1-17-25 *INTERVIEW* State Senator Paul Lundeen Gives Legislative Updates

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
We live in a strange time here in Colorado, especially
for those of us who are not on the left,
where if you live in Denver, if you live in Denver,
you are relying on Mike Johnston to protect you from
the left, like where he just vetoed that kind of

(00:22):
unlimited needle exchange thing in Denver. And at the state level,
we are also in the extremely uncomfortable position of being
mostly reliant on Governor Jared Polus to protect us from
the left and from the dominance of Democrats in the
state legislature. They are slightly less dominant than they were

(00:46):
in the previous session because voters made a few good decisions,
not enough, but a few. And joining us to talk
about what the state legislature is going to do for
us or more likely to us this year is my
good friend and fellow Leadership program of the Rocky Graduate
Paul Lundin. He is the minority leader in the State Senate,

(01:07):
meaning he's the leader of Republicans in the state Senate.
He represents Monument in the State Senate and is an
all around good guy and has some pretty good facial
hair going on right now.

Speaker 2 (01:17):
Hi, Paul Russ. It's always always a pleasure to be
with your friend.

Speaker 3 (01:23):
Yeah, I would sign on to that. I would agree
that Johnston's protecting a little bit from the extreme left Polus.
When we can tease the more libertarian aspects of his
philosophy out of him, he's helpful too. But I got
to tell you, the Senate Republicans last year we identified
sixty two bills that we felt were a threat to

(01:44):
the constitution of the United States, Constitution of Colorado are
just really bad economic policies. Of the sixty two that
we identified, we killed. We knocked off forty three of them.
So center Republicans have been punching above our weight getting
some stuff done too. And in those extreme moments, we've
got a couple coming up. There is a bill that

(02:04):
declares war on the eighty year old Labor Peace Act
in Colorado, and Jared Poulos is an ally on that.

Speaker 2 (02:13):
He just said, no, not a good idea.

Speaker 3 (02:15):
If that gets to my desk in the shape that's in,
I'll likely be to it. So you know we're counting
on him to be there for some step. But I'd
like to think maybe we'll knock that thing off in
the Senate. Maybe we can get five or six common
sense Democrats to come with us and kill a bill
like that.

Speaker 1 (02:29):
When you say, looking backwards at the previous session, that
you killed two thirds of the bills you identified as
being incompatible with the United States Constitution, I mean obviously,
obviously you needed Democrat votes to get that done, right,
because there aren't enough Republican votes to get it done.
So when you do get the Democrat votes that way,

(02:52):
how do you do it? This is a very serious question, right,
So what I mean is, for example, do you say,
all right, Senator whoever, this is a bad idea and
it won't work on a practical basis. Do you say
this is unconstitutional and therefore you should not support it,
which is not a thing that I think Democrats care about.

(03:14):
Do you say this is unconstitutional and I guarantee you
there will be lawsuits and the state will spend hundreds
of thousands or millions of dollars defending it and will lose,
and you shouldn't support it for that reason. Tell me
what are the arguments you make two people who don't
actually care about the Constitution.

Speaker 3 (03:36):
That's a great question. And let me set it up
with a little bit of the mechanics of how it works,
so one hundred members of the General Assembly, sixty five
in the House, thirty five in the Senate. It takes
thirty three votes in the House to pass a bill out.
Of course, ay bill in a by Camel state like
Colorado is like quite frankly, forty nine of the states
our neighbors of the east, Nebrassma is a unicameral, they

(03:58):
only have one body. But in a by Cameron you've
got to have both bodies thirty five members of the Senate,
eighteen votes to pass it out to the Senate, and
of course you have to get one you get the
governor to either veto it or sign it. So it's
thirty three, eighteen and one are the numbers. Well, we've
only got twelve members of the Senate, so that means
we have to get six Democrats to come with us

(04:19):
if in fact we're going to kill it on the floor.
We can do that occasionally, it doesn't happen very often,
but we can the other place where we kill bills
with as you were just asking arguments with the Democrat colleagues,
in committees and in the Senate, we've got several committees
that are one vote committees. If we can convince one
Democrat to find their common sense perspective and to vote

(04:43):
to kill a bill in committee. We can get that
done in committee with one vote, But more often the
way we do it is in the minority. You have
two elements, two tools that you can use to kill
bad legislation. One is the calendar and the other's rules.
More frequently, we use the rules to protect our access

(05:05):
to maneuver, our ability to make tactical maneuvers on the
Senate floor, and we kill some of those bills, those
forty three bills, we killed some of them. We got
killed out of the calendar. We back them into a corner,
we delay them, we delay them, we delam and then
we kill them. I don't want give a way too
much of the insight baseball, because the other side, of course,
pays attention to this is what we're you know, we're
strategizing and so can do. But some of those bills

(05:27):
we can kill outright just by delaying them on the calendar.
To your question, when I'm trying to kill a bad bill,
whatever motivates the Democrat to find their common sense approach
to life and join us in killing a bill. Whatever
the argument is that tickles their fancy. That's the argument
I'm going to use. You're right, you and I. We're
constitutional guys. We really believe in the Constitution, a founding

(05:50):
document delivered in a way that gives us freedom, opportunity.
It provides for negative rights, It keeps the government out
of our way, doesn't ever do anything good. It's the
free animal spirits of individuals in America that make America exceptional.
The Constitution provides for that. So you and I live

(06:11):
in this space where the Constitution and depending the Constitution
really important. It doesn't matter whatever the motivation is, this
is going to look bad for you in your district.
You have people in your district that will see you
in a way that you don't want to be seen.
If you, in fact, are unwilling to join us, join us,
and they will see you the way you Whatever the
argument is, we'll take whatever argument wins to get people

(06:33):
to find a pathway to protecting the people of Colorado
from the challenges that so many bad Democrat policies want
to create.

Speaker 1 (06:41):
Okay, this is a sincere question, and I'm not just
trying to bash Democrats, all right, But in your time
as a state senator, have you ever met a democratic
Have you ever seen a Democratic state senator change their
view on something based on the argument that it's unconstitutional?

Speaker 2 (07:08):
No, okay, I honestly haven't. And I'm not just bashing them.

Speaker 3 (07:11):
I'm just the reality is they You know, everybody sees
things the way they see it. I mean, their perspective
is their perspective, and here's something that is a defense
for them. The reality is, under the law, a piece
of legislation passed by the General Assembly, not only in
Colorado but in other states as well, but passed by

(07:32):
the Colorado General Assembly.

Speaker 2 (07:34):
Is deemed to be constitutional.

Speaker 3 (07:37):
The fact that the General Assembly passed it gives it
this imprimature, this weight, this assumption that it's constitutional. Then
somebody files a lawsuit and judicial review kicks in. That's
where you get your third branch of government. That the
judicial branch says, we're the lawyers, we're evaluating this, we're
interpreting this, and yes it is constitutional, or no, it

(08:00):
violates the constitution.

Speaker 2 (08:01):
So it's assumed.

Speaker 3 (08:03):
So the argument that you and I would use this,
and we use this all the time, this is unconstitutional.
It flies in the face of what America is supposed
to be about it intrudes on our rights, either First
Amendment right of free speech, you know, or the Second
Amendment right to you know, carry arms. I mean, there
are any number of things where we will use the

(08:23):
constitutional arguments. But when they're passing bad bills that you
and I know are unconstitutional, somebody's going to have file
a lawsuit to win that argument ultimately if it gets
past the legislature.

Speaker 1 (08:33):
Okay, let's move a little bit away from philosophy. Even
though you and I could talk about it all day,
yes we could. I saw a story at the Denver
Post a couple of days ago, Colorado Senate Republicans named
more than a dozen state laws they hoped to repeal
as part of a package of reforms they said would
bolster affordability in the state. So I want to focus

(08:55):
in on this with you a little bit, on some
of the things you're either trying to pass or repeal
that would impact cost of living. Let's talk about that.

Speaker 2 (09:05):
Yeah.

Speaker 3 (09:05):
Absolutely, and this is critically and I'm critically important. I'm
glad we got to this because there's at its most
fundamental level right now before the General Assembly, you've got
two conversations going on, We've got a budget crisis. The
state budget's about a billion dollars out of balance right now,
and so many people, almost all Democrats, are running around

(09:28):
trying to find every last nickel dollar dime that they
can get to make sure that state government has all
the money that they want because.

Speaker 2 (09:34):
They believe government does good.

Speaker 3 (09:36):
Then you've got the Senate Republicans saying, wait a minute,
that's the wrong conversation. The people of Colorado are having
trouble balancing their budgets. The families of Colorado can't balance
their budget. We need to be more focused on that.
And so the Center Republicans we identified this list of
bills that you've identified, list of bad policies, list of regulations,

(09:56):
list of hidden taxes and idiotic fees ease, and we
identified a total of forty five hundred dollars per family.

Speaker 2 (10:05):
We're bringing a suite of bills to if we.

Speaker 3 (10:08):
Can fix this, eliminate that, get after this, reduce this regulation,
we could actually put forty five hundred dollars per family
back in the pockets of the people in Colorado. And
that's what we're working on. Its areas housing basic things
like grocery bills and utility bills, transportation, just the costs

(10:28):
of life that we're running a suite of bills to
get after those and to put the money back from
the people of Colorado's pockets. For instance, the twenty seven
cent delivery fee that then became a year ago a
little more than your ago twenty eight cents, it's now
twenty nine cents more twenty nine cents. That's not a
lot lending you. You're chasing pennies. You know what, For

(10:50):
the average family in Colorado, that ends up being dozens
of dollars, approaching hundreds of dollars on nuisance fees.

Speaker 2 (10:57):
Of that nature.

Speaker 3 (10:58):
The ten cent per grocery the average family in Colorado
is about forty five bucks of family for those ten
cent grocery bag fees if they're paying the grocery bag fees.
So it's little things like that. But the bigger thing
is housing. Regulations around housing have gotten so incredibly owned
that if we roll back some of these regulations, we

(11:20):
can say thousands of dollars per per family. The energy
codes that are not building codes, they're energy codes, have
gotten so owners. If we just rolled back these energy
codes that we've identified, we could say thirty seven hundred
dollars per family in Colorado that's buying a new home.

Speaker 1 (11:40):
Can you give me an example, give me an example
of an energy code?

Speaker 3 (11:44):
All right, I give you an example. And I went
through this personally. So years ago I built a home
down in Monument and I put a wood burning fireplace
in it.

Speaker 2 (11:52):
Love it, It's great.

Speaker 3 (11:53):
I decided two years ago, you know, I'm going to
convert that to a gas fireplace. And so I had
the outfit come out and give me a quote, and
they said wow, and I I said, no, I can't
do that. So I looked into doing it myself. Owner builder,
I can do it myself. For a couple thousand bucks.
I could convert the gas log. Well, it turns out
when I get to the end of the thing, I
have to pull up prevent and the building department comes

(12:14):
in and says, perfectly safe. Everything's great, you're compliance with
all safety codes. But there's an energy code that requires
you to put a glass front on this think costs
me an extra thousand dollars to put a glass front
on that fireplace. Who had nothing to do with safety,
had nothing to do with building codes. It was an
energy code that required me to increase the cost of

(12:36):
my project by fifty percent, an extra one thousand bucks
on that small little project.

Speaker 1 (12:42):
Do you think you're going to get any buy in
from Democrats on any of this? Again, I feel like
I feel like I'm being kind of mean to Democrats.
And I don't really like being partisan because I'm unaffiliated,
and you know, I'm not a member of a party.
I tend to lean a little more towards the Republicans.
But I just feel like, Yeah, for the last years

(13:05):
and years and years, all they do is find ways
to increase our cost of living.

Speaker 3 (13:10):
Yes, So I'm giving my opening day speech and I'm
talking about this. I'm pretty pretty narrow in the arguments
in my opening day speech. They're about reducing the regulatory
burden on the people and businesses of Colorado, letting the
people of Colorado be free. And I get done with
my speech and share there's a text in my phone
from a Democrat colleague that says, let me know which

(13:33):
bill I need to sign on to. So, Yes, when
you make common sensical arguments, you people where you least
expect it show up and say, you know what, that
is common sense? Maybe I need to sign on the
other place where we're getting a little bit of support.
The governor acknowledged, we are overburdening the regulations of Colorado
have gotten to be too much. And so he gets

(13:54):
out his chop saw, or he borrowed somebody's chop saw,
and does his political theater where he up, he takes
the chop saw and he saws up all of these
old executive orders. Well, an executive order is a unilateral rule.

Speaker 2 (14:09):
It has the force of law.

Speaker 3 (14:10):
But it's issued by an executive Well, the governor repealed
a whole bunch of old extrainus no longer relevant executive orders.
And I said to the Governor in that moment, one
great political theater chopping up the bad regulations with a chopsaw.

Speaker 2 (14:26):
I like that.

Speaker 3 (14:27):
Two, thanks for taking a small start. Now, three, join
us in an effort to expand the relief of regulations
more broadly in Colorado. We're working democrats, and I've got
a couple of democrats along right and along on this.
We're working with Colorado Chamber to find and identify several

(14:48):
different buckets of regulations where we can see and repeal
or seal and see and reduce a number of regulations
that are creating friction in the Colorado economy. Again, you
and I can do a little wonky, Well, what's friction
in the Colorado economy?

Speaker 2 (15:03):
Lundy?

Speaker 3 (15:03):
I'll tell you what friction in the Colorado economy. Regulations
that slow down the growth of a business, make that
business less likely to give the individuals to work in
that business a pay raise, or it may cause that
business to have to lay somebody off. That regulation causes
the business to have to lay somebody out, somebody loses
a job. That's what friction in the economy is. And

(15:26):
we need to do everything that we can to repeal
and remove those sorts of barriers to the free spirits
of the people of Colorado.

Speaker 1 (15:34):
We're talking with State Senator Paul Lundin from Monument. He
is the leader of the Republicans in the Colorado State. Senator,
I've got about three minutes left, so I want you
to give me quick answers on some things.

Speaker 2 (15:46):
What are you saying I can't give brick answers.

Speaker 1 (15:49):
What do you think is going to happen with this
semi automatic weapons band that actually goes further than last
year's assault weapons ban.

Speaker 3 (15:58):
I think the Democrats are going to ram it down
the throat of the Second Amendment of the Constitution.

Speaker 2 (16:03):
They're going to push it through.

Speaker 3 (16:05):
We will fight because it violates the Constitution and violates
people's ability to, you know, make sure they are safe.
It intrudes in a way that is a threat. Do
you think Jared veto that one? He in the past
has said, you would veto assault weapons ban so and
I perceived this to be exactly that. I don't know

(16:27):
that he's purpolized that, but I would hope you would.

Speaker 1 (16:29):
Yeah. I mean, when he was on my show a
week ago, I asked him about it, and his thing
isn't so much assault weapon ban or not assault weapon ban,
but rather he doesn't want a ban. He doesn't want
to make things currently people people currently own illegal. So
I'm guessing the Democrats in the Senate will try to
structure this as prospective. You can keep whatever you got,

(16:50):
but you can't buy anything more. And that's what they're
going to do to try to get him to sign it.

Speaker 3 (16:55):
Well, which is just a sophistry. There's no way to
identify that. What's everybody have to turn in their magazines
and identify having date stamp by the State of Colorado.

Speaker 2 (17:03):
That's not gonna happen.

Speaker 1 (17:04):
Okay, you already talked about the Labor Peace Act. I
think I'm gonna leave that for now because I spent
a lot of time talking with Jared about it a
few days ago.

Speaker 2 (17:11):
So in the minute in the tevenue, it needs to
go away in.

Speaker 1 (17:14):
The two minutes we have left. What else are you
keeping an eye on as the one or two worst
things that you see Democrats preparing to do?

Speaker 3 (17:25):
Well, let me let me put it this way. Something
we must do. Republicans are working on this. I think
we will have some Democrat buy in. Is We've absolutely
got to do something about the construction DEEPEX laws of Colorado.
They are inviting lawsuits that are preventing the development and
building of the most affordable of housing, and that is
for sale multifamily housing commonly known as condominials. If you

(17:49):
build for sale to rent and for sale to sell,
the cost of the for sale multifamily to sell insurance
is five to six times greater, which adds up to
tens of thousands of dollars per dwelling, and it is
what is preventing condominiums for sale multifamily from being built.

(18:11):
We need more Democrats because they killed it House. Democrats
killed this concept last year. We need them to join
in because housing affordability in Colorado is the number one issue.
We've got to make homes, housing all types, more affordable
than Colorado.

Speaker 2 (18:28):
I agree with you.

Speaker 1 (18:29):
The thing is that the trial lawyers are right up
there with the teachers' unions in terms of the strength
of the stranglehold on the Democratic Party.

Speaker 2 (18:37):
And it is not going to be easy. There is
a chance you could.

Speaker 1 (18:41):
Get something like that through the Senate. The House is
going to be tough.

Speaker 3 (18:45):
You're absolutely correct. The argument around this is never the policy.
There is a there is the patina of a policy argument,
but the reality is it's political and you've just identified
it number one and number two in contributions to the
Democrats Party. They're the people, you know the old adages,
you dance with them that brung you. It's either the
trial attorneys or the teachers union as number one or

(19:08):
number two funding Democrat legislative races, and so they're going
to dance with them that brought him. And so it's politics.
It's the powers, the stranglehold that the trial attorneys hold
on the Democratic caucus that prevent us from getting the construction, DEEPEX,
litigation reform.

Speaker 1 (19:23):
My friend State Senator Paul Lundy and fellow graduate of
the Leadership Program of the Rocky same year as me.
By the way, we were in the same class at LPR.
Were old, Ross, Well, yeah, we are old. And he's
doing the best he can to protect all of us
colorad AND's from the excesses of the left. Maybe next
time around Colorado voters will give him a few more

(19:43):
Republicans in the state senator and he can do even
better than he's already doing. Thanks for your time, and
I'll see you with the LPR Annual Retreat next month.

Speaker 3 (19:53):
I like it a lot. I appreciate your audience, Ross,
I appreciate you. Thanks so much for having me on.

Speaker 1 (19:58):
All right, Glad to do it. Glad to do it, folks.
And if you want to go meet Paul Lundine and me,
go to Leadership Program Retreat dot com. They signed up
Newt Gingrich as the keynote speaker this year. Buck Sexton
is going to be there as well. I'm not sure
who else yet, but Leadership Program Retreats dot Com