Latest news with #JohnHickenlooper
CBS News
28-05-2025
- Business
- CBS News
Sen. John Hickenlooper tours Denver brewery, criticizes tariffs
U.S. Sen. John Hickenlooper toured 4 Noses Brewery in Denver on Tuesday as part of a visit highlighting local businesses. Hickenlooper, a Democrat representing Colorado in the Senate, wanted to learn how tariffs are impacting the craft beer industry. Sen. John Hickenlooper visits 4 Noses Brewing Company in Denver. CBS Following the tour, Hickenlooper said the costs of tariffs are making it difficult for businesses to invest the way they need to grow. He criticized tariffs imposed during the Trump administration, stating they "rarely worked" and warning that the U.S. economy is "perilously close to sliding into recession." "They don't need extra anxiety from wondering if the tariff is going to stay or double in a month or magically go away," said Hickenlooper. 4 Noses Brewing Company CBS President Donald Trump has said that his goal with tariffs is to bring back manufacturing jobs to America. Hickenlooper's remarks come amid ongoing concerns about inflation and global trade tensions. 4 Noses Brewing Company has said the company is switching from aluminum to tin.
Yahoo
19-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Democrats, addicted to nominating senators, prepare for a 2028 pileup
Democrats look like they're headed to another presidential primary dogpile in 2028, whether they want it or not. 'I feel it in the air,' said Sen. John Hickenlooper, D-Colo., who joined the 2020 primary — as a governor — and wants it 'official' that he's not running this time. He hopes, in fact, that the party can winnow down its field to six to eight candidates over the next two-and-a-half years. That would avoid a replay of what he called the 'ridiculous adventure' of 2020, when more than two dozen Democrats ended up seeking the nomination. But even as Democrats prepare for next year's midterms, the already-crowded stage looks set for a 2020 replay. Some contenders are playing coy about it. Few are ruling it out. And a party that's plainly addicted to nominating senators and ex-senators — 1940 was the last year Democrats ran a ticket without at least a running mate of senatorial heritage — may end up doing the same in 2028. At least a half-dozen senators are now viewed as potential 2028 candidates by their colleagues and top Democrats on Capitol Hill, a mix of new faces and familiar ones. 'How many presidential candidates can you fit in one caucus room? I don't know,' Sen. Ruben Gallego, D-Ariz., told Semafor. He's acknowledged considering the idea, but he said the ultimate number of Senate Democratic presidential aspirants is 'entirely dependent on where the country is, and who has a chance to win. You'll probably have to ask me in about a year and half.' Other Democratic senators seen as potential presidential candidates include Mark Kelly of Arizona, Cory Booker of New Jersey, Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, Chris Murphy of Connecticut, Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, Elissa Slotkin of Michigan and Raphael Warnock of Georgia. If Jon Ossoff wins reelection next year, don't be surprised if he gets some buzz, too. There's also a host of other big names on the gubernatorial side: Wes Moore of Maryland, Josh Shapiro of Pennsylvania, Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan, Gavin Newsom of California, JB Pritzker of Illinois, Andy Beshear of Kentucky, and 2024 vice presidential nominee Tim Walz in Minnesota. Former Vice President Kamala Harris, also a former senator, may run for governor of California — but she could also take another shot at the presidential race. Don't forget the House, with Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., as well as people who aren't on anyone's radar yet. But replicating 2020 presents its fair share of risks for a party that's still grappling with the fallout from the reelection decision by the winner of that primary, former President Joe Biden. Democrats are sorting through a lot right now: their handling of Biden's disastrous 2024 campaign, how to resist President Donald Trump's agenda, and whether to compromise with Republicans on anything at all. And for any party trying to emerge from the wilderness, there's a debate about electability. It's enough to guarantee the struggles for airtime and effectiveness that tend to come with a big primary field. In 2020, seven senators joined a heap of governors, mayors and House members, most of whom faded fast. Worries about Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders' electability and Biden's age enticed last-minute entries from two billionaires, Tom Steyer and Mike Bloomberg, who broke spending records to win almost nothing. Republicans had their own electability debate after Trump lost in 2020, only to end back up where they started in 2024 — and then win. Democrats are thinking harder about what sorts of candidates voters will respond to, though Hickenlooper deadpanned: 'Who the hell knows what they want?' Sen. Peter Welch, D-Vt., has an idea of what voters will respond to: 'It's the year of the governor,' he said. 'There's a lot of people who could legitimately run, including several senators … gut sense is somebody out of Washington, somebody with different experience has a better lead on the runway,' Welch added. Democratic governors have notched more wins against Trump than their counterparts on the Hill. They have also dominated the early conversation in states that expect to hold the first primaries and can attack a 'broken Washington' with aplomb. One governor who's already hit an early state, Pritzker, declined to favor any particular background in a nominee during a recent interview with Semafor, citing 'empathy, kindness, toughness' as top attributes for a nominee. He added: 'I think having executive experience seems like it would be very important.' Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., would only allow that governors are 'just as well-positioned as members of Congress.' 'There's talented women and men in the Senate that should be considered,' Durbin said. 'I think it's healthy [to have lots of candidates]. I wouldn't go overboard.' Democrats who tell you it's too early for them to think about 2028 are being cagey. It's on many of their minds, even though only a few will admit it. That's in part because many in the party are kicking themselves for the two elections Trump won. Democrats regretted their decision to rally early around Hillary Clinton in 2016; now they regret that Biden sought reelection last year with no serious primary challenger. We're not sure whether the senator vs. governor argument will play out that directly. But if we had to guess, you're going to end up with at least one senator on the ticket of a party that likes to put TWO of them on (Obama and Biden, John Kerry and John Edwards). There have been surges of interest around Booker after he broke the Senate record for longest speech; around AOC as she and Sanders held the year's largest rallies; and around Rep. Jasmine Crockett, D-Texas, for commanding news cycles with quips. But there is no frontrunner, and not even real clarity on which state will hold the first primary. Pritzker's recent New Hampshire trip and Pete Buttigieg's town hall in Iowa suggested that the DNC might push South Carolina back down the calendar, after it was scheduled first to help Biden ward off a challenger. Yet Walz and Moore will both speak at the South Carolina Democratic Party's convention and fundraisers at the end of this month. As for Gallego's visit to Pennsylvania? One Democratic senator, when we asked why the party can't stop nominating senators and ex-senators, replied: 'We tend to view members of Congress more favorably than Republicans.' That same senator told us you might as well consider the Keystone State the new Iowa. If candidates don't hit in Pennsylvania, they might as well not run. Sen. Tina Smith, D-Minn., said that most of her colleagues are being careful not to overtly position themselves for a presidential run and that their sole focus is — and should be — the midterms. 'We're, what, 120 days into this terrible administration? I think people are showing good judgment,' she said. Kelly agreed: 'I'm not spending a ton of time thinking about who our nominee is going to be in 2028,' he said. 'We've got bigger problems right now.'
Yahoo
16-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
CO lawmakers reintroduce bill protecting Gunnison Basin, surrounding regions
WASHINGTON D.C. (KREX) – In light of Colorado Public Lands Day on Saturday, U.S. Sens. Michael Bennet and John Hickenlooper have reintroduced the Gunnison Outdoor Resources Protection Act (GORP), while U.S. Rep. Jeff Hurd introduced companion legislation in the House. GORP uses a variety of public land management tools like designations focused conservation, wildlife, recreation and scientific research to protect important areas of the Gunnison Basin and its surrounding regions. 'Coloradans have spent over a decade at trailheads and kitchen tables to find common ground and protect Gunnison County's spectacular landscapes, economy and natural resources,' said Bennet. 'This bill proves that people with wide-ranging interests can develop a common vision to preserve our public lands for future generations.' The bill has come together after years of collaboration between tribes, public lands user groups and local governments. With that, the bill has support from the Ute Mountain Ute Tribe, local municipalities and the bipartisan support from six Western Colorado counties. Alongside these groups are those who also love the outdoors and use it daily for fiscal or recreational purposes. The bill has gained support local businesses, ranchers, rock climbers, bikers, hikers, hunters, anglers and whitewater rafters. 'Adventurers across Colorado and the country come to the Gunnison Basin for its rugged canyons and untamed wilderness,' said Hickenlooper. 'Protecting these additional 730,000 acres will help keep it that way for generations.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
16-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Fix Our Forests Act would destroy forests without protecting communities
A small pond sits near the Twin Rock Trail in the Florissant Fossil Beds National Monument. (NPS staff/Peterson/Public domain) Forests are extremely valuable for watersheds, wildlife, carbon storage, recreation and so much more. The deceptively named Fix Our Forests Act, or FOFA, does nothing to conserve forests to retain these values. Instead, it would emphasize logging and otherwise manipulating forests at a scale we haven't seen on public lands for many decades, if ever. The misguided bill has already passed the House, and its Senate version was recently introduced by Colorado's own U.S. Sen. John Hickenlooper and other Western senators. FOFA encourages the Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management, which manage most of the federal lands in the Western U.S., to avoid a careful examination of impacts from logging and ways to reduce harms under the National Environmental Policy Act. Under FOFA, projects up to 10,000 acres — over 15 square miles — would be excluded from consideration of possible impacts. The effects to watersheds, wildlife habitat, recreation and scenery would be massive. What's more, the public would have only one chance to provide input for logging projects and could only object in court. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX If Fix Our Forests passes, agencies would no longer need to consult about their management plans with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service if new threatened or endangered species were listed or critical habitat was designated for them, or even if new information surfaced concerning what action was needed for their recovery to secure populations. This provision could lead to further harm to species already on the edge of continued existence. The use of livestock grazing to reduce the risk of fire would be also encouraged. Grazing can be extremely harmful to fragile ecosystems, especially near streams and lakes. Stock can denude vegetation, leading to invasion by non-native species, such as cheatgrass, which burns easily and readily reestablishes itself after fires. Yet under FOFA, grazing could be used for 'post-fire restoration and recovery,' in spite of adverse impacts. Under recent direction from its Washington office, the U.S. Forest Service would be encouraged to use two methods of approving logging projects that would basically allow loggers to select which trees they want to cut and sell to mills. The largest trees, the ones most valuable for wildlife and storing carbon, would likely be taken. FOFA would even allow logging for the purpose of 'retaining and expanding forest products infrastructure,' i.e., with no other goal than to benefit the logging industry by giving them logs off public lands at taxpayer expense. In the bill, 'high priority hazard trees' would be defined as those likely to fall, which could of course mean almost all trees in the forest. Areas up to 6,000 acres containing such trees within 300 feet of Forest Service roads could be cut with no consideration of impacts. Similarly, trees that could fall within 150 feet of a powerline could be cut with no assessment of possible impacts. Science, much of it researched by the Forest Service, clearly shows the best way to protect houses and other infrastructure is by removing flammable material from the structures and an area no more than 100 feet surrounding them. Cutting our public forests will not protect our communities. We don't need to degrade and destroy forests to save our homes and infrastructure from fire. Our forests need more protection from harmful activities, not less, in order to retain the great benefits they provide for us and other species as well. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Newsweek
24-04-2025
- Politics
- Newsweek
Senator Raises Alarm as Major Lake Mead Water Deadline Looms
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. As the deadline to renegotiate Colorado River water use agreements approaches, Democratic Senator John Hickenlooper says he is "frustrated" with the lack of progress on a consensus between the seven basin states. "Colorado should have a right to keep the water that we have been using the way we've been using it, and I don't think we should compromise that," Hickenlooper said after a roundtable in Glenwood Springs with Western Slope water managers on April 15, according to Aspen Journalism. "But there are a lot of things we could do to give a little to be part of the solution to the Lower Basin and get to a collaborative solution. Again, I'm frustrated by our lack of progress." Why It Matters The Colorado River is a lifeline for the Southwest, supplying water and hydroelectric power across seven states. Its two largest reservoirs, Lake Powell and Lake Mead, have dropped to record lows in recent years due to overuse and drought conditions. New guidelines are needed by 2026 to replace the current set of rules. Federal officials previously released five conceptual alternatives, including a "no action" option required under environmental law, to determine how to allocate dwindling water resources. One proposal emphasizes infrastructure protection and strict limits on water deliveries during shortages, while another promotes expanded conservation and flexible storage solutions, the Hill reported. Without an agreement, a federal management plan would likely be implemented by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, according to Aspen Journalism. What To Know The Colorado River Compact, originally crafted a century ago, is expiring as the region has been confronting the crises of prolonged water scarcity. The states—Arizona, California, and Nevada in the Lower Basin, and Colorado, Utah, New Mexico, and Wyoming in the Upper Basin—have until the end of May to submit a consensus-based plan. Without agreement, federal officials are expected to begin drafting a unilateral management plan as part of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process. Talks had stalled late last year but have since resumed. Upper Basin negotiators, including Colorado's lead, Becky Mitchell, are pushing for supply-driven management of reservoirs like Lake Powell and Lake Mead "that are resilient across a range of hydrologic conditions experienced in the basin," Aspen Journalism reported. Lower Basin representatives, however, want the Upper Basin to absorb a share of usage cuts during drought years. The outlet noted that upper Basin states say they already suffer approximately 1.3 million acre-feet in annual shortfalls due to limited water availability and have never fully utilized their compact allocation. A ferry passes Rock Island rises on Lake Mead along the Colorado River on March 14, 2025. A ferry passes Rock Island rises on Lake Mead along the Colorado River on March 14, option put forward by the Bureau of Reclamation, described as "federal authorities," would require up to 3.5 million acre-feet in cuts exclusively from the Lower Basin, while preserving Upper Basin allocations and using upstream reservoir releases to maintain hydropower production at Glen Canyon Dam. Complicating matters further is a bleak hydrological outlook. The snowpack in the Upper Basin has fallen to 74 percent of average and may collapse entirely, echoing the severe drought conditions of 2021 and 2022, according to Aspen Journalism. What People Are Saying Lead negotiator for Colorado Becky Mitchell as reported by Aspen Journalism: "The basin states share common goals: we want to avoid litigation, and we want a sustainable solution for reservoir light of these goals, I see the basin states working towards sustainable, supply-driven operations of Lakes Powell and Mead that are resilient across a range of hydrologic conditions experienced in the basin." Andy Mueller, general manager of the Glenwood Springs-based Colorado River Water Conservation District, as reported by Aspen Journalism: "We have to remember that creating your own solution for the consensus is always better than allowing somebody else to create it for you, so we are hopeful that will happen." What Happens Next If consensus fails, the risk isn't only legal paralysis—a failure to reach consensus could trigger federal interventions and potential disruptions to water and energy supplies in the West.
