Rep. Lauren Boebert requests $5M in federal aid to fix water in eastern Colorado community
Colorado Congresswoman Lauren Boebert is requesting $5 million in federal aid to clean up the water in Wiggins. The request is part of her request focusing on water and infrastructure projects that impact the 21 counties in her district.
Boebert is a Republican representing Colorado's 4th Congressional District, which includes the community in the Prairie View Ranch Water District.
Prairie View Ranch in Morgan County
CBS
"Constituents across every part of the 4th District have made it clear when I speak with them about their priorities: they want reliable access to clean water and they want their roads fixed," said Boebert. "These projects will have a direct impact on Coloradans' quality of life and will be a huge benefit to the communities who are in desperate need of support. I will be fighting tirelessly to have each of these projects included in a final Appropriations bill for Fiscal Year 2026 and make sure our taxpayer dollars come back to the 4th District for substantive, important investments."
The water contains a sludge that makes it unsafe to drink or use for people living in that community, even though they pay $200 a month for water. CBS News Colorado's Shaun Boyd has previously reported that certified lab results show the sludge is filled with radioactive lead and uranium.
Other projects on Boebert's list include the construction of a pipeline connecting Plum Creek to Rueter-Hess Reservoir in Douglas County and road and safety improvements to the U.S. 34 and U.S. 287 intersection in Loveland.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
E&E News
37 minutes ago
- E&E News
National Park Service adds more projects to NEPA exclusion list
Completing a job initiated by the Biden administration, the National Park Service on Wednesday announced 33 types of projects that will no longer require the most extensive environmental reviews. The so-called categorical exclusions under the National Environmental Policy Act are designed to speed work on projects deemed not to have significant environmental impacts. 'The Department of the Interior is focused on streamlining government processes that have slowed progress for too long,' Interior Secretary Doug Burgum said in a statement. 'These reforms will help the National Park Service act more efficiently while continuing to uphold environmental standards.' Advertisement NPS cited examples that include infrastructure upgrades, communications improvements, rights-of-way authorizations, cultural and natural resource management, recreation access and emergency response efforts.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Pulse shooting survivors, family members tour building before demolition
Survivors and family members of the victims of the 2016 Pulse nightclub shooting are touring the inside of the building for a final look before it's torn down. About 250 people accepted the city of Orlando's invitation to tour the building where Omar Mateen, who had pledged allegiance to the Islamic State group, killed 49 people and wounded 53 others during a Latin Night celebration at the popular LGBTQIA+ club on June 12, 2016. Mateen was killed following an hourslong standoff with police. At the time, it was the deadliest mass shooting in modern American history. The shooting at the Route 91 Harvest music festival in Las Vegas would eclipse the Pulse shooting's death toll the following year. The visits, which coincide with the shooting's nine-year mark, are being done in small groups over the course of four days, with survivors and family members spending about a half hour inside, according to The Associated Press. Christine Leionen lost her only child, 32-year-old Christopher, in the shooting. Wednesday marked the first time she saw where her son was killed. "My son died on that dance floor. He was shot nine times, and he bled to death on that dance floor," she told CBS News. She said going to Pulse was "a way to try to experience his last seconds of life. I just want to feel closer to him." Orlando Mayor Buddy Dyer, who also visited the site, said the visit "took me back nine years." "Reflecting on being in the command center on Orange Avenue as all the things are transpiring and, eventually, the shooting of the killer and then the realization of just how many people were impacted," he said, according to CBS affiliate WKMG-TV. Dyer said the people visiting included 25 of the 49 victims' families. The city of Orlando is planning to build a permanent memorial where the building currently stands. City officials approved a plan to buy the property for $2 million back in 2023, following several previous failed attempts to buy the land. Family members and some survivors had been pushing for a permanent memorial for years before the purchase. But some of the families and survivors still have questions about whether more could have been done to prevent the shooting or if police could have done more to save people. Questions also surround the ensuing investigation and the issue of whether the attack was a hate crime. "I lived that night, but it's a constant sacrifice to keep moving every day," survivor Maritza Gomez told WKMG back when the city approved the plan to buy the property. "I don't think that Pulse should be diminished. I think that an investigation should be taken care of first." An accused woman skips her pedicure, kills her ex-husband Watch California Gov. Gavin Newsom's full speech on federal response to Los Angeles protests LAPD chief speaks out about deployment of military forces to anti-ICE protests
Forbes
4 hours ago
- Forbes
New State Merger Review Laws Could Harm U.S. Economy
U.S. states are ramping up their review of proposed mergers and acquisitions (M&A). Both Washington and Colorado have enacted new pre-merger notification statutes that will take effect this summer, and other states have introduced or are considering similar legislation. These changes could impose major new costs on potential merging parties and harm the U.S. economy. In addition, the Trump Administration may wish to consider revisiting costly changes imposed in a revised 2024 federal pre-merger rule. M&A Benefits As I previously discussed in Forbes, M&A activity generates major economic benefits by reallocating capital to higher-valued uses and thus yielding more efficient production and innovation. Specifically: M&A Costs and Federal Enforcement Oversight Trends As I previously explained, M&A activity may also, however, impose costs when it reduces competition in the marketplace. The Clayton Antitrust Act bars M&A transactions that may substantially lessen competition. A longstanding bipartisan federal enforcement consensus that targeted only those mergers that threaten to harm consumer welfare (by raising prices and reducing output, quality, or innovation) was overturned by the Biden Administration, which introduced a populist 'big is bad' skepticism of merger activity. These are 'early days' in the second Trump Administration. Nevertheless, new Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission antitrust enforcers appear to be signaling that they will focus on improvements in merger review process, rather than a return to the far less interventionist pre-Biden approach to merger analysis. Indeed, the Trump DOJ and FTC have kept in place 2023 Biden merger analysis guidelines that greatly relaxed prior guidelines' standard for deeming a merger problematic. The new guidelines disincentivized mergers by featuring novel and unproven theories of competitive harm. The new Trump enforcers also have retained an October 2024 revised pre-merger rule. Compliance with the revised rule 'require[s] New State Merger Legislative Requirements Will Likely Prove Harmful At its best, alignment of state and federal antitrust enforcement efforts is an example of beneficial 'cooperative federalism.' States can enforce federal merger law on behalf of their residents. They also may challenge mergers under state antitrust laws. State statutes may allow a local focus on small state-specific mergers not investigated by federal enforcers. State and federal merger enforcement may also, however, work at cross-purposes. State merger cases may generate highly costly, wasteful duplication of federal efforts, and may occasionally be in tension with federal antitrust policy. The 2024 Model Antitrust Pre-Merger Notification Act served as the basis for an April 2025 pre-merger notification law in Washington, with many other states expected to follow suit. The Model Act gives states access to federal pre-merger filings, subject to the same confidentiality requirements that apply under federal law. Widespread adoption of the Model Act will increase filing cost burdens on merging parties and will subject them to a greater risk of having sensitive non-public business information leak out from a variety of new sources. Even greater concerns stem from the fact that California and New York are considering pre-merger legislation that sweeps more broadly than the Model Act. The new pre-merger burdens would impose major new costs on merging parties. What's more, the California proposal would also establish a far lower substantive standard for striking down a merger ('an appreciable risk of materially lessening competition') than that found in federal law ('may be substantially to lessen competition'). This change raises the legal risk associated with merger proposals. It could seriously disincentivize many beneficial mergers for no good reason. Policy Implications and Next Steps Taken as a whole, recent state merger-related initiatives threaten significant U.S. economic harm. The U.S. has the strongest most innovative capital markets, which are key to driving economic growth. M&A plays a central role in the success of those markets. It keeps rivals on their toes and yields more vibrant competition. The weakening of M&A based on new state-created burdens and legal risks would tend to diminish economic growth and lower American competitive vitality, at least to a degree. This is that last thing we should want to do in a highly competitive global economy. The Trump Administration hopefully will take note. The President might, for example, direct the DOJ and the FTC to make 'competition advocacy' filings with the states highlighting the economic harm that specific merger-related legislative proposals would likely impose. The two agencies have specialized economists and lawyers with a long and respected history of making advocacy filings, directed at both state and federal government entities. The two agencies also use the 'bully pulpit' to emphasize the importance of continued close cooperation between federal and state antitrust enforcers. Federal and state enforcers already cooperate and make joint filings in a variety of cases. New state merger requirements could reduce the effectiveness of such cooperation. Finally, the FTC and the DOJ may wish to take a second look at the revised 2024 federal pre-merger rule to determine whether some of the costly new requirements it placed on filers could be eliminated. Issuing a new less costly rule could be good for American M&A. It would also be fully in tune with President Trump's April 2025 Executive Order on Reducing Anticompetitive Regulatory Barriers. Hopefully state and federal officials will take note and act to enhance the economic benefits of merger review.
