Latest news with #MoeClark
Yahoo
08-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Heavily amended bill adding legal protections for transgender people passes Colorado Senate
Two people fly a rainbow LGBTQ pride flag and a transgender pride flag in front of the Colorado Capitol building during a celebration on Nov. 7, 2020. (Moe Clark/Colorado Newsline) The Colorado Senate gave final approval Tuesday to a heavily amended bill adding legal protections for transgender people in a 20-14 vote after hours of debate and opposition from Republican senators. House Bill 25-1312, dubbed the Kelly Loving Act in honor of a transgender woman killed during the 2022 Club Q shooting in Colorado Springs, would make it a discriminatory act to intentionally not refer to a transgender person by their chosen name. It also requires school policies be 'inclusive of all reasons' that a student changes their name, and it says schools must allow students to choose from any variation contained in dress code policies. The bill includes a provision that says someone does not need a court order if they want to change their gender marker on a driver's license or other identification a second or third time. Colorado allows an 'X' gender marker on state IDs, but that has led to some people having trouble with student loans and passport applications, so some people may want to change their gender markers back. It will also allow a county clerk to issue a new marriage license to someone who has legally changed their name. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX 'This bill's needed because if transgender residents were never harassed, denied services, or mocked in official settings, additional clarification would be unnecessary,' Sen. Chris Kolker, a Littleton Democrat, said Tuesday. 'The lived evidence shows that gaps persist.' Kolker sponsored the bill alongside Sen. Faith Winter, a Broomfield Democrat, Rep. Lorena García, an Adams County Democrat, and Rep. Rebekah Stewart, a Lakewood Democrat. The House voted 39-24 to accept the Senate's many amendments to the measure and 40-24 to approve it again as amended. Democratic Reps. Regina English of Colorado Springs and Naquetta Ricks of Aurora joined Republicans in voting against accepting the amendments to the bill. House Republicans continued echoing parental rights concerns during debate that went into late Tuesday evening, which bill supporters said were unfounded under the latest version of the bill. 'The continued mischaracterization of these policies needs to stop,' Garcia said Tuesday night. 'It is a disservice to Coloradans who are really trying to understand what is in this bill, and we should be honest and truthful about what we are agreeing to or disagreeing with without exaggeration.' The measure will now go to Colorado Gov. Jared Polis' desk to be signed into law. Two Democrats in the Senate joined Republicans in voting against the bill: Sen. Kyle Mullica of Thornton and Sen. Marc Snyder of Manitou Springs. The Senate adopted an amendment Monday that removed a portion of the bill that would have shielded parents who help their child obtain gender-affirming care from laws in other states that outlaw the practice — a part of the bill some supporters had reservations about due to potential legal implications. A Senate committee cut part of the section last week, on top of many other substantial amendments, but bill sponsors offered an amendment deleting the section entirely. Colorado already has a shield law in place that protects people who travel to Colorado for abortion or gender-affirming care from lawsuits and criminal prosecution initiated in other states, and Winter said the original intent of the cut section was to strengthen those protections. We are proud to stand shoulder to shoulder with our community in full support of the Kelly Loving Act. Trans liberation is non-negotiable. – Nadine Bridges, One Colorado executive director Another two amendments added Monday made technical and terminology changes, and changed the description of a 'chosen name' to mean a name someone wants to be known by related to 'disability, race, creed, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, marital status, familial status, national origin, or ancestry, so long as the name does not contain offensive language and the individual is not requesting the name for frivolous purposes.' Winter said that change made the policy inclusive of all reasons someone may want to change their name, not just gender identity. Republican senators acknowledged and thanked bill sponsors for removing provisions that would have affected child custody decisions — the most controversial portion of the original bill — but said many constituents don't realize that was removed and continue to express concern. Republicans still said the bill would affect parental rights related to chosen names and dress codes in schools. Senate Minority Paul Lundeen, a Monument Republican, said Tuesday on the Senate floor that the measure still interferes with the 'sacred' parent-child relationship even as amended and draws the state into 'personal family matters.' '(House Bill) 1312, despite its protective intent, creates a system where schools and state agencies become the arbiter of deeply personal family decisions,' Lundeen said. 'By mandating inclusive name policies, enforcing gender neutral dress codes, enlisting the (Colorado Civil Rights Division) to police speech, this bill risks transforming schools and courts into areas where the state overrides parental authority. We must not allow government to intrude into and fracture the trust between parents and children.' Rod Pelton, a Cheyenne Wells Republican, said he received more communications related to House Bill 1312 than any other bill this session. Other senators from both sides of the aisle have said the same. One Colorado, one of the largest LGBTQ+ advocacy groups in Colorado, and Rocky Mountain Equality both support the bill in its current form after various amendments were adopted. The organizations initially supported the bill, but changed to an 'amend' position with unspecified legal concerns after it passed the House. 'We are proud to stand shoulder to shoulder with our community in full support of the Kelly Loving Act. Trans liberation is non-negotiable,' One Colorado Executive Director Nadine Bridges said in a statement the organization posted to Facebook. 'Pro-equality legislation is not just about creating hope, but creating a better reality. It is a fight that we all need to be in together to protect our community, our family.' Democrats control strong majorities in both chambers of the Legislature. The 2025 legislative session ends Wednesday. Editor's note: This story and headline were updated at 9:17 a.m., May 7, 2025, to include the House vote on Senate amendments and previously to correct that the amended version of the bill says intentionally not referring to a transgender person is a discriminatory act. The terms 'deadnaming' and 'misgendering' were removed from the bill. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
05-04-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
Colorado House approves pair of bills for transgender health care and protections
Two people fly a rainbow LGBTQ pride flag and a transgender pride flag in front of the Colorado Capitol building during a celebration on Nov. 7, 2020. (Moe Clark/Colorado Newsline) Two bills that would strengthen protections for transgender people and gender-affirming care won preliminary approval in the Colorado House on Friday. They come as transgender rights and protections are put on shaky ground at the federal level under the Trump administration, which has issued orders to recognize only two unchangeable genders, stop offering non-binary passport gender markers, and attempts to stop funding care for transgender minors. 'What's happening at the federal level is casting a long shadow and we don't know what the future holds. There is a real possibility that gender-affirming care could be at risk,' said Rep. Brianna Titone, an Arvada Democrat and the Legislature's only transgender member. 'Passing this bill is about telling Coloradans that no, we are not going to let that happen. It's about taking control of what we can do to ensure that our friends and neighbors and family members continue to get the care they need regardless of what might happen in the future.' As more states enact policy to restrict care, especially for minors, Colorado could further become an island of access and absorb more out-of-state patients. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX House Bill 25-1309, sponsored by Titone, would codify into state law existing state public health rules about gender-affirming health care coverage. It would make it illegal for health insurers to deny or limit care deemed medically necessary by a doctor, which could include hormone therapy and procedures like facial surgery, breast augmentations and genital reconstruction. 'What can be created by rules can also be undone,' said bill sponsor Rep. Kyle Brown, a Louisville Democrat. 'This bill codifies existing standards into statute to provide long-term stability and clarity for patients.' The bill would also exempt prescriptions for testosterone from the state's Prescription Drug Use Monitoring Program, which shares data across pharmacies and providers to mitigate abuse of controlled substances. Republicans offered a failed amendment during the chamber's two-hour debate on the bill to limit covered care to adults only, arguing that minors are not mentally developed enough to make such medical decisions. They pointed to Colorado laws that place age restrictions on other behavior like buying firearms and getting a tattoo. 'You can't even buy a betta fish until you're 18. But we're going to allow (doctors) to perform lifelong sterility based with no (Food and Drug Administration) approval and no systematic review,' said Rep. Brandi Bradley, a Littleton Republican. 'If you're an adult, make your own decision. But for the love of humanity, protect the children who don't understand that these things are not FDA approved or haven't been reviewed by any research. Let these children go through puberty,' she said. The FDA has approved puberty blockers for precocious puberty. The medication's use is considered off-label for youth gender-affirming care, but it has been standard care for decades. Democrats responded that decisions about gender-affirming health care for transgender children are made between the patient, their families and their doctor. Leading medical organizations, including the American Academy of Pediatrics, recommend that gender-diverse children have access to developmentally-appropriate care. 'I think we should consult everyone in the equation, especially the person the care is being directed to,' Titone said. The other bill, House Bill 25-1312, aims to add protections for transgender people in schools and courts. It would require courts to consider as a form of coercive control actions like deadnaming — using a transgender person's previous name before transitioning in order to reject their identity — and misgendering in child custody decisions. It would also shield parents who help their child obtain gender-affirming care from court orders in other states that outlaw the practice. 'Supporting a child's gender identity is indeed in the best interest of the child, and that support cannot be used against a loving and supportive parent in a dispute,' said bill sponsor Rep. Rebekah Stewart, a Lakewood Democrat. But Republicans argued the bill's provisions for custody decisions would be an 'erosion' on parental rights. 'The idea that misgendering your own child is considered coercive control, which is another word for child abuse, because you want to get your child help instead of affirming their delusions … this is the most disgusting bill I've seen so far,' said Rep. Jarvis Caldwell, a Colorado Springs Republican. The bill would also label deadnaming and misgendering as discriminatory acts under the state's anti-discrimination law. Schools could not adopt a gender-based dress code under the bill. If a school has an adopted policy related to chosen names, that policy would have to be 'inclusive of all reasons that a student might adopt a chosen name that differs from the student's legal name.' The Legislature approved a law last year that concerns students' chosen names in public schools. 'This bill is truly the least that we can do. Frankly, I wish that we didn't have to bring this bill, but the reality of navigating the world today as a transgender human necessitates it,' Stewart said. Both bills still need a final recorded vote in the House before heading to the Senate. Democrats hold majorities in both chambers and do not need any Republican votes to pass legislation. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
21-02-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Colorado lawmakers advance bill to cut tipped minimum wage in Denver, Boulder
An employee at the Briar Common Brewery + Eatery in Denver pours a beer for a patron on Jan. 7, 2021. (Moe Clark/Colorado Newsline) Tens of thousands of servers, bartenders and other tipped workers in Denver and Boulder could face a significant pay cut under a bill being advanced by Colorado lawmakers who say the change is necessary to help a struggling restaurant industry. Members of the House Business Affairs and Labor Committee voted 11-2 in favor of House Bill 25-1208 on Thursday night, after nearly six hours of testimony from supporters and opponents. Democratic state Reps. Bob Marshall of Highlands Ranch and Sheila Lieder of Littleton were the only 'no' votes. The bill would dramatically increase the 'tip offset' — the dollar amount that employers can subtract from the minimum wage paid to tipped workers, as long as tips make up the difference — in cities and counties that have raised their local minimum wages above the statewide level. For a tipped restaurant employee in Denver, the minimum wage would fall from $15.79 to $11.79 per hour; at 40 hours a week, that could mean over $7,000 a year in lost pay. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX Restaurant owners and business groups, who have lobbied for the change for years, say that high labor costs, combined with pandemic disruptions and inflationary pressures, have caused hundreds of local restaurants to close their doors and pushed many others to the brink. 'Labor costs, which used to be 25 to 30% of restaurants' costs, are now 50 to 60%,' Sonia Riggs, president of the Colorado Restaurant Association, told the committee. 'Menu prices can't keep pace or consumers stop dining out. It's like death by a thousand increases.' Workers, labor unions and progressive groups, however, say the bill is a misguided, and potentially counterproductive, effort to help an industry that faces a variety of economic headwinds. The average restaurant server in the Denver metro area makes a little over $39,000 annually including tips, according to Bureau of Labor Statistics data. HB-1208's 'huge overnight pay cut' for those workers, said Caroline Nutter of the Colorado Fiscal Institute, attempts to balance the industry's books on the backs of its most vulnerable employees. 'We need to consider what slashing wages by almost $140 million a year might due to consumption, demand and revenue,' Nutter said. 'There are ways to address the issues that restaurants are facing. There must be a way to do this with workers at the table and without starting (by) cutting the wages of some of the lowest-paid workers in the state.' The state's labor department says there are roughly 21,000 tipped employees who could be affected by the change. No amendments to the bill were made in Thursday's committee hearing, though several Democrats on the panel said they expected changes at a later stage. State Rep. Steven Woodrow, a Denver Democrat and one of the bill's sponsors, said he would continue talks with opponents, but something must be done to help an industry in 'crisis.' 'We have ideas on how we can make the policy more labor-friendly,' Woodrow said. 'We are looking for partners on the other side to have those conversations with. At this point, we've run up against fairly stiff opposition.' Two major changes to Colorado's wage laws enacted over the last 20 years set state and local policymakers on a collision course with the restaurant industry. In 2006, Colorado voters approved a constitutional amendment to raise the statewide minimum wage and adjust it annually based on inflation. The measure also fixed the state's tip offset at $3.02 per hour. Over time, the flat $3.02 tip credit has shrunk to a smaller and smaller percentage of the overall minimum wage — from over 40% in 2007, when the minimum wage was $6.85 an hour, to just 20% today, with the minimum wage set at $14.81. And in 2019, Democratic lawmakers repealed a preemption law that banned cities and counties from setting their own, higher minimum wages. A handful of local jurisdictions — the cities of Denver, Boulder and Edgewater, along with unincorporated Boulder County — have done so. If passed, by October of this year, HB-1208 would effectively exempt tipped workers from local minimum wage hikes, by requiring local governments to increase their tip credits by an amount equal to the difference between the local and state minimum wages. For example, in Denver, which has raised its minimum wage to $4.00 above the state's level, the tip credit would rise to $7.02. After one year, cities could raise or lower their tip credits by no more than 50 cents annually, within a certain range. HB-1208 has divided local elected officials in cities with higher minimum wages. Denver City Council has taken a position against the bill, and several council members testified in opposition in Thursday's hearing. 'This is one of the most flawed pieces of legislation I've ever seen come through this building, and I don't say that lightly,' Denver City Council Member At-Large Sarah Parady told lawmakers. 'I am astounded, and as a local legislator insulted, by the idea that the state of Colorado would force its biggest and most expensive city to directly cut worker pay by thousands of dollars per year.' But Mayor Mike Johnston supports the change, said Dominick Moreno, a former state senator and the mayor's deputy chief of staff for strategy. Moreno was a sponsor of the 2019 legislation allowing local governments to raise their minimum wage. The tip credit issue should have been settled at the time, he said, but the sides weren't able to come to an agreement. 'I think everyone understood at that time that we were kicking the can down the road, and that eventually something would need to be done to address this issue,' Moreno said. 'I think now you're seeing quite an untenable situation for the restaurant community.' Marshall took issue with the abrupt wage cuts the bill would force, floating the possibility of a 'glide path' for local governments to comply with. 'This issue has been a long in coming, over eight years, piece by piece,' he said. 'And yet we're trying to cram down the workers in one year.' While there's little doubt that restaurants have faced a variety of challenges in recent years, some opponents of HB-1208 dispute the prevailing narrative from bill sponsors and industry groups that Colorado's dining scene is in free fall. 'The restaurant industry in Denver isn't dying,' Matthew Fritz-Mauer, director of the labor division at the Denver Auditor's Office, told lawmakers. 'The sky is not falling. There is no reliable empirical support for this claim.' A widely circulated statistic showing a 22% decline in the number of restaurant licenses in Denver since 2022, Fritz-Mauer said, is based on 'incomplete data' and doesn't account for a significant change in the city's licensing system in 2023. He cited BLS data showing stable employment figures for the industry as a whole. Moreno acknowledged that changes to licensing procedures 'may have disrupted the numbers a little bit,' but said the mayor's office still finds the figures 'quite concerning.' Other proponents of HB-1208 said the BLS data, which includes workers in commissaries used by food trucks, caterers and online-only 'ghost kitchens,' doesn't accurately reflect the health of the hospitality industry. Democratic state Rep. Alex Valdez of Denver, another HB-1208 sponsor, cited the recent closure of familiar spots around the state Capitol as proof that the bill is necessary. 'It's astounding to me that we had testimony from the auditor's office that there's no problem,' Valdez said. 'Everyone in Colorado can see the problem. Everyone in Denver can see the problem. It's a major problem.' Analysts say per-person restaurant visits have steadily declined from their peak in the 1990s, part of a broader trend towards American adults spending more of their time alone or at home. The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated those trends, and while revenues and employment in the foodservice sector at large have rebounded to pre-pandemic levels, that bounceback has been achieved through a shift away from full-service, independent restaurants towards large chains and expanded takeout and delivery service. Dozens of local restaurant owners testified in support of HB-1208 on Thursday. Many of them said that changing the tipped wage would help their bottom lines, but not by much. 'It's everything. It's rent, cost of goods, labor,' said Jeff Osaka, a Denver restauranteur who said he's been forced to close one of his two remaining restaurants, Osaka Ramen. 'So this bill would help a fraction of that. This is a good stepping stone.' But Jesse Thornton, an airport bartender and member of foodservice union Unite Here Local 23, said that after decades of extremely low pay, minimum wage hikes over the last decade have finally meant 'real wages' for restaurant employees for the first time. Rolling back those gains would be 'devastating' for workers who live paycheck to paycheck, he said. 'Restaurant owners would profit from this bill, and working Coloradans would not,' said Thornton. 'Tipped workers don't get raises unless the minimum wage goes up. That's a fact of the industry.' SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
