Colorado bill puts limits on new veterinary associate position
State lawmakers advanced a bill to create a veterinarian associate position despite questions about whether it contradicts what voters approved in the 2024 election.
Why it matters: Colorado is the first state to authorize a midlevel veterinarian position and how it is defined is a multimillion-dollar fight.
State of play: The legislation seeks to put guardrails on what voters approved in Proposition 129 last November by limiting the scope of practice.
A veterinarian could supervise up to three associates and must sign an agreement with each for accountability.
A state board will determine whether the veterinarian must be on the premises or in the room at the time of care by the associate.
An associate must inform patients they are not a veterinarian.
What they're saying: The bill's sponsor is state Rep. Karen McCormick (D-Longmont), a veterinarian and vocal critic of the ballot measure.
She described the legislation as "clear guidelines" that "in no way overturn the will of the voters."
Yes, but: Critics — including Gov. Jared Polis' administration — blasted the bill, saying it overrides voters who approved a more open-ended role in the ballot measure and overrides current rule-making happening at the state level.
"This is not what the voters intended, and revising their decision after the vote is both irresponsible and unnecessary," said Apryl Steele, CEO of Humane Colorado, formerly known as the Dumb Friends League, which spent more than $1 million in support of the ballot measure.
What's next: The legislation moves to a vote of the full House.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
TN Republicans' bill would oust officials who release 'confidential' immigration enforcement details
Top Tennessee Republican lawmakers have proposed a bill that would make it a felony and grounds for removal if public officials jeopardize the safety of federal law enforcement officers or disrupt federal immigration enforcement by revealing confidential operation details. The bill, filed by House Speaker Cameron Sexton and Senate Majority Leader Jack Johnson on June 9, comes after a weeklong operation by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement in Nashville in early May. The operation led to hundreds of traffic stops, in coordination with the Tennessee Highway Patrol, and nearly 200 arrests. Nashville Mayor Freddie O'Connell has been under scrutiny from state and federal Republican leaders over his response to the arrests. During the operation, O'Connell updated an existing executive order that requires city departments to report communications with federal immigration officials to the mayor's office, tightening the timeline for those reports. Even in its original version, the executive order included a provision that those communications be posted online for transparency. When O'Connell's office posted that list in late May, it originally included the names of some officials who called. Those names have since been removed from the version of the spreadsheet posted online. During the sweeps in Nashville, O'Connell also repeatedly asked federal officials to release the names and charges of the people arrested, but to no avail. Some community members, meanwhile, were outspoken in their opposition to the operation. Immigrant rights groups and other Nashvillians showed up to protest at Nashville's ICE office not long after the sweeps began on May 4. That opposition extended to further protests several weeks later, an appearance from New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker and a volunteer effort to monitor and verify ICE activity. U.S. Rep. Andy Ogles and other D.C. Republicans have since called for a federal investigation into O'Connell, which was officially initiated on May 30. Meanwhile, Sexton called for O'Connell to rescind his executive order, saying it risks the safety of federal immigration agents. "The people of Tennessee expect their elected leaders to protect law enforcement — not endanger them," Johnson said in a June 9 news release. "When a public official like Mayor O'Connell chooses political activism over public safety, especially by interfering with federal immigration enforcement, he has no business holding office in this state." Johnson said he hopes the legislation "sends a message" to O'Connell and other "blue city" leaders that may act similarly. 'Mayor O'Connell's public refusal to rescind his executive order makes the need for this legislation unmistakably clear to prevent future political defiance that undermines the rule of law and puts law enforcement at risk,' Johnson said in the release. Sexton and Johnson did not provide any examples of O'Connell's interference with immigration enforcement operations. The bill would make it a Class E felony for state or local officials to "negligently release" information that identifies officers tasked with immigration enforcement and paves the way to oust those who violate the law, according to the release. Additionally, it expands provisions under the Tennessee Public Records Act to protect undercover officers and sensitive enforcement activity and beefs up penalties for unauthorized disclosures of protected law enforcement information. The bill is backed by top Senate Republicans, including Lt. Gov. Randy McNally, Speaker Pro Tempore Ferrell Haile, Republican Caucus Chair Ken Yager and Finance Committee Chair Bo Watson. It is set to be taken up in the 2026 legislative session. O'Connell's office had not responded to The Tennessean's request for comment by 11 a.m. on June 10. The move by Tennessee Republicans comes a few days after U.S. Sen. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tennessee, introduced legislation to make it illegal to 'dox' federal law enforcement officials. She said the bill is a direct response to the spreadsheet published by O'Connell's office detailing recent communications between city departments with federal immigration agents. Blackburn filed the Protecting Law Enforcement From Doxxing Act on June 4, explicitly naming O'Connell as the impetus. That bill would make it illegal to 'publish the name of a federal law enforcement officer with the intent to obstruct a criminal investigation or immigration operation.' An individual found guilty of doing so would face a fine and imprisonment of five years. In their joint news release on June 9, Sexton and Johnson praised Blackburn's efforts and say their proposed legislation complements her proposal. "Tennessee has always stood with law enforcement and we will not allow politically motivated actors to put officers' lives in danger simply to score political points with the far left," Sexton said in the release. "Tennessee will not become California, and Nashville will not become LA or San Francisco on our watch." Typically, "doxxing" refers to the act of publicly providing personally identifiable information about an individual or organization, usually via the internet, such as their home addresses, private contact information and names of family members. As for the public availability of law enforcement officers' names, they are not typically considered private information. This article originally appeared on Nashville Tennessean: TN bill would punish officials who reveal immigration enforcement details
USA Today
an hour ago
- USA Today
Newsom should be 'tarred and feathered' for defying Trump, Speaker Johnson says
Newsom should be 'tarred and feathered' for defying Trump, Speaker Johnson says 'I'm not gonna give you legal analysis on whether Gavin Newsom should be arrested. But he ought to be tarred and feathered,' Speaker Mike Johnson told reporters in the U.S. Capitol. Show Caption Hide Caption Los Angeles residents take pride in their city amid ICE protests USA TODAY spoke with Los Angeles residents about recent ICE raids and protests. House Speaker Mike Johnson is piling onto the Republican attacks aimed at California Gov. Gavin Newsom, telling reporters on June 10 that the state Democrat should be 'tarred and feathered' for challenging President Donald Trump over immigration enforcement. 'That's not my lane. I'm not gonna give you legal analysis on whether Gavin Newsom should be arrested. But he ought to be tarred and feathered,' Johnson, a Louisiana Republican, said in the U.S. Capitol during his weekly news conference. On June 9, Trump said "it would be a great thing" if his border czar Tom Homan arrested Newsom. The governor has challenged Trump's decision to call the California National Guard to Los Angeles to quell protests over immigration enforcement. Trump has also ordered 700 Marines be sent to the nation's second-largest city. In his news conference, Johnson said Newsom is keeping the Trump administration from implementing federal law. "He's standing in the way of the administration and the carrying out of federal law. He is applauding the bad guys and standing in the way of the good guys. He is a participant, an accomplice in our federal law enforcement agents being not just disrespected, but assaulted," Johnson said. "This is a serious problem." Newsom quickly responded on social media. 'Good to know we're skipping the arrest and going straight for the 1700's style forms of punishment. A fitting threat given the (Republicans) want to bring our country back to the 18th Century.' Johnson on Newsom lawsuit: 'What a joke' Johnson also criticized Newsom for filing a lawsuit against Trump for sending the California National Guard to Los Angeles over his objections. "What a joke," Johnson said. "Do your job, man." The House speaker also said protests can quickly get out of hand in large cities. "If local and state officials are unwilling or unable to do their job, the president of the United States will do his and we support that fully," Johnson said. The last time a president called in the National Guard over the objections of the state governor was in 1965 when President Lyndon B. Johnson sent troops to escort civil rights marchers participating in the Selma-Montgomery March in Alabama.
an hour ago
Trump's tax bill could raise taxes on foreign companies
WASHINGTON -- WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump likes to say he's bringing in trillions of dollars in investments from foreign countries, but a provision in his tax cuts bill could cause international companies to avoid expanding into the United States. The House-passed version of the legislation would allow the federal government to impose taxes on foreign-parented companies and investors from countries judged as charging 'unfair foreign taxes' on U.S. companies. Known as Section 899, the measure could cause companies to avoid investing in the the U.S. out of concern they could face steep taxes. The fate of the measure rests with the Senate — setting off a debate about its prospects and impact. A new analysis by the Global Business Alliance, a trade group representing international companies such as Toyota and Nestlé, estimates that the provision would cost the U.S. 360,000 jobs and $55 billion annually over 10 years in lost gross domestic product. The analysis estimates that the tax could cut a third off the economic growth anticipated from the overall tax cuts by Congress' Joint Committee on Taxation. "While proponents say this punitive tax hike is intended as a retaliatory measure against foreign governments, this report confirms that the real victims are American workers in states like North Carolina, South Carolina, Indiana, Tennessee and Texas," said Jonathan Samford, president and CEO of the Global Business Alliance. Republican Rep. Jason Smith of Missouri, chair of the House Ways and Means Committee, has defended the provision as protecting U.S. interests by giving the president a tool that can be used against countries with tax codes that, in the federal government's opinion, put American companies at a disadvantage. 'If these countries withdraw these taxes and decide to behave, we will have achieved our goal," Smith said in a statement last week. "It's just common sense. I urge my colleagues in the Senate to move quickly to pass this bill and protect Americans from economic bad actors around the world.' The tax gets at a fundamental tension within Trump's policy agenda: a contradiction in the broad strokes of Trump simultaneously trying to tax imports and foreign profits at higher rates while also seeking investments from companies headquartered abroad. In late May, Trump defended his approach by saying that his tariffs were causing more countries to invest in the U.S. to avoid imports getting taxed. While some countries and companies have made announcements, there is not evidence of the investments pushing up spending on new factories as measured in the government's monthly report on construction spending. The Republican president said his tendency to impose steep tariffs, then retreat to lower rates, had succeeded. 'We have $14 trillion now invested, committed to investing,' Trump said then. 'You know we have the hottest country anywhere in the world. I went to Saudi Arabia, the king told me, he said, you got the hottest -- we have the hottest country in the world right now.' The Global Business Alliance was among the groups that signed a letter on Monday warning of the consequences of Section 899 to Senate Majority Leader John Thune of South Dakota and Senate Finance Committee Chairman Mike Crapo of Idaho, both Republicans. The Investment Company Institute, representing financial firms, said the provision 'could limit foreign investment to the U.S. — a key driver of growth in American capital markets that ultimately benefits American families saving for their futures.' The analysis performed by EY Quantitative Economics and Statistics notes there is a degree of uncertainty in how the taxes under Section 899 could be implemented. But they could be charged against companies based in countries that tax digital services, as is the case in parts of Europe. If the U.S. judged the taxes unfair, there would be a 30% tax rate on foreign companies' profits and income. People working in the U.S. for the companies who are not citizens could also be taxed, among other provisions. The possibility of the taxes and seemingly arbitrary nature by which they could be imposed is also a challenge, said Chye-Ching Huang, executive director of New York University's Tax Law Center. 'Section 899 creates a game of political chicken with trade partners that risks harming businesses, consumers, and workers in the hopes of securing US multinationals the ability to shift more of their profits out of the US to tax havens," Huang said in an email. 'It's a high-risk strategy that could expand the damage of the failed tariff war.' There could also be political repercussions if key states in Trump's political coalition from 2024 suffer layoffs or simply find job growth slowing. The Global Business Alliance finds job losses could amount to 44,200 in Florida, 27,700 in Pennsylvania, 24,500 in North Carolina and 23,500 in Michigan.
