Joey BunchJoey BunchMarch 10, 20185min392
Friday morning Colorado Springs Rep. Larry Liston sauntered to the speaker’s well in the House. Under the gold dome, he put some good news on the official record — at least good news to the right side of the chamber. “I just can’t help myself,” said the Republican lawmaker with an aw-shucks shrug, lifting his palms […]

This content is only available to subscribers.

Login or Subscribe


Joey BunchJoey BunchFebruary 16, 20185min359

A Republican going before the House State, Veterans, and Military Affairs Committee with any legislation — let alone a  gun bill — doesn’t usually leave happy. They don’t call it the kill committee for nothing, and Democrats have a 6-3 supermajority.

But Rep. Larry Liston, a Republican from Colorado Springs, pulled off that rare feat with rare compromise on issues pertaining to guns. He had the help of a Democratic co-sponsor, Rep. Donald Valdez of La Jara.

Even a Republican running for attorney general, George Brauchler, thinks the legislation is part of a bigger conversation on guns and public safety in Colorado.

House Bill 1077 would increase penalties for burglars who take guns, ammunition or accessories from a class 4 to a class 3 felony. The bill passed its first hearing in the Democrat-led House on a 7-2 vote. It heads next to the appropriations committee, before it can go to the full House for a floor deliberation and votes. Then it must survive a narrowly split Senate with a GOP majority.

In other words, the cold war on gun rights vs. public safety is a long way from over, even for this bill. Two Democrats voted against the bill in committee: Reps. Jovan Melton of Denver and Adrienne Benavidez of Commerce City.

Liston recounted a series of smash-and-grab burglaries at dozens of Colorado gun stores and pawn shops last year when burglars executed elaborate gun thefts by driving stolen vehicles through the front of stores, gathering as much as they could and taking off in another vehicle.

“As a strong supporter of our Second Amendment rights I became alarmed that these firearms could be sold on the black market and could be used against our citizens or our law enforcement officers, whom we all support,” he said.

Liston said his bill isn’t about being for or against guns, but it’s a “solidly anti-crime bill.”

This is a fairly common crime. Bill analysts founds that from January 2015 to January 2018, 4,043 people were sentenced for committing second-degree burglary. Researchers estimated that the extra prison time could cost taxpayers an extra $1.4 million over the first five years.

Tom Sullivan, whose son Alex was killed in the Aurora theater shooting in 2012, said he hoped the legislation could be common ground to build on to address gun violence.

“This is the beginning I hope of a conversation about something we can do to prevent the proliferation of gun violence here in our community and across the country,” he said.

Sullivan ran unsuccessfully for the state Senate as a Democrat in Arapahoe County in 2016.

Another supporter of the bill is Brauchler, the district attorney for Arapahoe, Douglas, Elbert and Lincoln counties. He prosecuted Aurora theater gunman James Holmes.

“It’s the right step to take,” he said. “It’s not the only step we might end up having to take, and I agree with Mr. Sullivan, it’s part of a bigger conversation.”

He added, “What I like about this bill is it gives me as a prosecutor another tool in my toolbox to try to distinguish between someone who might steal a laptop and someone who might steal something that could be used to take another person’s life or commit another crime down the road.”

Brauchler said those who steal guns have a clear intentions. He has no problems singling out guns as a particularly dangerous kind of weapon.

“I think for stealing knives, there might be 100 million uses for knives that aren’t quite as risky as the potential uses for a firearm,” he told the committee. “And I think we’re at a place where what we’re saying is if you’re breaking into a gun shop or a pawn shop to steal guns it’s probably not to go duck hunting.”


Joey BunchJoey BunchFebruary 7, 20188min737

A Democrat-led House committee gave another celebrated approval — along party lines — for a proposed family and medical leave insurance program for Colorado.

Democrats passed a leave bill out of the House last year (without a single GOP) vote last year, and it was quickly squashed by the Republican majority in the Senate, at is it’s likely to again this year.

Employees would be required pay in less than 1 percent of their salaries annually to be insured against having to take time off to take care of a family member for up to 12 weeks. To create a broad enough pool to keep costs low, everyone would have to pay in, even if even if their employer already offers medical leave.

The program would increase labor force participation, especially for women who make up most household breadwinners. For young families, family leave gives mothers time to heal and bond with their child, as well breastfeed, which has benefits, witnesses told the committee.

Leave also could ultimately decrease the number of people forced leave the workforce or rely on taxpayer-supported programs, including putting loved ones in nursing homes, proponents said Tuesday.

House Democrats designated it as their top priority and made it the first bill introduced in the chamber this session, House Bill 1001. Such measures are a high-priority for Democrats nationally to sustain or build on the  #MeToo momentum of female and lower-income voters this fall, in response to Republican leadership in Washington.

One of the bill’s sponsors is Rep. Faith Winter of Westminster, who is challenging Republican incumbent Sen. Beth Martinez Humenik of Thornton in the north metro district that could, ultimately, decide whether the GOP retains its one-seat majority in the upper chamber. Democrats have a nine-seat edge in the House. Winter carried the bill last year, as well.

Near the end of the four-hour hearing Tuesday, committee member Alec Garnett, D-Denver, said he wished a solution was a bipartisan goal, short of changing the majorities in the next election.

“I wish this wasn’t partisan,” he said. “I wish we didn’t have to wait for a moment in time where we reshuffle the board and see if this can pass next year.”

Rep. Lang Sias, R-Arvada, said there are bipartisan ideas, perhaps that could be considered this session, but they do not create “a government behemoth” insurance program. Rep. Yeulin Willett, R-Grand Junction, said lots of small businesses already offer leave programs. He preferred that such an individualized approach for busienesses, “rather than the government mandating a one-size-fits-all program.”

Colorado Democrats, however, have at least one Republican in their corner. President Trump called for a federal program (paid for by the government) in his State of the Union address last week. He called it “an investment in America’s working families.”

If a federal program came about, the state program would unwind.

“I would be happy to have that problem,” another of the Colorado bill’s Democratic sponsors, Rep. Matt Gray, D-Broomfield, told the committee.

Chambers of commerce and most other business groups oppose the bill, said it would make Colorado less attractive to employers. Small businesses would face a new level of record keeping and regulatory compliance, businesses representatives told the committee.

Loren Furman, the senior vice president of the Colorado Association of Commerce and Industry, the state’s chamber of commerce, said a survey of members found many different kinds of leave programs appropriate for each business and its employees.

“Each employee’s situation is going to be different,” she said. “The best solution we see is working with those employees and seeing how we can meet those needs, based on the business that they operate (in).”

Small businesses would struggle to find skilled temporary employees for three months who would expect to have a job with the employee on leave returns, Furman. That labor force might not be available, and that could have a detrimental impact on some small companies, she warned.

Five states have implemented similar insurance programs: New York, New Jersey, Rhode Island, California and Washington, as well as the District of Columbia.

Rep. Larry Liston, R-Colorado Springs, pointed to an analysis by a conservative economist showing Colorado with a much more attractive job market than some of those states.

“Why would Colorado want to move in the direction of New York and New Jersey, when this would hurt the very people it’s meant to help” if there are fewer jobs, he said. “Why would we want to move toward the bottom rather than stay near the top?”

Winter argued that the employee-funded program is good for businesses, because it retains good employees who can return to work rather than quit to take care of a family member.

The legislation is co-sponsored by Sens. Rhonda Fields of Aurora and Kerry Donovan of Vail.

Donovan told a lunchtime rally for the bill on the Capitol steps that in the rural communities in the seven mountain counties she represents, if a person has to leave a job for a temporary family priority such as an infant or a sick family member, returning to the workforce is no guarantee, and it might mean a family has to move away to find work.

“It isn’t always an option to find another employment opportunity in a small town,” she said. “Having lost a job means you’re moving to a different community, and the impact that has on a family is self-explanatory.”

Fields promised a fight for the bill looming in the GOP-led Senate.

“I am ready to take this bill on in the state Senate,” she said to cheers at the rally. “When it comes us (Democrats) we’re going to fight for it. There are people in the building behind me who do not want to see this bill pass. They don’t want to provide benefits of paid family leave insurance to all people who live in the state of Colorado. But I do. They need to hear from us.”