Senator Ken Salazar Q&A: June 30

We are pleased to announce that Senator Ken Salazar has agreed to participate in a Q&A with Colorado Pols.

We will accept questions for Senator Salazar on this post through June 22, with the Q&A to be posted on June 30. Submit your questions for Senator Salazar below.

Remember, the deadline to submit questions is June 22.

Comments

[thinkin]

ColoradoPols ROCKS.

[RHS]

I'd like to ask the Senator what his intentions are concerning the remainder of the President's Judicial Nominations. Will he do what he agreed to in the campaign? An up or down vote?

[Phoenix Rising]

W00t! (okay, childish expression done...) Seriously, I think the recent line of interviews that Colorado Pols is picking up show just how popular and influential this place is...

[Coloradem]

When do Peggy Lamm and/or Ed Perlmutter answer questions???

[Chris B]

Hello Senator. Congrats on your win from a GOP'er.

I'm curious as to your thoughts regarding energy policy (shale in NW Colorado, increased drilling, near-shore drilling and development). Is the currently stalled energy bill being held up because of ANWR, or is there something else to this? Is there any talk of incentives for new refineries or for new facilities to refine heavy sour crude?

Regards,

Chris
Centennial CO

[Far Removed]

Is everyone going to lambaste Sen. Salazar for not answering questions live the same way everyone jumped down Sen. Allard's throat?

[pollyblogger]

Take a pill Far Removed. Allard has had to postpone his answers for an embarassingly long time; it's obvious that live questions would have left him completely tongue-tied. When Senator Conway returns from vacation, you'll get Allard's responses...

[unnamed]

I would like to ask Senator Salazar what his take on the Downing Street Memo is.

[Amelia]

Congratulations to standing up to the bullying from the fake "Christians" at Focus on the Family.

Do you still refuse to acknowledge that torture is the official (albeit officially denied)policy of the Bush Administration? Do you think that anything good can ever come from this policy of torture?

Do Democrats in Congress appreciate that their Democratic constituencies are far more passionate and less afraid of Republicans than they appear to be?

Thank you.

[Alva Adams]

Just a friendly reminder: you'll have a better chance getting your question picked if it is not in the form of a lecture. You can ask just about any question you'd like, but you can also be respectful in how you do it.

"Do you still refuse to acknowledge that torture is the official (albeit officially denied)policy of the Bush Administration?"

You could have said, "You have not spoken out against torture as a U.S. Senator. Why not?"

We're not telling you what to say in your questions, but we are always going to give more consideration to questions that are asked in a respectful manner.

[Julio Trujillo]

What do you think of the article in the Rocky Mountain News, that credited your electoral success to downplaying your hispanicity, and appealing to rural, white voter? Do you think that Latinos are as important in Colorado politics as a lot of people seem to be saying? And how important are rural voters in statewide election?

[jon]

Senator:

Will you put the rumor to rest once and for all that you intend to run for Governor in 2006?

[Amelia]

Ms. Adams--I love your site and respect you much, but I called Sen. Salazar's office after his nomination of Gonzales, and in response to my protest the staffer informed me that in the Senator's opinion, this country does not engage in torture. This is a Republican talking point--just a few bad apples, etc. I would like to know if this is the Senator's opinion--that this country does not, as an official policy, engage in torture. Your re-phrasing is not the same question. But your the boss, I'll respect whatever you decide to post as questions.

[Alva Adams]

Actually, the way you explained the question that time made perfect sense. Out of respect for the participants in these Q&As, we just try to avoid sending too many questions that sound more like angry lectures than questions. And we didn't change your question - we don't change the wording of any of your questions - we just offered an example of a suggestion.

When you say "do you still refuse to acknowledge that torture is the official policy," you are not asking a fair question. We can argue over semantics, but there is no universally acknowledged "torture policy" that he could answer a question about. You can't ask him to respond to a "truth" that you believe, but that is not universally recognized as truth. That's like asking "Why do you refuse to admit that Jack Ruby acted alone when he shot Lee Harvey Oswald?"

We want these Q&As to be a place to ask questions of those officials who are kind enough to take time out of their schedules to participate; the least we can do is be fair and respectful in return.

You can describe your experience when you called his office. You can ask for clarification on that point, and why he does not believe that the country engages in torture. You can phrase this question any way you like, but if it sounds like you are giving him a lecture because you believe your point of view is irrefutably superior to his point of view -- well, that's not a fair question, and that's not the point of the Q&A. We are giving you an opportunity to ask questions, not to berate elected officials.

I hope that makes more sense. There's nothing wrong with the intent of your question at all, but it CAN be asked in a respectful manner. That is our only rule in these Q&As.

[Phoenix Rising]

Thank you for taking the time to answer our questions, Senator.

The issue of medical marijuana has been in the news lately with the Supreme Court ruling last week; in the past, you have been in the news as supporting Federal law enforcement efforts against the Colorado initiative allowing medical marijuana. With the seemingly ample evidence piling up, why - in your opinion - is this relatively harmless drug more restricted than cocaine and opiates, and do you intend to continue going against the wishes of voters in this state on this issue?

[Phoenix Rising]

Senator, thank you so much for supporting today's (6/16) amendment to the Energy bill calling for more renewable energy. Do you see any possibility of removing ANWR from the bill, and what other forward-looking solutions will you and others be proposing on energy in the near future?

[Phoenix Rising]

You played a significant role in the compromise on judicial nominees; does the nomination of John Bolton for UN Ambassador change your thoughts about the confirmation process and the "advise and consent" interplay between the Senate and President? Will you be standing firm against his nomination until the President releases information requested by the committee?

[Phoenix Rising]

You campaigned on your ability to reach across the aisle to get things done. Now that you're in the Senate, do you find it harder to find someone reaching back? Or is it easier than you thought, or pretty much as you expected? Any examples or thoughts on the art of openness and compromise from your short time in the Capitol?

[CKP]

Senator Salazar-

What is your position on CAFTA? More generally, do you believe that free trade is good for the U.S.?

[snowman]

Senator Salazar

What is your position on the development of the resort near the Wolf Creek ski area?

[too_much_green_tea]

Senator Salazar,

In regard to the Bush Administration's Social Security Proposal, why haven't the Democrats clearly articulated that "private accounts" is a code-word for taking money from the pockets of every working American to transfer into the pockets of Wall Street fat cats?

How do you propose to stabilize Social Security Trust Funds?

Thanks in Advance for your answers.

[Amelia]

Senator Salazar:

Thank you for having the courage to stand up to the bullies at Focus on the Family.

1. Many people have concluded that torture is the official policy of the Bush Administration. Do you share that assessment? Do you think anything productive can result from torture, i.e., is it ever justified?

2. Veteran journalist Elizabeth Drew wrote in the New York Review of Books that reading between the lines of the 9/11 Commission's report, leads one to conclude that 9/11 was a preventable event--preventable by the Bush Administration. She noted that the commissioners reported that the system was blinking red, it was the summer of threat, George Tenet's hair was on fire, but for whatever reason, the Bush Administration made no response. Do you share the assessment that the Bush Administration could have prevented 9/11? I understand the TV talking heads insist that Clinton was equally responsible, but journalist Drew states that is not what the Commission's report actually says.

3. Before the Iraq war there were many reports doubting the Cheney, Rice, Bush et al. mushroom cloud scenario, including questions regarding the yellowcake from Niger representation, the aluminum tubes as centrifuges, and stories of CIA analysts being pressured by Cheney's visits to Langley, to fix the facts and intelligence around the policy--in the words of the Downing Street minutes. I note another questioner has already asked you to comment on the Downing Street minutes. My question is, if WMDs were merely a pretext for war, what was the real reason the Bush Administration wanted to take us to war in Iraq?

Thank you.

[Becky]

Dear Senator Salazar:

When asked about gay marriage, most elected Democrats say they support civil unions, but not gay marriage. Is this a "politically correct" response or is there some reason marriage should be reserved only for heterosexual couples?

Thank you,

Becky

[Rebel Rep]

Ken,
Where do you stand on the Dick Durbin issue? When will you be releasing a statement condeming his statements? Would you consider voting to Censure him? Thanks.

[Kim Coupounas]

Senator Salazar,

Your history of conservation and protection of Colorado's lands and waters has set a tremendous precedent in our state and across the nation. I am happy to see you are continuing those efforts as our U.S. Senator through your support of PILT and the Land and Water Conservation Fund.

It is also heartening to see the Senate Appropriations Committee restore partial funding, $30 million, to the LWCF State Assistance Program after the President's Budget recommended and the House voted to eliminate the program. While the program is authorized at $450 million, it has received reduced allocations in the last ten years, with last year's enacted amount at $91.2 million. As you know, stateside LWCF provides matching grants to states and local communities for investment in close-to-home recreation infrastructure such as ball fields, trails, and parks and is one of the most successful federal-state partnerships available. In Colorado, the program has been of significant support to Colorado's growing recreation economy.

As the Interior Appropriations bill will soon be considered on the floor of the Senate, do you anticipate adding an amendment that will increase the stateside allocation, perhaps to last year's enacted amount or at least an amount that ensures funding will not be reduced in the House-Senate conference? What is your view on legislation such as the Alexander/Landrieu American's Outdoors Act (S.964) that guarantees adequate funding for stateside LWCF and bypasses the appropriations process?