Today the Inside Edge is proud to give out our first ever Gordon J. Humphrey award to former State Senator and former acting Treasurer Mark Hillman.

The award is named after former U.S. Sen. Gordon Humphrey from New Hampshire because Humphrey was once named the dumbest Senator in the U.S. Senate by Washingtonian magazine; and to dispel any doubt as to whether he was the dumbest Senator or not, Humphrey promptly called a news conference in order to deny that he was, in fact, the dumbest U.S. Senator.

Ouch.

Accordingly, we've created the Gordon J. Humphrey award to glorify those politicians who either 1) demonstrate the validity of criticisms through their actions; or 2) attempt to get out of one pile of bull pucky by stepping in a larger pile; or 3) both.

As is fitting for the first recipient of the award, we think that Hillman qualifies on both counts.

Congratulations!

Last week, we penned a column talking about how fiscal conservatives felt betrayed by Hillman's deal with then-Gov. Bill Owens when Hillman was appointed acting Treasurer back in June 2005.

"Some say that implied in the agreement between Owens and Hillman to appoint Hillman to the top spot in the state treasury," we wrote "was that Hillman stop campaigning against Referendums C and D."

Indeed one source was so angered by the alleged deal that in reaction to the news that Hillman was running for the Republican National Committee, said: "Yeah, Hillman took his 30 pieces of silver. But the difference between he and Judas is that at least Judas had the good sense to hang himself. Hillman acts like he deserves a promotion."

This week Face the State published Hillman's official reaction.

"I don't pay attention to anonymous attacks," Hillman said in the Face the State article.

"When the Founding Fathers wrote anonymously, they did so to debate issues and principles, not to hurl cowardly, baseless accusations at each other. The Founders understood honor; anonymous bloggers do not."

Hillman then responded to the anonymous attack (an attack he says he doesn't pay attention to) by saying that his opposition to Referendum C took the shape of attending rallies and writing op-eds, but you know he was really, really busy with the new job as Treasurer, so there.

Getting past the fact that Hillman solicited the article from Face the State, a publication paid for by establishment Republicans, and that he has undoubtedly misread American history if he believes that our Founding Fathers used pseudonyms just to promote ideas and not attack political opponents, the contemporaneous evidence does not favor Hillman's version of the events.

In fact it does just the opposite.

"If he can't get conservative office-holders and candidates to vote 'yes'," wrote Dan Haley of the Denver Post about Owens strategy of getting rid of GOP opposition to Referendum C at the time Hillman was appointed acting Treasurer, "Owens at least wants them to soften their skepticism. Witness former Senate Minority Leader Mark Hillman at last week's press conference where the governor named him interim state treasurer. He's a 'no' vote, but essentially said he won't be a torch-bearer for the cause." [Wally's emphasis]

HAnd his one op-ed in the Denver Post where Hillman claims he was against Referendum C bears out Haley's version of events.

In the Aug. 21, 2005, Sunday edition of the Denver Post, Hillman seems to take both sides of the issue saying that opponents of Referendum C are wrong and proponents of Referendum C are wrong too; that the issues are far more complex than bumper stickers and slogans.

"Opponents suggest that the state budget is awash in waste," wrote Hillman in the Post, "ignoring the fact that the portion of the budget restricted by TABOR has fallen below 2002-03 levels for the past two years. Their most oft-repeated evidence of this waste is the Colorado Council for the Arts' proclivity to pay for "projects" that ought to be relegated to sex shops. Those expenditures - foolish as they are - make up just 0.000008 percent of the budget.

“Proponents - especially those most reliant on government largesse - seem to suggest that state government will disintegrate unless spending is allowed to grow approximately 10 percent faster than it can under current law. This implies that Colorado's economy is boosted when government spends $3 billion that would otherwise be spent and invested by families and businesses."

In fact, the Post op-ed looks like nothing more than a fig leaf for Hillman, who weakly suggests a "few possibilities for stirring the pot" about Referendum C without ever saying he's against it.

We won't say that his stand was cowardly or baseless.

All we'll say is: Congratulations!