8 interesting bills introduced in the Colorado Legislature
Of the more than 500 bills introduced at the state Capitol so far this legislative session, a handful are eye-catching policies.
State of play: Here's a look at some of the more unusual legislation being considered this year.
✂ Create a DOGE-like authority at the state level to find government efficiencies that aim to save taxpayer dollars.
🐮 Ban the sale of cultivated meat made from animal cells and grown in laboratories, and prohibit the product from being labeled as meat.
🐛 Prohibit the sale and manufacturing of insect products for human consumption, such as crickets.
🐈 Provide money to organizations that sterilize and vaccinate community, free-roaming cats.
🍄 Designate Agaricus julius, commonly known as the Emperor mushroom, as Colorado's state mushroom.
🚲 Require e-bike retailers to inform customers about safe operating practices.
🐶 Prohibit home insurers from discriminating against pet owners and allowing those in public housing to have pets.
🦬 Ban the killing of bison unless they are livestock.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Washington Post
5 hours ago
- Washington Post
Gov. Josh Shapiro on antisemitism and Trump's 'sanctimonious B.S.'
Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro (D) sits for an interview with Washington Post reporter Colby Itkowitz at the Pennsylvania State Capitol on June 11. (Peter W. Stevenson/The Washington Post) Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro (D) faced a violent attack on his home in April. A man with a history of mental illness, 38-year-old Cody Balmer, has been charged with breaking in and setting fire to a dining room at the Governor's Residence. The alleged arsonist said part of his motivation was Shapiro's support for Israel. Since this incident, there have been other high-profile attacks against Jewish people in Boulder, Colorado, and Washington, D.C. Host Colby Itkowitz speaks with Shapiro about the attack and the recent spike in antisemitic actions in the United States. She also asks him about President Donald Trump's decision to deploy the National Guard and Marines to California, and why so many people think he's a top contender for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2028. Today's show was produced by Laura Benshoff. It was edited by Reena Flores and mixed by Sam Bair, who also edited the video. Peter Stevenson and HyoJung Kim shot the video. Thanks also to Nick Baumann, Sean Sullivan and Ariel Plotnick. Watch the full interview on YouTube. And you can subscribe to The Washington Post here.
Washington Post
9 hours ago
- Washington Post
Fearing Trump, academics worldwide issue anti-fascist manifesto
LONDON — In the spring of 1925, a group of academics, researchers and writers in Italy published an open letter in multiple newspapers, hoping to ring alarm bells over the creeping authoritarianism of Benito Mussolini and his Fascist party. It called for 'intrinsic goodness' and recognizing the value of 'liberal systems and methods' over 'violence and bullying and the suppression of freedom of the press.' Spoiler: It didn't work. Mussolini wasn't stopped, fascism plunged Europe into darkness, and the letter signers were variously fired, sidelined and beaten. But exactly a century later, a modern group of academics, researchers and writers around the world is giving it another go — fearing that the world is once again sleepwalking into dictatorship and violence. More than 400 scholars from dozens of countries, including at least 30 Nobel laureates, are reprising the 1925 Manifesto of the Anti-Fascist Intellectuals to warn that 'the threat of fascism is back.' 'In the past two decades we have witnessed a renewed wave of far-right movements,' the new letter states, 'often bearing unmistakably fascist traits: attacks on democratic norms and institutions, a reinvigorated nationalism laced with racist rhetoric, authoritarian impulses, and systematic assaults on the rights of those who do not fit a manufactured traditional authority.' Organizers said the open letter — published Friday by media outlets in Britain, France, Italy, Australia, Argentina and other countries — was inspired by rising influence of, as they see it, a growing roster of would-be demagogues and dictators around the world and their followers. The essay does not name names. But in interviews, organizers cited Russian President Vladimir Putin's invasion of Ukraine; the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol by rioters trying to block the peaceful transfer of power; and myriad crackdowns on press, protesters and professors in Hungary, Brazil, Israel and other democracies. Their fears have been supercharged by the early actions of the second Trump administration, they said. 'What we are witnessing at the moment is extremely concerning for people who want to defend democracy,' Andrea Pisauro, an Italian professor of neurology at the University of Plymouth in England and one of the organizers, said in an interview. 'It looks to us like authoritarianism is on the march throughout the world and now in the United States.' The group timed the specific release of the letter to coincide with the military parade that President Donald Trump planned to roll through Washington on Saturday, his 79th birthday, which organizers of the letter characterized as a ritual of authoritarian pomp. 'We thought, 'That's perfect. A person is trying to be a king and wants a parade,'' said another organizer in the United States, who would only speak on the condition of anonymity out of fear of reprisal. 'It's the classic mix of ridiculous and scary.' Publication of the letter also coincides with the Trump administration's ongoing push to exert greater control over universities, including Harvard, by cutting research grants, seeking to block the enrollment of international students and threatening to raise taxes on school endowment funds. The idea of an updated manifesto began mostly among hard-science researchers from Italy, who were familiar with their country's own descent into dictatorship and the noble, if futile, efforts by intellectuals to stop it. Support for it quickly spread to other disciplines and nationalities. Dozens of political scientists, legal scholars, historians and economists added their names. The list is growing, and the organizers plan to keep the letter open for new supporters. Those already signed up include some renowned thinkers, among them historian Garry Wills, New York University's Ruth Ben-Ghiat — the author of 'Strongmen,' a history of authoritarian rulers — and tyranny expert Timothy Snyder of Yale. 'I think it's important to remember that there is a history of university professors and other intellectuals taking risks in the name of principles,' Snyder said in an interview about why he joined the signatories. 'Secondly, it was important to me for people to have this historical reference to fascism, that things today might be more explicable when we have clear references to the past.' The project was launched in February by a loose confederation of academic colleagues who had been wary of rising autocracies for years. They saw Trump's moves to deport international students, threaten sanctions on unfavored law firms and ignore judicial restraints as another check-engine light on democracy's dashboard. The Trump administration has also pulled research funding for the National Institutes of Health and other scientific bodies, they noted, and has co-opted federal watchdog agencies long viewed as independent monitors. Among the most concerning, Pisauro said, were actions by Elon Musk's U.S. DOGE Service to erase decades of irreplaceable research on climate change, sexuality and other suddenly taboo topics. 'We are researchers,' Pisauro said. 'That really shocked us.' Fully aware that academics were already in the crosshairs of powers from Washington to Budapest, they decided to reprise the 1925 letter, which condemned Mussolini's 'bizarre mixture of appeals to authority and demagogy, of proclaimed reverence for the laws and violations of the laws.' The modern version was largely written by an international medical researcher at an American university, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. He said the atmosphere of fear and mistrust that has enveloped academic institutions under Trump makes him afraid to go public. He isn't alone. Several signatories of the letter opted to remain anonymous. That alone should be seen as a warning sign that the United States is descending into the wary chill that characterized the former Soviet Union and other totalitarian regimes, said the researcher, whose identity and credentials were verified by The Washington Post. 'I don't want my colleagues to know what I'm doing,' he said. 'That is definitely not something I thought would happen when I moved to the United States many years ago.' The organizers are quick to say that current events in the U.S. and elsewhere are not exact parallels to the rise of dictators like Mussolini and Adolf Hitler. By 1925, many opposition figures were imprisoned and a growing number of dissidents were dead, part of a wave of violence that grew to engulf Europe. Still, even though there is debate over the definition of 'fascist' — a label easily deployed in political arguments — the letter writers see echoes of it in the actions of today's strongman leaders and the conditions that enable their rise. 'These movements have reemerged across the globe, including in long-standing democracies, where widespread dissatisfaction with political failure to address mounting inequalities and social exclusion has once again been exploited by new authoritarian figures,' the letter states. 'True to the old fascist script, under the guise of an unlimited popular mandate, these figures undermine national and international rule of law, targeting the independence of the judiciary, the press, institutions of culture, higher education, and science.' Some of those who signed the manifesto did so while also arguing for universities and institutions to address their own shortcomings. Among them is a widespread intolerance of political and cultural views that many academics don't like when it comes to hiring experts and setting curriculum, said Pippa Norris, a longtime political scientist at Harvard's John F. Kennedy School of Government. 'We need to make sure all viewpoints are heard and taught,' Norris said. 'At present we don't have the balance right.' Norris said she signed the open letter because she also recognized the rising threat to academic freedom coming from governments. Her institution has seen federal funding stripped by the Trump administration and its international students blocked from applying for visas. 'Everyone can speak up in different ways,' she said. 'And this is something I can do.'
Forbes
12 hours ago
- Forbes
House Approves Bill That Would Claw Back $9.4 Billion In Funding, Now Moves To Senate
WASHINGTON, DC - JUNE 9: The U.S, Capitol Building seen at dusk on June 9, 2025 in Washington, DC. (Photo by) Getty Images As expected, the House of Representatives voted in favor of a bill to rescind $9.4 billion in funding for National Public Radio (NPR), the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS), and the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). The bill, proposed by President Trump, does not focus on approving new dollars, but instead targets a clawback of previously approved funds, a move known as rescission. Just before the vote, Trump posted (in part) on Truth Social: Despite the President's message, not all Republicans voted yes on the rescission. Four GOP representatives—Mark Amodei (Nev.), Brian Fitzpatrick (Pa.), Nicole Malliotakis (N.Y.), and Mike Turner (Ohio)—voted no. That represented a shift from the vote to consider the measure, which passed earlier in the week—in that vote, Kentucky's Thomas Massie was the sole Republican voting no (he changed his vote to yes for the Thursday vote). Despite the name, the clawback isn't from a single pot of money—the cuts will be made across appropriations over several fiscal years. As approved by the House, the bill reduces pre-approved funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting by $535 million per year for fiscal years 2026 and 2027. Currently, PBS receives about 15% of its revenue from CPB's federal funds, while approximately 1% of NPR's annual operating budget comes from the CPB (that percentage is a bit higher for member stations, including those in rural stations or underserved areas). 'Unobligated' balances for certain USAID programs available under the 2024 and 2025 fiscal year appropriations are also permanently rescinded—those total approximately $8.3 billion. For context, the U.S. government's last fiscal year budget totaled $6.75 trillion in spending. The U.S. government has spent $4.85 trillion in fiscal year 2025, an increase of $356 billion over the same time period last year. The most significant outlays went to Social Security, followed by Medicare and interest to pay down the national debt. Following the vote, Katherine Maher, NPR President and CEO, released a statement, saying in part, 'Americans who rely on local, independent stations serving communities across America, especially in rural and underserved regions, will suffer the immediate consequences of this vote. If rescission passes and local stations go dark, millions of Americans will no longer have access to locally owned, independent, nonprofit media and will bear the risk of living in a news desert, missing their emergency alerts, and hearing silence where classical, jazz and local artists currently play.' The bill now moves to the Senate, where its future is uncertain. Republicans hold a narrow majority, but some Senators have expressed reluctance to pass the retroactive cuts. PBS has urged the Senate not to pass the bill, saying in a statement, 'The fight to protect public media does not end with this vote, and we will continue to make the case for our essential service in the days and weeks to come. If these cuts are finalized by the Senate, it will have a devastating impact on PBS and local member stations, particularly smaller and rural stations that rely on federal funding for a larger portion of their budgets. Without PBS and local member stations, Americans will lose unique local programming and emergency services in times of crisis.' White House officials have signaled that they want to send more cuts, but it's unclear what the appetite might be for continuing to undo the work of an earlier Congress. One option that could be considered? A pocket rescission. While a rescission requires an affirmative vote of Congress to claw back funds, a pocket rescission issued within 45 days of the end of the fiscal year allows for a rescission if Congress simply fails to act. The government's fiscal year ends on September 30, which means that the window for such a move opens in mid-August.
