More

Andrew Romanoff, Senate Candidate, Accused By Bennet Backing Oil Exec Of Hypocrisy, Soliciting Donations

First Posted: 08/05/10 06:12 PM ET Updated: 05/25/11 06:15 PM ET

Romanoff

With former Colorado House Speaker Andrew Romanoff emerging as a potential surprise winner in the state's Senate Democratic primary, political opponents are increasing scrutiny of the ethical pledges that have defined his campaign.

With five days until the vote, the Colorado Democrat has stood by his promise to not accept money from political action committees (PACs) and to avoid special interests in his run for office. But an admission from his campaign manager that, should he be elected, he would take funds from the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee -- itself funded heavily by PAC donations -- spurred a tough Denver Post editorial on Thursday morning. (Romanoff has since stressed he will only take DSCC money that hasn't been raised through PACs).

Later in the day, the accusation of hypocrisy was made even sharper when a powerful Colorado oil executive with longstanding ties to Romanoff's primary opponent -- Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.) -- claimed that Romanoff called him earlier in the year to solicit campaign donations.

Tim Marquez, a major philanthropist, Democratic donor and CEO of Venoco Inc. said that months ago he received a call from Romanoff requesting a meeting -- a call that he interpreted as a fundraising plea.

"I declined to take the meeting and I'm glad I did. It's upsetting when he continues to bash oil companies and yet he wanted our support," Marquez told the Huffington Post. "It's hypocrisy."

"I was talking to someone and told them I was really pissed off that he keeps bashing oil companies and still came to me for support in his campaign," Marquez said, when asked why he was coming forward only now. "It was upsetting."

A supporter of Bennet, Marquez hardly qualifies as an objective source. The oil company CEO and his wife have both donated the maximum amount to Bennet's campaign (the senator, indeed, is a major recipient of oil industry donations). He himself worked closely with Bennet on education issues when the senator was serving as superintendent of the Denver public school system.

That said, his claim to having received a request for a meeting from Romanoff was confirmed by Romanoff himself. The former House Speaker called HuffPost to argue forcefully that there was nothing untoward with him reaching out to the oil executive. "I've called thousands of people," Romanoff explained. "Marquez is a very well known philanthropist in Denver."

Romanoff insisted that airing this episode at this juncture is "part of a fishing expedition from the opposition." And, indeed, it was a Democratic source opposing Romanoff's campaign who suggested that the Huffington Post call Marquez.

The broader question -- as the Denver Post editorial offers -- is whether Romanoff's posture as the candidate of ethics is shallower than he has publicly let on. Romanoff has been blistering in his criticism of the oil industry "special interests." In late July, moreover, MSNBC's Chris Matthews asked him point-blank whether he was circumventing his self-imposed rule of no PAC money by soliciting donations from the CEOs and executives of companies themselves.

"Do you take it the other way? Where you go around and don the executives of the companies and they get paid back later so they don't go through the PAC money? You don't do that either?" Matthews asked.

"No," Romanoff replied. "I will tell you 95 percent of our donors live in Colorado..."

"I'm the only candidate in the race, one of the very few in America, Chris, who doesn't take a dime in special interest money," he said earlier.

Romanoff described to HuffPost the difficulties he had in determining which donations would qualify as acceptable and non-acceptable. Early on, he and his aides made the decision not to accept PAC money, he said (though he had accepted these donations in past campaigns). But to restrict employees of companies who have interests before the government from donating to his candidacy would have resulted in his campaign being "funded by the unemployed, I guess, or the retired."

Context, Romanoff stressed, was important. Not only was Marquez a Bennet donor. The Denver Post has endorsed the senator as well. Moreover, while he may have called an oil executive many months ago -- a call that resulted in no meeting and no donations -- his opponent was the one who actually accepted more than $71,000 in oil industry contributions (including $31,745 from oil industry PACs), according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

"I made a decision to turn down contributions from special interest groups," he added. "And the result, of course, is we have gotten a lot of support form individuals and therefore a lot of the other campaigns are trying to figure out how to criticize this position so that they don't have to answer the tough questions of your own."

This post has been slightly updated from its original version

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
 
 
  • Comments
  • 93
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
BalancedEgg
Over easy
10:35 AM on 08/09/2010
Consider the source.
photo
GirlOutWest
I hope to be the person my dog thinks I am.
06:17 PM on 08/08/2010
I voted for Bennett and I'm glad I did. He's an upstanding guy.
12:25 AM on 08/10/2010
I guess you are in favor of Corporate Greed and don't care what taxpayers have to eat over the DPS Bonds. Nice. I suppose you are independently wealth. Good for you.
photo
GirlOutWest
I hope to be the person my dog thinks I am.
09:15 AM on 08/10/2010
Whatever. Nice comment.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
waynesmyer
08:05 AM on 08/08/2010
"and we can really trust the word of an oil excretive! RIGHT?
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Nancy Cronk
Founder, Progressive Outreach Colorado
10:02 PM on 08/07/2010
If anyone is undecided in the Senate primary and is interested, here is my take on it: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nancy-cronk/romanoff-vs-bennet-a-matt_b_673433.html
08:52 AM on 08/08/2010
Should anyone want the whole story try these:

>>Subject: Romanoff Another cynical career politician
>>
>>How about the Denver Post articles...July 25/31, 2010...
>>http://www.talkleft.com/story/2010/8/2/45525/07946
>>http://www.denverpost.com/editorials/ci_15642940
>>http://www.denverpost.com/carroll/ci_15642958
>>
>>tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/eric_lach/2010/07/25-week/
>>
http://www.9news.com/news/article.aspx?storyid=146891&catid=346
>>or the scramble: www.denverpost.com/news/frontpage
>>
>>Hmmm and the jury is still out on the latest sleaze on the DPS transaction...from romanoff..
>>BUT A School Board member who supports Romanoff admitted to the Denver Post today that she shopped the story to the New York Times for months. And, when doing so she did not disclose that she was a Romanoff supporter, much less that she and her husband have contributed nearly $10,000 to Andrew Romanoff.

>>What about that veiled 527 ad for Romanoff and his PAC scramble too!
12:23 AM on 08/10/2010
This might hurt your feelings Nancy . . . but why would any thinking person care what your take is? Can you give me 3 reasons?
08:24 PM on 08/06/2010
"Months ago he received a call from Romanoff requesting a meeting -- a call that he interpreted as a fundraising plea."

That's it?

Reminds me of the time I was at a stoplight and a guy walked close to my driver's side window, which I "interpreted" as an attempt to jack me. So I ran him over.

Sorry, Mr. Marquez, my wife and I turned in our ballots today. Two more votes for Romanoff. You can "interpret" that any way you like.
02:27 PM on 08/06/2010
Hopefully Romanoff will win the Dem nom over Bennett and it just might send out a message that big money/corporate interests have no place in the democratic election process. POWER TO THE PEOPLE!!
12:09 PM on 08/06/2010
"Later in the day, the accusation of hypocrisy was made even sharper when a powerful Colorado oil executive with longstanding ties to Romanoff's primary opponent -- Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.) -- claimed that Romanoff called him earlier in the year to solicit campaign donations." And with those ties, we're supposed to believe the oil executive? Sounds like Bennett is running scared and the Democratic establishment is too.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Turtleposer
I have micro-bios in my tummy.
09:18 AM on 08/06/2010
"Tim Marquez, a major philanthropist, Democratic donor and CEO of Venoco Inc. said that months ago he received a call from Romanoff requesting a meeting -- a call that he interpreted as a fundraising plea."

It's a good thing Marquez put his big oil bucks behind Bennet. Whew! He narrowly missed maybe having to possibly get into a conversation that may have led to Romanoff asking him for an individual donation or not because he never actually spoke to Romanoff. Not actually finding out what Romanoff wanted was pure genius!
06:31 PM on 08/06/2010
I love how his assumption led to a whole article with a misleading headline. We can debate opinions all day long but let's not try to debate FACTS. The fact is all Romanoff did was ask for a meeting. I guess we'll never know for a FACT what that meeting would have been about.
08:58 AM on 08/08/2010
Romanoff decided not to take corporate money while he had his own PAC and was exposed for taking all those dollars over his political career.. It may have been the locals knew his REAL track record of romanoff --which he seems not to be running on ---Wonder why! He then closed his PAC but is now hedging again..This is typical career insider politics Shameless hypocrite !
12:32 AM on 08/10/2010
binkis1 . . . get a life. "Exposed . . . to taking all those dollars". . . Excuse me but Andrew has always been an open book in terms of his PAC monies. "The Locals" . . . binkis . . . get a grip. . . any "local" worth his salt appreciates that Speaker Romanoff fought insurance companies for the rights of medical care for children long before appointed Senator Bennet published his bogus . . . fight for insurance for us all. "Typical Career Politics" . . . Ha! we should be so lucky that we have a Senator that fights for us like Romanoff. Look at Bennet's votes. . .against Seniors, against standing up to banks (too big to fail), against . . . why am I wasting my time. . . you obviously either won't or can't look at the records. Shame on you.
photo
HowdyDoody
Freud Woman
12:32 AM on 08/06/2010
There's a strange 527 group out there running factually inaccurate ads against Bennet. It's called New Leadership for Colorado, reminiscent of the Democratic Leadership Council.

My thinking is that because Romanoff has been a longtime member of the DLC (Bill Clinton's conservadem organization), it is the DLC money behind this 527. I am appalled at the scorched earth attacks by Romanoff and his supporters against Bennet. Smells of Bill Clinton and his desire to get back into the White House via Hillary.

If we are Democrats, we should reject this kind of campaigning against each other AND against the GOP. I think we're better than that, but maybe not.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Icantbelieveher
What you do for the least of my brethren, you do f
01:58 AM on 08/06/2010
What is false about their ad? Maybe that they say he voted to bailout the big banks, but he voted against breaking up the too big to fail banks! He wasn't around for the bailout, but he voted in favor of the banks when he killed the credit card interest rate cap legislation, then was caught on tape with Udall changing his vote, once he knew there was no pay it would pass!

He voted in favor of the banks when he voted against cramdown -- and that would have put an end to the foreclosure problem, because banks would have been forced to work with the people!

He only decided he liked the public option once he found out he had a primary challenger who was in favor of the public option! He can't even decide how he stands on anything until there's a poll that tells him how the public feels!

and where is he on immigration? He never even came out with an opinion on SB 1070! Maybe he wrote a letter!
photo
HowdyDoody
Freud Woman
11:56 AM on 08/06/2010
The vote against the Sanders/Brown amendment failed by something like 65-35 or worse. The amendment, according to the majority of dems who voted against it, was not written in a way to actually prevent too big to fail.

You tell me why Bennet is so much more conservative than a long-time DLC member who has been touted by them on several occasions as "New Democrat of the Month" -- the Blanche Lincoln wing of the Democratic party. Explain that to me, please.

There is something else that fuels you and everyone else's anger at Bennet. I don't know what it is, but I'm guessing it is the Clinton war machine out there putting in the conservadems all over the country.
12:34 AM on 08/10/2010
really HowdyDoody . . . I suppose you think it's okay for Senator Bennet to send out campaign literature lies against Andrew Romanoff's record concerning Social Security. "Smells of Bill Clinton" Ha! Senator Bennet's lies and DPS Bond Deals just blame smells.
photo
HowdyDoody
Freud Woman
01:45 AM on 08/10/2010
Actually, Rosie, several television news organizations have verified that Romanoff did vote to privatize part of Social Security. On May 3, 2004, Romanoff voted for Joint Resolution 28, a resolution that supported Pres. Bush's plan to privatize SS.

http://www.9news.com/news/article.aspx?storyid=146891&catid=346
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Icantbelieveher
What you do for the least of my brethren, you do f
photo
Level7
Not the book
11:18 PM on 08/05/2010
All I can say is that I was happy with both candidates in the beginning. But the Romanoff ads completely turned me off - they seem so sleazy to me, and I no longer trust him. I'm pleased to vote for Bennet. I think he is a good man, and know he fought for my interests during the health care debate.

I detest this Democrat infighting.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Icantbelieveher
What you do for the least of my brethren, you do f
11:57 PM on 08/05/2010
Yeah, but you think that Bennett is not sleazy at all? You'd better think again!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-sirota/nyt-unloads-devastating-s_b_672801.html

turns out that everything Romanoff has been saying is true -- and I guess Bennett thinks that telling the truth about his voting record and his corporate raiding, not to mention the mess he left of the Denver Public Schools -- is sleazy!
tulatank
wannabe Master gardener
01:06 PM on 08/07/2010
David Sirota - opinion columnist, entertainer, and public shill for Romanoff. He is a jounalist like Glen Beck is. Handy for a candidate to have a public shill present his case for free. Listen to his interview with Rep. Perlmutter, he introduces him as a well respected legislator and a great friend of Sirota's program. He said, in summary, I don't want to talk about your endorsement of Bennet. I want to talk about his votes and PAC donations. Interesting. Perlmutter, for whom I have the greatest respect and for whom I would vote in a heartbeat if I had the chance, has taken (www.opensecrets.org) 46% of his donations through PACS. Bennet, 17%. PAC money to someone you like = okay, to those you don't = mortal sin. Sirota wanted to know whether investigating Senator Bennet's vote was fair. Perlmutter said it was. Senator Bennet has said the very same thing. Have Sirota or Romanoff asked Senator Bennet about his votes? If they have, they would have touted his response a lie. In his column he stated (twice) that Rep Perlmutter " ...previously endorsed Senator Bennet thereby implying that he longer endorses him. I don't think Rep. Perlmutter has withdrawn his endorsement. Sirota should have said that Rep Perlmutter "has endorsed Senator Bennet." which would have been more accurate and thus better writing. David Sirota is neither the purveyor nor the determiner of truth that some would make him out to be.
photo
HowdyDoody
Freud Woman
12:23 AM on 08/06/2010
I voted for Bennet, although my husband voted for Romanoff.

I'm very disappointed in how nasty and disgusting Romanoff's ads have been. How can we call ourselves Democrats and then use the same tactics as the Repugs? Fanned and faved.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Icantbelieveher
What you do for the least of my brethren, you do f
01:23 AM on 08/06/2010
It's disgusting to repeat facts about an opponent? What's more disgusting to me is calling someone a liar, then not proving that they are lying! And people just believe that Romanoff is lying because Bennet says he is!

I'd like to know what Romanoff did that was sleazy! He points out the facts and he shouldn't do that? Don't Colorado voters deserve to know the truth about the people that are representing us?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
02:08 AM on 08/06/2010
when the dems act like repubs they should be treated like repubs
photo
SteveDenver
Progressive and liberal, just like Jesus Christ.
11:06 PM on 08/05/2010
The Bennet campaign got this hunk of baseless smear for FREE? Shame on HuffPo.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
11:23 PM on 08/05/2010
what makes you think its free?
10:02 PM on 08/05/2010
So typical. You lead with a misleading headline and if people actually READ the story they see this:

'Moreover, while he may have called an oil executive many months ago -- a call that resulted in no meeting and no donations -- his opponent was the one who actually accepted more than $71,000 in oil industry contributions (including $31,745 from oil industry PACs), according to the Center for Responsive Politics.'


Just more Michael Bennet dirty politics. He's getting desperate now....GO ROMANOFF!!!!
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Icantbelieveher
What you do for the least of my brethren, you do f
11:59 PM on 08/05/2010
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-sirota/nyt-unloads-devastating-s_b_672801.html

Michael Bennett's campaign death blow! Bennett is a sleazeball, who has voted against Colorado voters and in favor of the banks and big business!

I guess telling the truth about your opponent is sleazy!
09:41 PM on 08/05/2010
Bennet should get out in front of this immediately and denounce this scurrilous smear-but he won't.Just when you thought the Republicans had won the race to the bottom,a desperate campaign throws this mud in the voters face,so much for Dems being able to take the high road in November after this gutterball.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Sharon Hanson
Skeptical of the *pseudo-skeptics*
09:37 PM on 08/05/2010
I'm satified with this thread, there are hardly any pro-Bennet posts. People are smarter than this and they know Bennet is not in Washington to represent us, he's there for his corporate paymasters.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Icantbelieveher
What you do for the least of my brethren, you do f
12:02 AM on 08/06/2010
I think he's lost and he's trying hard to claw his way back up! But as facts keep coming to the forefront, his numbers keep going down!

Facts can be sleazy indeed!
photo
HowdyDoody
Freud Woman
12:25 AM on 08/06/2010
How come you didn't post your favorite link again?? :)
09:28 AM on 08/08/2010
Romanoff insider dem sleaze...

>>Subject: Romanoff sleazy
>>
>>How about the Denver Post articles...July 25/31, 2010...
>>http://www.talkleft.com/story/2010/8/2/45525/07946
>>http://www.denverpost.com/editorials/ci_15642940
>>http://www.denverpost.com/carroll/ci_15642958
>>
>>tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/eric_lach/2010/07/25-week/
>>
http://www.9news.com/news/article.aspx?storyid=146891&catid=346
>>or the scramble: www.denverpost.com/news/frontpage
>>
>>Hmmm and the jury is still out on the latest sleaze on the DPS transaction...from romanoff..
>>BUT A School Board member who supports Romanoff admitted to the Denver Post today that she shopped the story to the New York Times for months. And, when doing so she did not disclose that she was a Romanoff supporter, much less that she and her husband have contributed nearly $10,000 to Andrew Romanoff.

>>What about that veiled 527 ad for Romanoff and his PAC scramble too!