logo
Lawmakers reflect on what did, did not get done during regular session

Lawmakers reflect on what did, did not get done during regular session

Yahoo09-05-2025

DENVER (KDVR) — State lawmakers have finished their work at the Colorado Capitol, for now. Both parties reflected on what they see as wins and losses for the state this year during their press conferences.
Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle are glad they were able to end the session with a balanced budget that did not harm schools, but worries surrounding the fiscal shape of the state and its citizens still linger.
Denver voted to not extend its Flock camera contract: Are ICE access concerns valid?
'While we worked really hard to address the $1.2 billion budget shortfall, I think there is still a lot more work to be done and we know that there is potential for more cuts coming forward,' said House Minority Leader Rose Pugliese.
'We are fearful that with the Trump administration, continuing to cut services in rural parts of our state, cuts to public safety, cuts to agricultural and water infrastructure, that there is more work ahead for us today,' said House Speaker Julie McCluskie.
As lawmakers celebrate the end of the session, they also acknowledge they could be back this summer for two reasons: one being unfinished work at the state level, like delaying the state's landmark artificial intelligence regulation measure.
'We couldn't get that done. It was never the plan for this bill to be the final product. And I think that we will get working and whether we go into a special session or go into next year, I think we will be in a much better place with the policy and have more consensus,' said Senate Majority Leader Robert Rodriguez.
Another reason they could come back is the potential for cuts from the federal level, lawmakers could need to rework the state budget if the state does not get the federal dollars they planned for.
Lawmakers act on artificial intelligence bills as Colorado session ends
'If we come back into a special session, it will clearly be on the polis administration and the tax and spend democrats in the legislature. I've said it before several times, probably at nauseam for some people, we do not have a revenue problem. We have a spending problem. The Democrats in Colorado have the same issue as the tax-and-spend democrats in Washington, D.C. They have a crisis of priorities, and they can't stop themselves from overspending,' said Senator Barbara Kirkmeyer.
Leaders in both parties hailed the failure of a bill that would have allowed the state to sue over the legality of the Taxpayer Bill of Rights as a win for Colorado taxpayers.
'I'm always pleased to have one lawsuit less, so thank you for not suing us,' Governor Jared Polis said as he turned towards Democratic legislative leaders.
'There was a resolution introduced with 31 Democrat members of the House on that resolution, 13 Democrat members of the Senate on that resolution and we worked diligently behind the scenes to make sure that an effort to destroy the Taxpayer Bill of Rights did not come to committee and did not have a vote,' said Senate Minority Leader Paul Lundeen.
The parties, however, have differing opinions over societal policy measures that have been passed: bills protecting civil rights for immigrants and members of the transgender community.
Republicans said they wished more measures addressing affordability and public safety had been prioritized this year. While the governor acknowledged some bills, like a measure addressing collective bargaining for unions in the state, were not able to reach solutions he liked, he all but said he plans to veto the measure.
'We were seeking a way to get a policy that would have the buy-in to be stable and unfortunately, despite the best efforts of the sponsors and our best efforts, and many in both the labor and business community, we did not quite get there,' Polis said.
Lawmakers send rideshare safety measure to governor's desk on last day of session
Polis has 30 days to sign or veto bills. Lawmakers said if a special session happens, it would come after details of the federal budget are more finite.
'I expect there is still going to be more because of this affordability issue that we are going to see Medicaid grow in terms of the number of individuals. So it will not surprise me if we need to come back and talk about that,' said Representative Rick Taggart.
'We're watching Congress, it's in the hands of our congressional delegation. The lieutenant governor and I, and many members of the legislature, have called on them not to cut Medicaid, we hope that they don't. But if those big steps are taken, it is quite likely that we would need to work with the legislature to see what that looks like,' said Polis.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Judge tosses lawsuit over Trump's firing of US African Development Foundation board members

time32 minutes ago

Judge tosses lawsuit over Trump's firing of US African Development Foundation board members

A federal judge has tossed out a lawsuit over President Donald Trump's dismantling of a U.S. federal agency that invests in African small businesses. U.S. District Judge Richard Leon in Washington, D.C., dismissed the case on Tuesday, finding that Trump was acting within his legal authority when he fired the U.S. African Development Foundation's board members in February. In March, the same judge ruled that the administration's removal of most grant money and staff from the congressionally created agency was also legal, as long as the agency was maintained at the minimum level required by law. USADF was created as an independent agency in 1980, and its board members must be confirmed by the U.S. Senate. In 2023, Congress allocated $46 million to the agency to invest in small agricultural and energy infrastructure projects and other economic development initiatives in 22 African countries. On Feb. 19, Trump issued an executive order that said USADF, the U.S. Institute of Peace, the Inter-American Foundation and the Presidio Trust should be scaled back to the minimum presence required by law. At the time, USADF had five of its seven board seats filled. A few days later, an administration official told Ward Brehm that he was fired, and emails were sent to the other board members notifying them that they had also been terminated. Those emails were never received, however, because they were sent to the wrong email addresses. The four board members, believing they still held their posts because they had not been given notice, met in March and passed a resolution appointing Brehm as the president of the board. But Trump had already appointed Pete Marocco as the new chairman of what the administration believed to now be a board of one. Since then, both men have claimed to be the president of the agency, and Brehm filed the lawsuit March 6. Leon said that even though they didn't receive the emails, the four board members were effectively terminated in February, and so they didn't have the authority to appoint Brehm to lead the board. Brehm's attorney, Bradley Girard with Democracy Forward, expressed disappointment with the judge's decision. 'But in our parallel case, Rural Development Innovations v. Marocco, a grantee and two USADF employees have also challenged Marocco's unlawful appointment," Girard wrote in an email. "We are hopeful that the Court will reject the defendants' attempt to ignore the constitutional and statutory requirements for appointing board members to federal agencies.' That lawsuit is still pending before the same judge. In that case, two USADF staffers and a consulting firm based in Zambia that works closely with USADF contend that the Trump administration's efforts to deeply scale back the agency wrongly usurps Congress' powers. They also say Marocco was unlawfully appointed to the board, in part because he was never confirmed by the Senate as required.

Washington AG exploring potential challenge to new federal travel restrictions
Washington AG exploring potential challenge to new federal travel restrictions

Yahoo

time33 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Washington AG exploring potential challenge to new federal travel restrictions

Jun. 10—Washington is "taking a careful look" at where it has standing to challenge President Donald Trump's recent proclamation restricting travel from 12 countries, Attorney General Nick Brown said during a news conference Tuesday. "The president says his travel ban is about national security, but this racist order will not make anyone safer," Brown said. The restrictions, Brown said, have stalled medical care, "struck fear" into Afghan refugees who previously aided the United States military and could hinder international students looking to study at American universities. "We are actively looking at ways to challenge this ban, but it will be difficult," Brown said, adding that the Supreme Court has upheld other travel bans in recent years. Trump last Wednesday announced that citizens from 12 countries — Afghanistan, Chad, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Myanmar, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen — would be barred from entering the United States. The president also partially banned citizens from Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan and Venezuela. In a video posted on social media, Trump said the "strength of the restrictions we're applying depends on the threat posed" and said countries could be added or removed from the list. "But we will not allow people who enter our country who wish to do us harm," Trump said. "And nothing will stop us from keeping America safe." The restrictions continue a trend by Trump, who issued several bans on international travel during his first administration. The first, which barred travel from seven majority-Muslim countries, faced swift backlash and was challenged within days by then-Attorney General Bob Ferguson. "I'll always be proud that Washington state was indeed the first state to take on that first travel ban, the first state to take on Donald Trump, and the first state to defeat Donald Trump in court," Ferguson said. "It is a little difficult to wrap my mind around the fact that we are back here again on another travel ban." Ferguson said that Washington will lead other states on standing up against Trump's orders. "And I want all Washingtonians to know that," Ferguson said. "We have a new attorney general, but guess what? The good news is he is as deeply connected to this issue, and as resolved to stand up against it, as we were eight years ago." Among those feeling the impact of the travel ban is Katia Jasmin, founder and executive director of Creole Resources in Spokane. During an interview Tuesday, Jasmin said the inclusion of Haiti caught her by surprise. Jasmin said the ban could have wide-ranging effects on Spokane's Haitian community, including deepening the existing trauma that many have experienced. Jasmin said the ban could also result in family separation, as many permanent residents or citizens still have family abroad — something she knows firsthand. "I have my brother that lives in Haiti, and he comes to see us, and now he won't be able to come and see us," Jasmin said. Katia's brother, Jay, was set to serve as the best man in an upcoming wedding — plans that seem to be in doubt. "My brother won't be able to see us, so I don't know how long we'll have to wait to be able to see him," Jasmin said. The restrictions, Jasmin said, will ultimately have minimal impact on safety. "If you people are scared of gang members coming to the States, I don't know how we are scared of the gang members; they don't have visas, they don't have anything. I don't think a gang member from Haiti will come here to the United States to do anything," Jasmin said. "So whatever they try to say that it's for, the security or stuff, it's not true."

Critics Expose The Massive Constitutional Flaw In Donald Trump's Latest Threat
Critics Expose The Massive Constitutional Flaw In Donald Trump's Latest Threat

Yahoo

time36 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Critics Expose The Massive Constitutional Flaw In Donald Trump's Latest Threat

Donald Trump's threat to use 'very heavy force' on anyone who dares to protest his administration during the U.S. Army's 250th anniversary celebrations in Washington, D.C., on Saturday — which coincides with the president's 79th birthday — drew fierce blowback on social media. 'If there's any protester wants to come out, they will be met with very big force,' Trump told reporters on Tuesday. 'For those people, that want to protest, they're going to be met with very big force,' he reiterated. Trump claimed he hadn't 'even heard about a protest' being planned on the day. But he deployed his usual rhetoric against his critics, claiming they are just 'people who hate our country.' And he added again, 'They will be met with very heavy force.' Trump says anybody who protests the military parade on Sunday will be met with 'very heavy force' — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) June 10, 2025 Critics reminded Trump of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which states that: 'Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.' Former Trump aide Anthony Scaramucci, who is now a vocal critic of his onetime boss, slammed Trump for 'threatening state sponsored violence on citizens exercising their first amendment right' and called Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) to 'grow a backbone' and speak out to 'reject fascism.' Others agreed: Threatening state sponsored violence on citizens exercising their first amendment right. But @LeaderJohnThune is silent. Grow a backbone John and reject fascism. — Anthony Scaramucci (@Scaramucci) June 11, 2025 So much for the First Amendment — Sarah Longwell (@SarahLongwell25) June 10, 2025 The First Amendment specifically prohibits the government from using heavy force on citizens who protest the government. — Ron Filipkowski (@RonFilipkowski) June 10, 2025 But, hear me out here, what if the protesters attack the Capitol? Would we be cool with that? — Stephen Shewmaker (@sbshew) June 10, 2025 Ah yes, such a great confident leader he can't even handle peaceful protest — studio_dad (@studio_daddy) June 10, 2025 I've already said this but the people will stand up for what's right and they will be protesting there Saturday. It will be peaceful until they decide to use 'heavy force' - what a psycho. The president of the United States constantly threatening the American people. I've never… — Jenna (@jennaxkc) June 10, 2025 Surprise Departure Deals Blow To Slim GOP House Majority Rachel Maddow Reveals Sure Sign Trump Is 'Absolutely Panicking' Right Now Trump Reveals What's Next For That Tesla He Bought From Elon Musk

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store