You won’t believe how much money was spent on the 2024 Colorado elections.

There is an old saying: money makes the world go round. In Colorado politics, this is clearly the case.

But what kind of money are we talking about this year? Let’s start with electoral measures.

Proposition 131 has raised over $14 million and is counting on support. When all is said and done, the 131 votes will likely be the third or fourth most expensive ballot measure in the state in decades.

Combined with remaining ballot questions, including Amendment 79 and Proposition 127, which touch on the topics of abortion and trophy hunting, more $44 million as of last Monday, all of Colorado’s 2024 ballot measures had been counted. Of course, this does not include fundraising for candidates.

So let’s take a look at our candidates.

Putting aside 1 billion dollars raised just this year by Vice President Kamala Harris at the national level, Colorado has also seen its share of high costs. In the 8th Congressional District, U.S. Rep. Yadira Caraveo, a Democrat, spent $1.6 million in the last reporting period while maintaining $2.4 million in cash reserves. Her Republican opponent, state Rep. Gabe Evans, trailed her by nearly half, spending “only” $732,000, with $363,000 left in the bank.

However, the millions raised by Caraveo and Evans as candidates pale in comparison to $23 million this was spent by the Super PAC weighing the results of the race. Worse, the vast majority of those funds—$17 million—were used to spread negative messages, meaning voters are far more likely to see purchased and paid attack ads against a candidate than ads telling what the candidate will or won’t will. do.

Does negative advertising improve the lives of Coloradans?

In the 3rd Congressional District, a longtime Republican stronghold, Democrat Adam Frisch is poised to perform well against his Republican opponent Jeff Hurd, spending roughly double the amount in the last reporting period, $1.1 million. Super PACs also participated in this race, although to a much lesser extent.

Meanwhile, in the 4th Congressional District, Democratic spending is increasing after Rep. Lauren Boebert fled a losing race against Frisch to run in a new district. But turning away her constituents won’t do any good, at least from a funding perspective, since she raised a paltry $80,000 during the same period that her opponent, Democrat Tricia Calverese, raised $573,000.

Calverese also spent $1.6 million to Boebert’s $333,000 at the same time, leading some to question whether the area could be captured. One can only hope, but here, too, the enormous cost has for the most part brought brutal negativity into the lives of Coloradans.

Collectively, this amounts to tens of millions of dollars in candidate and Super PAC funds for just three of Colorado’s eight congressional districts. Then there are state and local races that easily add millions more, plus more than $44 million in ballot expenses.

However, Coloradans have also given a lot of money to national candidates or to issues that could otherwise be invested locally. So what is the ultimate cost of one of Colorado’s election cycles? 100 million dollars? 200 million dollars? 500 million dollars? More? Does anyone even know when you factor in primary candidates, ballot signature collection, and more?

This must stop.

Over the past 10 years, the seven most expensive ballot measures in Colorado have cost more than $131 millionand that’s only the money we can publicly track. It’s awkward. As a state, we see hundreds of millions of dollars wasted on political agendas that largely waste money on negative advertising while the average Coloradan struggles with the cost of housing or securing healthy food. It’s such a waste. Can you imagine what would happen if we used all that money to help Coloradans instead?

The numbers don’t lie. Let’s say the total cost of Colorado’s election cycle this year exceeds a conservative $100 million. That’s enough money to buy groceries for nearly 300,000 Coloradans for a month. That’s enough to pay $1,000 for a month’s rent and utilities for 100,000 Colorado residents.

That’s enough to invest in new tiny homes, new bus lines, or help pay off the average Coloradan’s healthcare debt.

But no. Instead, we have a system in which wealthy people like Kent Thiry can spend millions of dollars on political advertising to buy votes for their personal political agendas, rather than investing in real change to build Coloradans a better life. Why are we still allowing this to happen?

So what are we going to do about it, Colorado? Aren’t you tired of millions of dollars of negative TV ads and flyers every election cycle? Don’t you need a better campaign system? Because if we really want change – and I think most of us do – getting deep pockets from our politics should be agenda number one. Would you disagree?

So let’s do this. Let’s come together and work to rein in election spending once and for all so we can finally put more money where it’s needed most – back in the pockets of Coloradans.

Trish Zornio is a scientist, teacher and writer who has worked at the country’s leading universities and hospitals. She is an avid rock climber and was a candidate for the U.S. Senate from Colorado in 2020. Trish can be found on Twitter. @trish_zornio

The Colorado Sun is a nonpartisan news organization and the opinions of its columnists and editorial writers do not reflect the opinions of the editorial board. Read our ethics policy to learn more about The Sun’s opinion policies.. Find out how send column. Contact the Opinion Editor at [email protected].

Follow the Colorado Sun opinion at Facebook.

Story type: Opinion