Connect with us

Colorado

They hoped their children’s deaths would bring change. Then a Colorado bill to protect kids online failed

Published

on

They hoped their children’s deaths would bring change. Then a Colorado bill to protect kids online failed


Bereaved parents saw their hopes for change dashed after a bill meant to protect children from sexual predators and drug dealers online died in the Colorado state legislature last month.

Several of those parents had helped shape the bill, including Lori Schott, whose 18-year-old daughter Annalee died by suicide in 2020 after consuming content on TikTok and Instagram about depression, anxiety and suicide.

“When the legislators failed to vote and pushed it off onto some fake calendar date where they’re not even in session, to not even have accountability for where they stand – as a parent, it’s a slap in the face,” said Schott, who identifies as a pro-second amendment Republican. “It’s a slap in the face of my daughter, and to other kids that we’ve lost.”

Had the legislation passed, it would have required social media platforms like Facebook, Instagram and TikTok to investigate and take down accounts engaged in gun or drug sales or in the sexual exploitation or trafficking of minors. It also mandated the creation of direct hotlines to tech company personnel for law enforcement and a 72-hour response window for police requests, a higher burden than under current law.

Advertisement

Additionally, platforms would have had to report on how many minors used their services, how often they did so, for how long and how much those young users engaged with content that violated company policies. Several big tech firms registered official positions on the bill. According to Colorado lobbying disclosures, Meta’s longtime in-state lobby firm, Headwater Strategies, is registered as a proponent for changing the bill. Google and TikTok also hired lobbyists to oppose it.

‘[Legislators] chose big tech over protecting children and families.’ Illustration: Andrei Cojocaru/Guardian

“We’re just extremely disappointed,” said Kim Osterman, whose 18-year-old son Max died in 2021 after purchasing drugs spiked with fentanyl from a dealer he met on Snapchat. “[Legislators] chose big tech over protecting children and families.”

Protections for users of social media (SB 25-086) passed both chambers before being vetoed on 24 April by governor Jared Polis, a Democrat, who cited the bill’s potential to “erode privacy, freedom and innovation” as reasons for his veto. Colorado’s senate voted to override the veto on 25 April, yet those efforts fell apart on 28 April when the state house opted to delay the vote until after the legislative session ended, effectively blocking an override and keeping the bill alive.

The bill originally passed the senate by a 29-6 vote and the house by a 46-18 margin. On 25 April, the senate voted 29-6 to override Polis’s veto. Lawmakers anticipated that the house would take up the override later that day. At the time, according to those interviewed, there appeared to be enough bipartisan support to successfully overturn his veto.

“It was an easy vote for folks because of what we were voting on: protecting kids from social media companies,” said the senator Lindsey Daugherty, a Democrat and a co-sponsor of the bill. She said she urged house leadership to hold the vote Friday, but they declined: “The speaker knew the governor didn’t want us to do it on Friday, because they knew we would win.”

Advertisement

The parents who advocated for the bill attribute its failure to an unexpected, 11th-hour lobbying campaign by a far-right gun owners’ association in Colorado. Two state legislators as well as seven people involved in the legislative process echoed the parents’ claims.

An abnormal, last-minute campaign disrupts bipartisan consensus

Rocky Mountain Gun Owners (RMGO) cast the bill as an instrument of government censorship in texts and emails over the legislation’s provisions against “ghost guns”, untraceable weapons assembled from kits purchased online, which would have been prohibited.

RMGO launched massive social media and email campaigns urging its 200,000 members to contact their legislators to demand they vote against the bill. A source with knowledge of the workings of the Colorado state house described the gun group’s social media and text campaigns, encouraging Republicans voters to contact their legislators to demand opposition to the bill, as incessant.

“[Legislators] were getting countless calls and emails and being yelled at by activists. It was a full-fledged attack. There was a whole campaign saying: ‘This is a government censorship bill,’” they said.

The group’s actions were instrumental in a campaign to deter house Republicans from voting against the veto, resulting in the quashing of the bill, and unexpected from an organization that had been facing funding shortfalls, according to 10 people interviewed who were involved in the design of the bill and legislative process. Sources in the Colorado state house spoke to the Guardian on condition of anonymity out of fear of reprisal from RMGO.

Advertisement

The house had delayed the vote until 28 April, which allowed RMGO time to launch a campaign against the bill over the weekend. When lawmakers reconvened Monday, the house voted 51-13 to postpone the override until after the legislative session ended – effectively killing the effort.

‘It was a full-fledged attack. There was a whole campaign saying: “This is a government censorship bill.”’ Illustration: Andrei Cojocaru/Guardian

The gun activists’ mass text message campaign to registered Republican voters asserted the social media bill would constitute an attempt to “compel social media companies to conduct mass surveillance of content posted on their platforms” to search for violations of Colorado’s gun laws, describing the bill as an attack on first and second amendment rights, according to texts seen by the Guardian.

A familiar, aggressive foe

Founded in 1996, RMGO claims to have a membership of more than 200,000 activists. It is recognized as a far-right group that takes a “no-compromise” stance on gun rights. Dudley Brown, its founder and leader, also serves as the president of the National Association for Gun Rights, which positions itself further to the right than the National Rifle Association (NRA). RMGO has mounted criticism against the NRA for being too moderate and politically compromising. Critics have described RMGO as “bullies” and “extremists” because of its combative tactics, which include targeting and smearing Democrats and moderate Republicans. The group did not respond to requests for comment on its legislative efforts.

RMGO is a well-known presence at the Colorado capitol, typically opposing gun-control legislation. Daugherty described its typical campaign tactics as “scary”. She got rid of her X account after being singled out by the group over her work on a bill to ban assault weapons earlier this year.

“When we were running any of the gun bills at the capitol, they put my and some other legislators’ faces on their websites,” she said. A screenshot of a tweet from RMGO showed Daugherty with a red “traitor” stamp on her forehead.

Advertisement

The group’s campaign resulted in the spread of misinformation about the bill’s impact on gun ownership rights, sources involved in the legislative process said.

“The reason I was in support of the bill, and in support of the override, was it has to do with child trafficking and protecting the kids,” said the senator Rod Pelton, a Republican, who voted in favor of the veto override in the senate. “I just didn’t really buy into the whole second amendment argument.”

skip past newsletter promotion
Advertisement

The bill had enjoyed the backing of all 23 of Colorado’s district attorneys as well as bipartisan state house support.

RMGO’s late-stage opposition to the social media bill marked a break from its usual playbook. The group generally weighs in on legislation earlier in the process, according to eight sources, including two of the bill’s co-sponsors, Daugherty and the representative Andy Boesenecker.

“They really ramped up their efforts,” Boesenecker said. “It was curious to me that their opposition came in very late and appeared to be very well funded at the end.”

In recent years, RMGO group had been less active due to well-documented money problems that limited its ability to campaign on legislative issues. In a 2024 interview, the group’s leaders stated plainly that it struggled with funding. Daugherty believes RMGO would not have been able to embark on such an apparently costly outreach campaign without a major infusion of cash. A major text campaign like the one launched for SB-86 was beyond their financial capacity, she said. Others in Colorado politics agreed.

“Rocky Mountain Gun Owners have not been important or effective in probably at least four years in the legislature. They’ve had no money, and then all of a sudden they had tons of money, funding their rise back into power,” said Dawn Reinfeld, executive director of Blue Rising Together, a Colorado-based non-profit focused on youth rights.

Advertisement

The campaign made legislators feel threatened, with primary elections in their districts over the weekend, Daugherty said, particularly after accounts on X, formerly Twitter, bombarded the bill’s supporters.

‘The bill gave me hope that Avery’s legacy would be to help. So when it didn’t pass, it was pretty soul-crushing.’ Illustration: Andrei Cojocaru/Guardian

“Folks were worried about being primaried, mostly the Republicans, and that’s kind of what it came down to,” Daugherty said.

Aaron Ping’s 16-year-old son Avery died of an overdose in December after buying what he thought was ecstasy over Snapchat and receiving instead a substance laced with fentanyl. Ping saw the campaign against the bill as an intentional misconstrual of its intent.

“It was looking like the bill was going to pass, until all this misinformation about it taking away people’s gun rights because it addresses people buying illegal shadow guns off the internet,” he said.

Ping gave testimony in support of the bill in February before the first senate vote, alongside other bereaved parents, teens in recovery and a district attorney.

Advertisement

“The bill gave me hope that Avery’s legacy would be to help. So when it didn’t pass, it was pretty soul-crushing,” said Ping.

States take up online child-safety bills as federal lawmakers falter

Several states, including California, Maryland, Vermont, Minnesota, Hawaii, Illinois, New Mexico, South Carolina and Nevada, have introduced legislation aimed at improving online safety for children in the past two years. These efforts have faced strong resistance from the tech industry, including heavy lobbying and lawsuits.

Maryland became the first state to successfully pass a Kids Code bill, signing it into law in May 2024. But the victory may be short-lived: NetChoice, a tech industry coalition representing companies including Meta, Google and Amazon, quickly launched a legal challenge against the measure, which is ongoing.

Meanwhile, in the US federal government, the kids online safety act (Kosa), which had wound its way through the legislature for years, died in February when it failed to pass in the House after years of markups and votes. A revamped version of the bill was reintroduced to Congress on 14 May.

In California, a similar bill known as the age-appropriate design code act, modeled after UK legislation, was blocked in late 2023. A federal judge granted NetChoice a preliminary injunction, citing potential violations of the first amendment, which stopped the law from going into effect.

Advertisement

In the US, you can call or text the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline on 988, chat on 988lifeline.org, or text HOME to 741741 to connect with a crisis counselor. In the UK, the youth suicide charity Papyrus can be contacted on 0800 068 4141 or email pat@papyrus-uk.org, and in the UK and Ireland Samaritans can be contacted on freephone 116 123, or email jo@samaritans.org or jo@samaritans.ie. In Australia, the crisis support service Lifeline is 13 11 14. Other international helplines can be found at befrienders.org



Source link

Colorado

Where did Colorado’s wolves spend time in December? 

Published

on

Where did Colorado’s wolves spend time in December? 


While some of the wolves are part of Colorado’s four packs establishing territories in Pitkin, Jackson, Routt and Rio Blanco counties, others continue to search the landscape for mates and suitable food sources and habitat. 

Largely, however, wolf exploration of Colorado remains within similar northern counties in December, according to the latest wolf activity map shared by Colorado Parks and Wildlife on Dec. 23. 

The map — which shows the watersheds where the state’s collared gray wolves were located between Nov. 25 and Dec. 19 — shows that wolves continue to be most active in the northwest, while  also pushing into watersheds to the south and east. 



While the map continues to show activity in some Front Range area watersheds within Larimer, Denver, Boulder and Jefferson counties, the agency reported that “no wolves have crossed I-25 or spent time near urban centers.” 

Advertisement

If a watershed is highlighted, it means that at least one GPS point from one wolf was recorded in that watershed during the 30 days. GPS points are recorded every four hours or so. The latest map also shows activity in Routt, Rio Blanco, Eagle, Jackson, Larimer, Grand, Summit, Gilpin, Clear Creek, Park, Lake, Chaffee, Gunnison, Garfield, Saguache, Rio Grande and Conejos counties.   



While wolves have been exploring southern watersheds for months, Colorado saw its first wolf enter New Mexico and be returned by the southwestern state’s wildlife agency in December. Colorado has an agreement with Utah, New Mexico and Arizona in which any gray wolves from Colorado that enter these three states can be captured and returned to Parks and Wildlife. 

According to Parks and Wildlife, the male gray wolf was among those born to the Copper Creek pack in 2024 and dispersed from the pack in the fall. Dispersal is common for young wolves as they leave their birth pack, attempt to make it on their own and search for a mate. The animal was released in Grand County — a decision that sparked concerns from state and local elected officials as well as some wildlife advocates — in a location reportedly distanced from livestock and near to an unpaired female wolf as well as prey populations.  

The watershed map shows that there was wolf activity in Conejos County along the New Mexico state border. It also shows wolf activity brushing up against the Wyoming border. Parks and Wildlife does not have an agreement with its northern neighbor. Instead, wolves that enter Wyoming lose their protections as an endangered species and can be hunted in the vast majority of the state. Three of Colorado’s reintroduced wolves have died after going north. 

Colorado is nearly two years into its reintroduction of gray wolves, releasing a total of 25 wolves. Four packs had pups this year, but Parks and Wildlife has not released minimum counts of new wolf pups for all the packs. It says it will release the count in its annual wolf report, released each spring. Eleven wolf deaths have been confirmed. 
While the agency was looking to conduct its third year of wolf releases in the southwest this winter, Parks and Wildlife has yet to secure a source of wolves. The agency had planned to return to British Columbia; however, the federal government, under a new director, said it could no longer import the wolves from outside the country.

Advertisement





Source link

Continue Reading

Colorado

Opinion: Colorado must invest in evidence-based policies to prevent harm from substances, not costly criminalization

Published

on

Opinion: Colorado must invest in evidence-based policies to prevent harm from substances, not costly criminalization


Across the nation, the opioid epidemic has wreaked havoc on the health and lives of far too many, and Colorado is no exception. According to Mental Health America, Colorado ranks fourth and seventh in the country for adults and youth with substance use disorders, respectively. That means thousands of our friends, neighbors and loved ones are living with addiction and can’t get the help they need. Overdose deaths in Colorado have risen sharply since 2019, largely due to the proliferation of fentanyl, with 1,603 deaths in 2024 alone, according to the state. 

It’s a public health crisis, and one we’re now at risk of making even worse. Last month, supporters turned in signatures to send Initiative #85 to the 2026 ballot, a measure that would increase criminal penalties for fentanyl crimes. We feel this threatens to drag us backward toward the failed policies and practices of the past rather than working toward a healthier future.

At the same time, state and federal funding for treatment and prevention is drying up. The recently passed federal spending bill HR1 will mean devastating changes to Medicaid, gutting the single most important source of funding for substance use treatment in the country. For the past several years, as more states have expanded Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act, Medicaid has emerged as the leading source of coverage for addiction treatment in the nation. 

A recent Brookings study found that nearly 90% of treatment for opioid addiction is paid for, at least in part, by Medicaid. These cuts will leave our already strained systems unable to meet the growing demand, particularly for low-income and disabled individuals who will have fewer treatment options and more barriers to care. 

Advertisement

Meanwhile, Colorado faced a $1.2 billion budget shortfall this year, and even more deficits are on the horizon for 2026. The state is stuck in a cycle of annual budget shortfalls of roughly $1 billion, making it increasingly difficult to cover existing programs and skyrocketing Medicaid costs. That means fewer resources to fill in federal funding gaps, a fraying behavioral health safety net, and an increasingly stressed population that is highly vulnerable to substance use and harm. 

Given this grim picture, it’s never been more critical to prioritize smart, effective policy to combat the overdose crisis. We should be focusing our scarce funding on evidence-based substance use prevention, treatment and recovery support, not costly, ineffective drug war criminalization policies that are historically discriminatory in their implementation and proven to fail. 

Mitigating and reversing the drug addiction crisis in Colorado and across the nation is complex and has to involve multiple strategies working in tandem to decrease supply and demand. While increasing criminal penalties related to drug addiction among individuals may seem like a tough-on-crime approach, it has not and will not resolve the drug addiction crisis nor dissolve the supply or the demand for illicit drugs.

Decades of data show that criminalizing substance users doesn’t reduce addiction or overdose. Recently, researchers at the University of Colorado Anschutz found the following: “Intensified drug enforcement laws have little deterrent effect on substance use and may worsen health outcomes. Fear of being arrested fosters riskier substance use behaviors and increased overdose risk. Incarceration and the subsequent stigma experienced by people with substance use disorder work in tandem to create barriers for treatment access and worsen mental health, creating a structurally reinforced cycle of isolation.” 

The research is clear. Harsh penalties haven’t protected our communities from the dangers of fentanyl. They have only compounded harm and pushed people deeper into the shadows, making it harder to seek help, and saddling individuals with felony records that create lifelong barriers to employment, housing, and recovery. 

Advertisement

Policies like the proposed 2026 ballot measure to increase felony charges for drug possession are not just misguided — they cost taxpayer dollars. They further overburden law enforcement agencies, flood jails, courtrooms and prisons that are already beyond their capacity, and ultimately do nothing to address the core of the opioid epidemic.

Instead of doubling down on punishing people who use substances, we need to expand what works: prevention programs in schools and communities, access to harm reduction tools like naloxone, and a robust continuum of care that includes outpatient and residential treatment. We need more support for peer recovery professionals, more public education and more investment in what keeps people healthy, which includes housing, food security and opportunities for connection. We need to act together, with assertive intelligence, to disrupt the black market drug trafficking that is the enemy of the people.

The opioid crisis is a public health crisis and demands a public health response. Colorado has the knowledge, data and tools to build a more effective and compassionate system. But we cannot do it if we are bleeding out resources to punitive policies that fail the people they claim to help.

Let’s not go backward. Let’s invest in health and safety and give Coloradans a real chance at recovery.

Vincent Atchity, of Denver, is the president and CEO of Mental Health Colorado.

Advertisement

José Esquibel, of Jefferson County, is the former vice chair of the Colorado Substance Abuse Trend and Response Task Force.


The Colorado Sun is a nonpartisan news organization, and the opinions of columnists and editorial writers do not reflect the opinions of the newsroom. Read our ethics policy for more on The Sun’s opinion policy. Learn how to submit a column. Reach the opinion editor at opinion@coloradosun.com.

Follow Colorado Sun Opinion on Facebook.



Source link

Continue Reading

Colorado

Bright Leaf helps grandparents raising grandkids in Colorado as they face holiday hardships

Published

on

Bright Leaf helps grandparents raising grandkids in Colorado as they face holiday hardships


At a kitchen table in Arvada, backpacks and homework papers take over. It’s a common sight for Carla Aguilar, but one she never expected to repeat.

“I thought I was all done raising kids, you know?” Aguilar said.

Carla Aguilar and her 8-year-old granddaughter, Athena.

Advertisement

CBS


For more than a decade, Aguilar has been raising her two granddaughters, Ava and Athena. Ava, 12, was too shy to appear on camera, but 8-year-old Athena proudly showed how her grandmother helps her learn.

“She helps me read,” Athena said. “She taught me how to write correctly.”

Aguilar, 55, is disabled and lives on a fixed income. She says every day is a balancing act, and this time of year is challenging.

“Holidays are hard, so we’re kind of dealing with that right now,” she said.

Advertisement

Aguilar’s story is far from unique. According to the latest data from the American Society on Aging and the U.S. Census Bureau, more than 2 million grandparents nationwide are primary caregivers for their grandchildren. In Colorado, more than 36,000 families face the same reality, often with limited financial resources and little support.

carla.png

Carla Aguilar

CBS


“Most of these seniors are on fixed income, social security, disability, and you can’t really stretch that too far in Colorado these days,” said Steve Olguin, executive director of Bright Leaf, a nonprofit that helps older adults across the state.

Bright Leaf started as a small community group and now provides free home repairs, food assistance, and other essentials to seniors statewide. Its newest initiative, GrandCare Alliance, focuses on grandparents raising grandkids — offering help with school costs, activity fees, and holiday wish lists.

Advertisement

“We’re just trying to help out so it’s not as rough for them,” Olguin said.

For Aguilar, that support is a lifeline. She says her granddaughters are her world, and she’ll never stop fighting for them.

“They’re my heart, my soul, everything,” Aguilar said. “I will take care of them until my last breath.”

steve-olguin.png

Steve Olguin, executive director of Bright Leaf.

CBS

Advertisement


Bright Leaf is asking for the community’s help in supporting the GrandCare Alliance and its other services. Those who want more information on how to volunteer and donate can visit their website. 



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending