“Create a Colorado Clean Air, Affordable Energy Program with a clear, enforceable cap on emissions across major economic sectors to meet the state's statutory climate targets through 2050.”
Sources (click to view full provenance)
Propose an edit to this promise's details
Suggest a sourced correction to the promise text, topic, scope, significance, or dates. Changing the promise text requires a source. Your suggestion is reviewed before it changes the record.
Sign in and complete the Contributor Agreement to propose an edit.
Assessments
evidence-backed verdictsThese are sourced verdicts from fact-checkers or community evidence reviews — not opinions.
Verified. This is a 2026 gubernatorial CAMPAIGN promise, and Bennet's official campaign platform frames the "Colorado Clean Air, Affordable Energy Program" — a statewide cap-and-invest program with "a clear, enforceable cap on emissions across major economic sectors" to meet Colorado's "statutory climate targets through 2050" — explicitly as something he would "design and implement" "As Governor." Creating a Colorado state cap-and-invest program requires the governorship (plus the legislature); Bennet's current office (U.S. Senator) has no authority to enact a state program. On June 30, 2026, Bennet LOST the Democratic gubernatorial primary to Attorney General Phil Weiser (AP called it with Weiser leading by ~10 points, roughly 55%-45%). Having lost the primary, he will not be the nominee, will not become governor, and never obtained the office the promise required. There is no alternative pathway from a Senate seat to create a state program, so the outcome is settled rather than not-yet-determinable — he never got a genuine chance to fulfill it. NO_OPPORTUNITY (not ATTEMPTED, because the failure was electoral — he never held the office to even begin; not UNRATABLE, because the primary loss makes the outcome definitively determinable) is correct. Same nonpartisan standard would apply to any candidate whose office-contingent promise was foreclosed by losing the election.
Your opinion on this assessment(clearly labeled opinion)
Sign in to vote.
Discussion
community opinionsComments are user opinions — not verdicts. They do not affect the official assessment.
Sign in to join the discussion.
Propose a correction
community accountabilitySee an error in the promise text, status, significance, or missing source? Submit a sourced correction — a reviewer will evaluate and apply it if accurate. Your submission must cite evidence; unsourced changes are not accepted.
Sign in or create an account to propose a correction.
Debate
sourced community argumentsThese are sourced community arguments — not StumpWatch assessments. Each cites a source and is community-contributed; it does not change the official status or rating above.
No arguments yet
Be the first to weigh in. Every argument cites a source and is reviewed before it publishes. Create an account to add one and help keep this promise honest.
Add a sourced argument
Cite a source for your point. Submissions are held for reviewer approval before they appear.
Sign in or create an account to add an argument.