With Colorado voters this year facing an epic-length ballot, we've opted to offer our endorsements in certain pivotal races and in regard to key ballot issues. For full ballot information, visit www.colorado.gov/bluebook.

U.S. SENATE

Who's running: Bob Schaffer, Republican; and Mark Udall, Democrat.

Our take: Having represented this district in Congress for a decade, Udall is well known to local voters, as are his accomplishments as an environmentalist and a legislator able to work both sides of the aisle. Perhaps most admirably, he's stood on principle, voting against the rush to war in Iraq, fighting for civil liberties and twice voting against what he saw as an ill-structured economic bailout. Although Schaffer has the experience necessary for the job and has Colorado's best interests at heart, Udall will make a better and less rigidly partisan senator. The Democrat â who's hardly the left-wing radical he's been portrayed as â has put forth a sensible energy plan, supports smart health-care reform and, despite his opposition to the war, is committed to finding a safe and thoughtful end to our country's involvement in Iraq.

Vote: Mark Udall

U.S. HOUSE, 2ND CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT

Who's running: J.A. Calhoun, Green Party; Bill Hammons, Unity Party; Jared Polis, Democrat; and Scott Starin, Republican.

Our take: Conventional wisdom holds that Polis won this seat in August when he defeated Joan Fitz-Gerald and Will Shafroth in the Democratic primary. While it's worth examining the Internet entrepreneur's general-election foes â Starin's aerospace background is a real plus in this district, while Hammons' balanced-budget focus is too one-note and Calhoun's less a traditional Green than a 9/11 Truther â Polis remains the best choice. His environmental and energy stances are sound, while we applaud his desire to end the war in Iraq. Closer to home, his education background would make him an invaluable ally to CU. Polis supports removing caps on student loans, keeping Pell grants on pace with tuition increases â not just adjusting for inflation â and upping federal R&D expenditures at institutions such as CU. His push for health-care reform would also make higher-education more affordable by cutting CU's employee costs.

Vote: Jared Polis

CU REGENT, 2ND CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT

Who's running: Joe Neguse, Democrat; and Jerry Reed, Republican.

Our take: As a current CU law student, Neguse would bring the kind of first-hand, in-the-trenches perspective on higher education that's so often lacking on the Board of Regents. Plus, his push to increase the transparency of the board's decision-making process, in addition to upping public participation, would inject a welcome dash of openness into the board's operations.

Vote: Joe Neguse

AMENDMENT 46

What it would do: Dubbed the Colorado Civil Rights Initiative, this measure would bar preferential treatment based on race or gender in hiring, contracting and public education, effectively ending affirmative action at institutions such as CU.

Our take: It would be nice to live in a race- and gender-neutral society, but we don't. Affirmative-action programs â such as what CU uses in its admissions process â are important to help ensure diversity, which is an important and admirable goal, and should be supported.

Vote: No

AMENDMENT 47

What it would do: The measure would bar employers to require employees to join a labor union or pay union dues.

Our take: Labor unions historically have been a boon to workers, and we support the notion of collective bargaining as a way to ensure better working conditions and equitable pay. This measure is nothing more than an attack on labor unions, railing against something already prohibited by federal law: forcing workers to join unions. Don't be fooled.

Vote: No

AMENDMENT 48

What it would do: The so-called "personhood" amendment would legally label an unborn fetus a "person," giving it full rights under Colorado's Bill of Rights.

Our take: No issue on this year's ballot is as fraught with consequences as this one, a not-so-veiled attack on abortion that might not simply outlaw the procedure outright, but equate it with first-degree murder under Colorado law. Not only is this a horrible idea, but deciding when a fetus becomes a person is a deeply philosophical conclusion that shouldn't be up to voters to decide en masse.

Vote: No

AMENDMENT 49

What it would do: The measure would bar public employers from making certain paycheck deductions, such as labor-union dues.

Our take: Like Amendment 47, this is designed as an anti-union measure, and worth opposing. It'd be one thing if the measure barred all paycheck deductions, but by only outlawing some types â such as union dues â its hard to argue this is about reforming a public process.

Vote: No

AMENDMENT 58

What it would do: The amendment would end a tax credit given to oil and gas companies in Colorado in 1977, gaining the state an additional $321.4 million in revenue â which would go mostly toward a scholarship fund for Colorado students attending state colleges and universities.

Our take: This measure would still keep taxes on the oil and gas industry in line with â or lower than â neighboring states, and provide valuable funds to help Coloradans attend college. It's certainly not something that will spike the price at the pumps here in Colorado, as the measure's opponents argue.

Vote: Yes

ISSUE 1B

What it would do: This Boulder County measure would extend the "worthy cause" tax â 5 cents on every $100 spent â through 2018. The tax helps funds nonprofit groups in the county.

Our take: Boulder County's "worthy cause" tax has been an innovative and admirable measure, voters agreeing to tax themselves to help important community groups such as Safehouse and the Boulder County AIDS Project. We support this small tax, and are even more please to see that this is not an indefinite extension of the measure.

Vote: Yes

ISSUE 202

What it would do: This Boulder ballot measure would extend indefinitely a sales tax of 38 cents on every $100 purchase to pay for certain city services.

Our take: While we're tempted to oppose this measure because the tax is being extended indefinitely â our current economic state shows that times, indeed, can change quite fast â we also cannot risk cutting funding to critical city services such as the police and fire departments.

Vote: Yes