9 Days Until the Election- Election Truths VS Myths

Courtesy Cherokee Phoenix

One theme we’ve noticed more than once in the comments on our Facebook page, is the notion that Chad Smith was elected by the ‘at-large’ voters, those who live out of state or at least outside of the 14 county area.

So, at we decided to find the Truth, which just takes a little bit of math.  In 2007, Smith won 59% of the vote (8,035), and his opponent, Stacy Leeds, won 41% (5675).   The election results are available online, so we checked it out. When you open the link, click on General Election Results and it will open an Excel Spreadsheet, and that's where we're getting the numbers we will use below.

The short version (before we get into the math that might make your eyes glaze over), is that in 2007, Smith won the overall walk-in vote, the mail-in vote by people who voted in-district, and the mail in vote for at-large voters.

Here are the totals.  You have to make one assumption, but we’ll get to that, and if you look at the results very long, we think you’ll agree it’s a fair assmption:

2007 Election
Type of voter	Smith raw	Smith %	Leeds raw	Leeds %
walkin	4130	51%	3705	49%
at-large *	1975	73.50%	712	26.50%
in district mail-in	1930	61%	1258	39%
Totals	8035	59%	5675	41%

*At-large council races went 74% and 73% in favor of candidates supported by Smith; 73.5 was used as an average.  If you disagree with this assumption and think Leeds won a larger share of the at-large vote, then that means her numbers would go down and Smith's would go up for the in-district mail-in vote, because we are only talking about how to divide the overall mail-in vote, which went 3,905 to Smith and 1,970 to Leeds.

To break down the walk-in vote, The Truth is that Smith won in 18 of the 31 precincts, Leeds won 12, and one, Muldrow, was a dead heat at 161 votes each.

Smith won seven of the nine districts, winning everywhere but Adair and Cherokee County.

Smith did win the overall mail-in vote by a larger margin than the walk-in vote.  Absentee voters voted 66% for Smith and 34% for Leeds, but that is a little deceptive, because most of those voters who voted by mail live in-district.  There were 2,687 people who voted at-large and another 3,138 who voted by mail but live in district.

There were actually more Cherokees who voted by mail who lived IN the districts than who live outside.

There were 2,687 votes in one at-large council race, and 2,676 votes in another.  Both seats were won by council members who Smith supported and likewise they supported Smith.  Jack Baker got 74% of the vote in his race, and Julia Coates got 73% of the vote.

Let’s do a little more math-- this is where that asterisk on the above chart comes into play. If Smith got approximately the same percentage of votes from at-large Cherokees as Baker and Coates, he would have won 1,975 at-large votes and Leeds would have gotten at-large 712 votes.

Smith’s total mail-in votes were 3,905, so if you subtract out 1,975, you have 1,930 in-district votes by mail for Smith.  Leeds got 1,970 total mail-in votes and if you subtract our 712, you would have 1,258 in district votes by mail.  So Smith got about 61% of the in-district mail in vote, and Leeds got about 39% of the in-district mail-in vote.

So here’s what it all means:

More people vote by mail in-district than out.

More people vote in person than by mail

In 2007, Smith won both the walk-in and mail-in votes.  Mail-in votes did not decide the election.

The numbers do show that Smith in 2007 was more popular with at-large citizens than he was with walk-in voters but he was still elected chief by both segments of the voting public.

I’m sure the supporters of the losing candidate, whoever he may be, will have reasons why they are unhappy.  Hopefully they will be real reasons, not the rumors we’ve debunked today. 

Coming soon (as soon as we can get our hands on ‘em): the last pre-election campaign finance reports.

10 Days Until the Election- Accusations & Truth

More than a week ago, we addressed Baker’s allegation that Cherokee Nation employees were breaking federal law by sending a letter to other employees asking them to support Smith with their votes and money.

The U.S. Attorney told the Cherokee Nation the same day this was not the case, move along, nothing to see here.

At the time we said “Hopefully, from here on out, he’ll use the truth to educate Cherokee voters. Maybe (Baker) doesn’t like employees supporting Smith, but he shouldn’t accuse them of breaking the law if they haven’t done so. Maybe that one-day "investigation" will be the end of it, but for some reason we don’t think so.”

Boy, were we right!  Since then, Baker has sent out mailers, done some pretty spooky sounding robo-calls and apparently taken out radio ads along the same theme.

A lot of people, if they were told by federal prosecutors to stop accusing people of committing crimes when the people hadn’t done anything wrong, would stop.  Not Baker, apparently.  Instead, he’s kept repeating the story, and finally got the folks at FOX 23 to bite yesterday. At least part way.  

The hard hitting FOX news journalists told you what we told you 9 days ago:  there is no violation of federal law.  They did a story anyway, where Baker said, even if it’s not illegal, it’s wrong.  Since we care about the truth here, we have a little rule that says you lose the moral high ground and the ability to say what is right and what is wrong when you wrongfully accuse Cherokee people of violating federal law in public. Especially when you do it repeatedly after the experts have weighed in and said you're wrong (we're talking about the lawyers here, not us)!

The FOX story lets Baker tell his side of the story and references employees who said they were afraid to talk on camera.  Then they let Smith respond, and he says, basically, that he’ll abide by the Constitution and Cherokee employees have no reason to fear for their job. 

We’ll let their story stand for what it is, though the reporter waving around a piece of paper in front of the hospital looks kinda funny.  The real TRUTH is that the story shouldn’t have happened, if Baker would have just taken the word of the U.S. Attorney and moved on down the road to talk about important issues, rather than attacking employees who support Smith.

11 Days Until the Election- Term Limits: When Yes Means No

The discussion, pros and cons, on term limits have been covered by others quite a bit.  The Cherokee Phoenix had dueling editorials by Tribal Councilor Cara Cowan-Watts and  Phoenix Editor Bryan Pollard.

Smith and Baker have aired their disagreements over term limits pretty well in two debates, and we’ve covered those in our blogs 42 Days Until the Election and 18 Days Until the Election.

Term limits are an issue in all governments, it's not uniquely Cherokee.  The Cherokee Nation currently has term limits, but there are two separate votes on the June 25 ballot to repeal them.  One vote deals with the term limits for the Chief and Deputy Chief, and one vote deals with the term limits for the council.

Voting YES on either of those amendments GETS RID OF TERM LIMITS.  So if you vote yes, term limits go away, and if you vote NO, TERM LIMITS STAY IN PLACE.

So today, we want to turn it over to you all.  How are you going to vote on term limits?

12 Days Until the Election- Guest Blog featuring Chief Chad Smith

Two weeks ago, we asked Baker and Smith to submit a blog, 700 words or less, for our audience. We asked that the blogs be positive and about their candidacy, and pointed out that it would be a way to reach a few hundred Cherokees without having to kill and fry a single hog. Both candidates responded to our email, but only one actually submitted a blog, and his blog will run today.

Those of you who support Baker, we apologize that his campaign chose not to respond, but as we pointed out, no hard feelings.  That being said, here is Smith’s guest blog:

____________________________

I want to begin by saying Wado to Cherokee Truth for allowing me to post a blog on this page and I commend the site for its dedication to providing accurate information to Cherokee voters.

I’m proud to be principal chief of the great Cherokee Nation, because I love the work of building our Nation. I never underestimate our people, our employees or our future because I believe as Redbird Smith said, “We are intelligent, industrious; we are loyal and we are spiritual.” These are important traits to consider when we are on the verge of selecting leadership.

By just about every measure, the Cherokee Nation is better off today than it was 12 years ago.  I will always believe that the very best service we can provide for our people is a job.  We’ve created 5,000 jobs with great benefits that enable our people to take care of their families and contribute to their communities. And Cherokee Nation hiring policy requires that Cherokees be considered first for all jobs.  Look around and ask yourself if more of your friends and family work for the Cherokee Nation and our businesses today than 12 years ago.

While we are proud of our successes in gaming, we know that to provide a secure future for generations of Cherokees, we must work to create a strong and diverse tribal economy.  By operating on a sound fiscal policy that reinvests our gaming profits, we own businesses that provide environmental services, home health care, IT and hospitality services.  Our strong credit rating enables us to receive capital improvement loans at interest rates that save our Nation thousands of dollars.

Our health care system’s budget in 1999 was just $18 million. Now, it’s more than $300 million. When some folks were doubtful about Cherokee Nation assuming operations of W.W. Hastings Hospital, I had faith that our employees could do a great job, and we’ve increased services and put $9 million into additional facilities there.

Our housing program went from putting 23 families in houses each year to putting more than 200 families in houses each year. I believe our housing employees do an amazing job and we receive thank you notes and compliments on their work daily.  

Under my leadership and thanks to our staff, the CN has received national awards nine years in a row for its finance system and audits. I proposed the Nation’s first Freedom of Information Act, Open Records Act and Free Press Act.  I strongly believe in the need for our government to be both transparent and accountable which is why our budget is posted online and Annual Reports are delivered each year to Cherokee citizens, both on our government budget and on the division of casino profits.

I’ve disagreed with our highest court, but always respected their decisions and their position as a third and equal branch of government.   It is my sworn obligation and my constitutional duty to both follow the law and to defend adamantly the Cherokee people’s right to their own constitutional process.

I have increased our overall budget for services from less than $150 million to $600 million, in part because of our efforts in Washington, D.C.  Education will continue to be one of my highest priorities.  During the past ten years, the Nation has provided more than 23,000 students scholarships for higher education and assisted thousands more through vocational training grants.

I could go on talking about the great things our employees have done and how far we’ve come, but if you’ve been around here, you see it. Still, I know there is a much more we can accomplish and I am running for re-election to continue building and improving the Cherokee Nation.  Recently, President Obama said, “We should live up to the expectations of our children.”  As Cherokees, I believe we must look to the future in even broader terms.  Our children and theirs and theirs.  Your response to this call will ensure that the Cherokee Nation will continue to be stronger than ever, passing on our great legacy to those who come after.

Wado,

Chief Chad Smith

13 Days Until the Election- How to Get Elected with Just One Vote

Could a person get elected to the Cherokee Nation Tribal Council with just one vote?’  Would it surprise you if the answer is yes?  The Cherokee Nation constitution says the seat of a council member whose seat is vacated by ‘removal, death, resignation or disability’ will be filled ‘by the candidate having the next highest number of votes in that district, who is available to serve and whose eligibility is confirmed by the Election Commission.  (see Article 6, section 13)

In 2007, 5 council members received at least 73% or more of the vote.  If any of them were to meet an untimely demise, someone who was rejected by 3 out of 4 voters would take a seat on the tribal council. 

In an extreme, case, you could look at the 2007 election of Meredith Frailey, who ran unopposed.  The way the Constitution is written, if she had an opponent, and that opponent went to the polls and voted for themselves and lost 615-1, then guess what?  That person would automatically become a tribal council member if anything happened to Frailey, regardless of that fact that they received only one vote.

On the June 25 ballot, Cherokees have a chance to change the law on this.  The proposed Constitutional amendment says that if there is a year or more left on the term,  and no general election is scheduled within 120 days, then a special election must be held within 90 days.  If there is one year or less, the council has to elect a replacement to fill the rest of the term.

If the Constitutional amendment fails, we could possibly see two new candidates sworn in. If Baker wins as Chief and resigns from the Council, Barbara Dawes Martens could take his seat for the next two years. She finished second in the last election for that seat, winning 36% of the vote. If Crittenden wins as Deputy Chief and resigns, Rita Bunch would be put on the council, since she finished second with 43% of the vote.  That is assuming those two candidates still live in those districts and are eligible.

We don’t know if Bunch or Martens would be good council members or not, but the truth is that voters did not elect them when they had a chance, so it seems a little odd to put them into office anyway, just because they finished second in a two person election.

A yes vote on the Constitutional Amendment is a vote in favor of  the change, and it keeps 2nd place candidates from automatically joining the tribal council.  A no vote means we keep things the same way.

Tomorrow:  Candidate guest blog!

14 Days/Blogs Until the Election

Two weeks from tonight, we’ll know who will be Chief of the Cherokee Nation for the next four years.  In the next few days, we’ll get the final pre-election campaign finance reports and we’ll analyze those for you.  We’ve had a lot of discussion in the debates about 2 of the 3 ballot questions (on term limits for Chief/Deputy Chief and for council); in the next two weeks we’ll try to spend a day on the other one, which is about how the Cherokee people select council members who leave office before their terms expire. 

This August, that could come into play since Baker and Crittenden both are on the Tribal Council, and if they win we assume they’ll resign their council positions and those positions will need to be filled.

Finally, we’ll cover the truth that isn’t getting reported anywhere else.  No one else, not even the Cherokee Phoenix, has analyzed the finance reports like we have.  No one else has taken both candidates to task when their campaign statements have been anything less than the truth.  Part of that comes from the help of you all, as readers.  We’ve used blog ideas from people who have Baker signs as their profile picture and we’ve used blog ideas from people with Smith signs as their profile pictures.  What matters is that every time, we’ve been able to find the facts behind what the candidates are saying.

We appreciate any truth you, the readers, can give us in the next two weeks, to help inform Cherokee voters.  Email us at cherokeetruth@gmail.com or message us on Facebook if you want to help.

15 Days Until the Election- It's Getting a Little Ridiculous

Bill John Baker is keeping it interesting-- it seems like every day he throws something new out there. 

Today, he sent out an email blast declaring his opponent, "a man who blocked a bill that would have given councilors $40,000 to restore and protect cemeteries in their districts, but he has no problem spending $2 Million on a private plane- we need to Ground Smith."

The best part is that the Baker campaign  attaches a PDF of the legislation with Smith's veto stamped across the top. We're just wondering if the campaign itself read the entire document before sending it out. 

We read the whole thing, cuz that's what nerds like us do. And what is interesting reading is Chief Smith's explanation of the veto at the bottom of the document. He vetoed the legislation because it was unconstitutional. 

What? Cemetery preservation is unconstitutional? No.

Smith says any law passed that is to be executed by the legislative branch of Cherokee Nation's government, which is the Tribal Council, is unconstitutional, which is how this law is written. To put it simply, the Council can budget money but they aren't allowed to hand it out themselves. In fact, the document states a similar program was already in place and Smith believed duplicating it with an unconstitutional council hand-out program was illegal.

Did Chad Smith veto a law focused on Cherokee Cemetery Preservation back in 2004? Sure. But it's evident from the very documents sent out by Baker that it wasn't because Smith hates preserving sacred Cherokee cemeteries. Or because he needed the money to fuel his plane. 

The document indicates Baker and Smith both think Cherokee cemeteries should be preserved, they just disagree over how to get it done. For Baker to insinuate otherwise is not quite the truth.

16 Days Until the Election-Broken Promises

Tonight's truth delves into the murky water of campaign promises. Usually, a candidate waits until he/she is elected before they break a campaign promise. Remember "Read My Lips---No New Taxes?" But in this election, one candidate already has egg on his face. 

Since Bill John Baker first announced his candidacy for Principal Chief, he's made a big deal out of campaign finance, honesty and integrity. As recently as the end of April, Baker "challenged" Chad Smith to forgo campaign contributions from non-Cherokee, outside vendors. He also challenged Smith to not accept campaign donations from owners of businesses that contract with the tribe and its entities.

Baker, early on in January, told the Cherokee Phoenix, "I believe refusing contributions from anyone who benefits from contracts with our people will ensure there is not even the hint of impropriety or conflict of interest."

Then, in campaign material Baker mailed out to voters he made a promise. It was such a big promise that he underlined it. He declared to Cherokee voters that "He is the only candidate who refuses to accept campaign contributions from non-Cherokee outside vendors who make money from our Nation."

The Truth? Bill John Baker has taken at least $11,000 from three individuals who are both non-Cherokee AND vendors who make money by doing business with Cherokee Nation. What's even more startling is that when he made the above challenge to Smith on April 27, 2011, he had ALREADY POCKETED all $11,000 from the very folks he promised he would not take campaign contributions.

We'll break it down for you. Baker took $5,000 from non-Cherokee vendor Dr. Christopher DeLoache back on January 13, 2011. Dr. Deloache has made more than a million dollars thru his association with the tribe. 

Then, on April 14, 2011, he took $1,000 from Randy Skinner, owner of Tahlequah Lumber, a non-Cherokee vendor who has made more than $6.7 million doing business with Cherokee Nation.

A few days later on April 18, Baker pocketed another $5,000 from George Glover of Glover Construction Company who has been paid more than $6 million by the tribe for services rendered.

Want to see for yourself? Click here to and scroll down to page 4 to see DeLoache's donation and click here and scroll down to pages 5 and 7 to see Glover and Skinner's donations.

And because we are only interested in the truth, the Freedom of Information Act confirms what we are reporting tonight:

It's possible, but not likely, that Baker didn't know that three of his biggest campaign donors did business with the Cherokee Nation. Especially the two Tahlequah donors. If he knows them well enough to ask them for money, and he's made an important campaign promise about his donors, you'd think he'd ask them whether they did business with the Cherokee Nation.

In the campaign flyer in which Baker talks about not taking money from vendors, he also says 'the integrity of tribal government needs to be restored.' At this point, Baker needs to either return the money and keep his promise, or admit that he's breaking his promise.

The Truth is that Baker broke a campaign promise just weeks after he made it, and weeks before he was even an official candidate.

17 Days Until the Election- Deputy Chief Debate

The fine folks at Rogers State also had a deputy Chief debate on Monday night, and we’ve got a recap.  The sound was a little hard to hear sometimes, but we’ll interpret as well as possible.   Feel free to watch it yourself.

  

If you do watch, the first thing you’ll notice is the shoulder to shoulder, knee to knee posture the candidates are in.  It’s a good thing the candidates seem to respect, if not actually like each other, because they were in pretty close quarters.

After brief introductions, they jumped straight into the questions.

First question was about qualifications and motivations for running.

Chris Soap went first, saying he answered the call of duty, because a lot of people asked him to run.  He said he’s been very involved in the Cherokee Nation his whole life and that he would be honored to serve as Deputy Chief.

Callie Hathcoat was next, and she said she’s worked a lot of years with the Cherokee Nation in her career and she would bring ‘a lot of passion’ to the job.

Raymond Vann said he felt like it was his chance to help more people get better services from the Cherokee Nation. 

S. Joe Crittenden said he’s been doing something for the Cherokee Nation ‘since 1968 in some form or fashion’ and he’s seen the good times and the last four years the Cherokee Nation has had blinders on.

The next question was about representing the Cherokee people and not any special interests. 

Hathcoat answered first and said she didn’t have any special interests, which appears to be true, because even on her facebook profile she only lists one.

Raymond Vann said he’d treat everyone the same; Crittenden said we’re all entitled to the same type of service and Soap said that even on the Council he feels like he tries to represent the interests of all Cherokees, not just the ones in his district.

The next question apparently was posed by someone with an old version of the Cherokee Nation Constitution:  They asked if the candidates would be prepared to ‘preside over the tribal council,’ which stopped being a duty of the Deputy Chief in 2006.

Vann answered first saying he thought all branches of the government should work together.

Crittenden then explained that the question was off base because ‘the Deputy Chief has not presided over the tribal council for some time’ and that we have a Speaker of the Council now.

Soap agreed with Crittenden and said that his experience on the council would help him work together with the council because he understands their viewpoint. 

Hathcoat said she hopes that she will try to represent the Chief’s viewpoint if she has to represent him to the council.

The fourth question was about language preservation, and Crittenden had first shot.  He said he’d like to use CN community buildings and expand language programs more into the communities. 

Soap said the communities have done a great job working with the Nation on this, and he’d like to see more partnerships with public schools.  Hathcoat said she would build on what we already have in place and that the ‘earlier we reach them the better’ with language classes.  Vann echoed Crittenden’s comments about using community buildings more, but that might actually have been Vann’s line from the first debate, so let’s give them both equal credit for it.

The final question was on term limits, and just like the last debate, all the candidates agreed that there should be term limits.  No new ground here, really.

The candidates finally got to their closing statements.  Soap went first, and spent some of his time thanking supporters, RSU and the people who have put in time to work on all the campaigns.  He said he wanted ‘to invest in the future’ and promised to ‘represent you well.’

Hathcoat had her best moment of the evening, using a Margaret Thatcher quote that we don’t have exactly right, but basically said real leaders are out with the people making change and listening, and that’s the kind of leader she would be.

Vann wrapped up taking about treating people right because ‘we’re all Cherokees.’

Crittenden said he was ‘the most qualified’ candidate, having spent eight years on the Council and before that serving on the Housing Authority board after being appointed by Byrd ‘during the good times,’ which isn’t how most people remember the Constitutional crisis.  He reiterated his campaign promises as well.

And they were done.  And so are we.  

18 Days Until the Election- Debate Round 2!

A rapid fire debate hosted by Rogers State U in Claremore crammed 8 questions, answers, rebuttal and closing statements into roughly 30 minutes.  A lot of information and relatively few fireworks compared to the Tahlequah debate.  In this case, we’re just reporting what the candidates said.  We’ll try to come back with the TRUTH on anything that’s iffy here, so keep that in mind.  We haven’t had time since the debate to fact check all these claims, though some of them have already been dealt with.

You can check out the debate for yourself online here.

After a brief intro of each candidate they started in on questions.  The first one was about protecting Cherokee interests in compacts with the state.  Smith went first and said he would ‘jealously protect our sovereignty’ and ‘we will not yield.’  Very patriotic sounding stuff.  Baker didn’t disagree, and said that he was part of a team that negotiated a successful motor vehicle compact between the Cherokee Nation and the state back in the mid 90s.

More agreement on the second question, which was about the citizenship status of the Freedmen.  Baker went first and said it’s in the courts now and ‘when the courts decide I’ll follow’ what they say.  Smith agreed, and pointed out that as Chief his duty is to defend the Constitution, and since the Cherokee people decided in the Constitution what the citizenship qualifications are, it’s his duty to defend that.  He also brought up a point about the opportunity for reconciliation with Freedmen after the court decision, however it turns out.

The candidates disagreed on term limits.  Smith again said he was against them and saying that we fought for the rights to elect our Chief since 1907 and questioned why would we want to give it back.  Baker disagreed, and says that since Smith has been Chief for so long, he’s appointed every judge on the Supreme Court, and the Attorney General, and others, and that ‘when you get in that position, you think you are above the law.’  Smith countered by saying that the council, which includes Baker, has to approve all his appointments and that when the Cherokees had a Chief who fired the court judges and the newspaper editor, the Cherokee people put a 1-term limit on that guy by voting him out.

The next question had to do with improving health care.  Baker said “we’re doing pretty good,” but that we could do better by spending money on paying off our clinics instead of building more casinos and hotels, and that way more money would go for health care.  Smith listed off numerous clinics constructed or expanded since he took office…we lost track but we think he mentioned Vinita, Salina, Sallisaw, Muskogee, Nowata and maybe Jay.  He also talked about improving services at Hastings and how the health budget has increased from $18 million to more than $300 million since he’s been in office. 

Another question was on making education more accessible.  Smith talked about how 23,000 students have received scholarships since he’s been in office, and that education has to build leaders for the future.  Baker said that the Cherokee Nation education department just cut scholarships ‘to the poorest of the poor kids’ who get Pell scholarships.  He reminded us of the Cherokee Nation’s great history in education, dating back to our missionary schools and seminaries.

Things got slightly more heated on the question of involving Cherokees who live outside the Cherokee Nation boundaries.  Baker answered first and said that he feels they’ve been ‘left out on the car tag compact,’ especially the people who live across the border in Tulsa or Muskogee who can’t get tags even though the tag money goes to their public school system.   Smith countered by saying the Nation has established at-large communities to provide a connection with heritage and the Nation, and offered the history class to more than 10,000 people.  On the car tag issue, he said a candidate who will say anything to get elected will do anything once he is elected, but he ‘can’t change the boundaries of the Nation and to suggest otherwise is unlawful.’  Baker disagreed, saying ‘Osages, Creeks and Keetoowahs’ all have car tags in Tahlequah, so Cherokees in other parts of the state should be able to have tags as well.

They asked a question about jobs, and Smith talked about creating 5,000 jobs by planning for the future.  He said “the greatest service we can provide our people is a job,’ and pointed to jobs in aerospace, environmental, and IT companies that give people a chance to support their own families.  Baker said he disagrees with Smith about the number of jobs created, but the real issue is that ‘the Chief will not demand we hire Cherokees.’  Smith replied that Indian preference is the policy in place and that more than 70% of the workforce is Native.

The last question was about top priorities in office.  Baker led off by saying that he wants to ‘take away the fear and intimidation from employees’ and make them feel like ‘it’s their Cherokee Nation.’  He would start construction for houses and start hiring Cherokees.  Smith took exception to Baker’s comments about fear and intimidation, pointing out the pre-Smith era, when Baker was on the council and supportive of the previous Chief, where hundreds of Cherokees were laid off and furloughed, and the budgets couldn’t be audited, as a time for embarrassment for all Cherokees.  Baker responded by giving a shout out to the folks at the Cherokee Phoenix and their truth report, saying that wasn’t true, and that he was going to work for better health care, not jobs in Colorado.

The candidates each got a closing statement, with Smith going first.  He said the voters had an opportunity to look at the 12 years each have spent in office.  Smith pointed out his accomplishments again, including kids ‘texting in Cherokee’ and said Baker won’t tell you what he has done since he’s been in office, instead, ‘ using negative, deceptive mail’ and ‘slurs and attacks.’

Baker closed with a prepared, written statement saying ‘good isn’t good enough’ and that he wants to ‘build 100s of homes with money we already have,’ and that he’ll sell the CN/CNB plane.

That’s our blow by blow but you should take half an hour and watch it for yourself.