling Live.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
The Burden
The Burden is a documentary series that takes listeners into the hidden places where justice is done (and undone). It dives deep into the lives of heroes and villains. And it focuses a spotlight on those who triumph even when the odds are against them. Season 5 - The Burden: Death & Deceit in Alliance On April Fools Day 1999, 26-year-old Yvonne Layne was found murdered in her Alliance, Ohio home. David Thorne, her ex-boyfriend and father of one of her children, was instantly a suspect. Another young man admitted to the murder, and David breathed a sigh of relief, until the confessed murderer fingered David; “He paid me to do it.” David was sentenced to life without parole. Two decades later, Pulitzer winner and podcast host, Maggie Freleng (Bone Valley Season 3: Graves County, Wrongful Conviction, Suave) launched a “live” investigation into David's conviction alongside Jason Baldwin (himself wrongfully convicted as a member of the West Memphis Three). Maggie had come to believe that the entire investigation of David was botched by the tiny local police department, or worse, covered up the real killer. Was Maggie correct? Was David’s claim of innocence credible? In Death and Deceit in Alliance, Maggie recounts the case that launched her career, and ultimately, “broke” her.” The results will shock the listener and reduce Maggie to tears and self-doubt. This is not your typical wrongful conviction story. In fact, it turns the genre on its head. It asks the question: What if our champions are foolish? Season 4 - The Burden: Get the Money and Run “Trying to murder my father, this was the thing that put me on the path.” That’s Joe Loya and that path was bank robbery. Bank, bank, bank, bank, bank. In season 4 of The Burden: Get the Money and Run, we hear from Joe who was once the most prolific bank robber in Southern California, and beyond. He used disguises, body doubles, proxies. He leaped over counters, grabbed the money and ran. Even as the FBI was closing in. It was a showdown between a daring bank robber, and a patient FBI agent. Joe was no ordinary bank robber. He was bright, articulate, charismatic, and driven by a dark rage that he summoned up at will. In seven episodes, Joe tells all: the what, the how… and the why. Including why he tried to murder his father. Season 3 - The Burden: Avenger Miriam Lewin is one of Argentina’s leading journalists today. At 19 years old, she was kidnapped off the streets of Buenos Aires for her political activism and thrown into a concentration camp. Thousands of her fellow inmates were executed, tossed alive from a cargo plane into the ocean. Miriam, along with a handful of others, will survive the camp. Then as a journalist, she will wage a decades long campaign to bring her tormentors to justice. Avenger is about one woman’s triumphant battle against unbelievable odds to survive torture, claim justice for the crimes done against her and others like her, and change the future of her country. Season 2 - The Burden: Empire on Blood Empire on Blood is set in the Bronx, NY, in the early 90s, when two young drug dealers ruled an intersection known as “The Corner on Blood.” The boss, Calvin Buari, lived large. He and a protege swore they would build an empire on blood. Then the relationship frayed and the protege accused Calvin of a double homicide which he claimed he didn’t do. But did he? Award-winning journalist Steve Fishman spent seven years to answer that question. This is the story of one man’s last chance to overturn his life sentence. He may prevail, but someone’s gotta pay. The Burden: Empire on Blood is the director’s cut of the true crime classic which reached #1 on the charts when it was first released half a dozen years ago. Season 1 - The Burden In the 1990s, Detective Louis N. Scarcella was legendary. In a city overrun by violent crime, he cracked the toughest cases and put away the worst criminals. “The Hulk” was his nickname. Then the story changed. Scarcella ran into a group of convicted murderers who all say they are innocent. They turned themselves into jailhouse-lawyers and in prison founded a lway firm. When they realized Scarcella helped put many of them away, they set their sights on taking him down. And with the help of a NY Times reporter they have a chance. For years, Scarcella insisted he did nothing wrong. But that’s all he’d say. Until we tracked Scarcella to a sauna in a Russian bathhouse, where he started to talk..and talk and talk. “The guilty have gone free,” he whispered. And then agreed to take us into the belly of the beast. Welcome to The Burden.