Congressman Ken Buck’s abrupt resignation thrust Colorado’s political landscape into uncharted territory — an electoral odyssey akin to Star Trek’s claim of boldly going where no one has before.

Or at least, in over four decades.

Tuesday’s mic-drop announcement — revealing Buck’s imminent departure from the U.S. House at the end of next week — left voters, election officials and primary candidates scrambling in its wake.

It’s all about timing: Buck’s bombshell triggers a June 25 special election to replace him — the same day as the political primaries for Congress, state legislature and county positions. Speculation swirls over the “real reasons” for Buck’s exit and the question, “Why now?”

Cue voter confusion. Residents of the 4th Congressional District face a double-header election, casting votes in both the biannual political primaries and the special election to determine Buck’s successor. The average person may feel like they’re deciphering an electoral Rubik’s cube.

Colorado fills congressional vacancies first through party nominations, where each party selects a single candidate for the special election alongside third-party and unaffiliated candidates.

Both nominees will almost certainly be plucked from the crop of candidates running in the primary — offering a likely advantage to that candidate, whose name will appear twice before voters.

Any advantages are particularly valuable for the Republican nominee, given the 4th district’s +14 Republican advantage — the largest of the state’s congressional districts.

Here’s the thing: The special and primary elections are officially two entirely separate elections — meaning the decision whether to combine the elections or split the ballots looms large.

“This is a unique circumstance,” said Matt Crane, executive director of the Colorado County Clerks Association. “Colorado hasn’t had this for over 40 years, and our election model today is completely different.”

The task of election officials is a daunting one with little time to spare — charting a swift jump through the uncharted territories of logistics, efficiency and cost-management. It’s like Scotty lamenting to Captain Kirk, “I canna change the laws of physics! I’ve got to have thirty minutes!”

Most observers expect clerks to beam a consolidated ballot into voters’ mailboxes, rather than splitting them up. If they go this route, unaffiliated voters will receive one ballot for each party, just like normal for primaries. Both ballots will then feature the special election race.

The streamlined approach seems more efficient and cost-effective, too — a doubly important fact since the counties, not the secretary of state, must dig deeper into their pockets to cover the costs of a special election. For cash-strapped rural counties, that may mean checking under the couch to see if they have any spare change.

If combined, the order of the contests on voters’ ballots becomes the big question. Will the vacancy contest appear above the primaries, granting a strategic advantage to the party nominees whose names will appear twice?

Or will the primary races go first, leaving the vacancy nominees with less political benefit — but effectively deprioritizing the immediate concern of filling the seat?

If you’re Lauren Boebert, representing the 3rd Congressional District and is now running in the 4th, you’re probably hoping the party primaries show up first on the ballot.

Boebert has opted not to run in the special election, only the primary. (If she won the vacancy, she’d have to resign her current seat, which would leave the 3rd district without a U.S. representative.)

Any primary candidate who’s also vying for the vacancy and doesn’t get the nomination may ultimately want the same thing — they just don’t know it until they lose.

This could also prove advantageous for Boebert, though. Backed by Donald Trump’s endorsement and a multimillion dollar campaign war chest, she may attempt to shift the political narrative by casting whomever the GOP’s vacancy nominee is (inevitably one of her primary opponents) as the “party insider” pick.

If Trump echoes that line, she could ding the Republicans’ vacancy nominee with that critique, turning a seeming political advantage into a negative.

Of course, if the special election is first on the ballot, the vacancy nominee will still have at least a slight advantage. And that individual may also benefit from some level of party get-out-the-vote efforts for the special election.

Either way, it’s like a game of political roulette — with less than half the electorate likely to vote.

Meanwhile, this odd circumstance unwittingly serves a bigger-picture purpose. Former DaVita CEO Kent Thiry is proposing two measures on the November ballot to eliminate all political party-based vacancy committee appointments — whereby an elected official’s political party gets to replace them upon resignation — with special elections.

The 4th district’s special election becomes a sort-of litmus test. Just 40% of registered voters and 45% of active voters, respectively, participated in Colorado’s 2020 primaries.

Throwing a special election into the mix might boost turnout, but probably not by much.

Add together the increased costs of a special election plus low anticipated turnout, and it begs the question: What kind of representation will people actually have — and are special elections worth it?

As Colorado braces for this electoral warp forward, navigating through nebulous clouds of political uncertainty, the state’s steadfast county election staff will boldly forge ahead — exploring new frontiers of democracy with a spirit of adventure and determination. Make it so.

Jimmy Sengenberger is an investigative journalist, public speaker, and longtime local talk-radio host. Reach Jimmy online at Jimmysengenberger.com or on X (formerly Twitter) @SengCenter.