SSA is now a shill for Trump. Trust nothing. I woke Friday morning to an email from the Social Security Administration bragging about Donald Trump’s “big, beautiful bill” and how it was advantageous to me as a Social Security recipient. I verified this was actually […]
LettersOwning Pride: Overcoming oppression and being true selves Re: “Keep government out of Pride, whether it’s Trump or Biden,” June 29 commentary Had I grown up with a legion of Krista Kafers as my parents and neighbors and teachers and schoolmates and doctors and shopkeepers, […]
LettersI fear for my future self. When I was a teen, a suicide attempt put me in the hospital. I recovered from the pill overdose and got the treatment I needed to manage depression, a condition that has never ceased to be my shadow. It, […]
ColumnistsFor countless students, especially those from low- and middle-income backgrounds, small liberal arts colleges offer more than an education — they serve as the launchpad to a lifetime of opportunity. These institutions, here in Colorado and across the country, open doors to academic rigor, financial […]
ColumnistsFor countless students, especially those from low- and middle-income backgrounds, small liberal arts colleges offer more than an education — they serve as the launchpad to a lifetime of opportunity. These institutions, here in Colorado and across the country, open doors to academic rigor, financial aid, and lifelong networks that would otherwise be out of reach.
That’s why Congress’s proposed expansion of the federal endowment tax is so troubling. This policy risks undermining the very resources that make these transformative experiences possible, threatening access and affordability at schools that depend on their endowments to support students most in need.
We both have direct small college experience and strong Colorado ties: Kyle graduated from Colorado College in Colorado Springs, and Greg is originally from Denver and returned to the area after attending DePauw University in Indiana. We both now chair the boards of trustees for our respective schools, so we know what’s at stake.
Unlike large universities, small liberal arts colleges like ours and dozens of others across the country rely on donor-funded endowments as essential financial resources. These funds directly support financial aid, faculty salaries, academic programs, and community partnerships. At institutions like Colorado College and DePauw, endowment income typically covers a larger portion of operating budgets – for some, up to 50% — compared to just 15% at larger schools.
For students, endowments support generous scholarships that enable graduates to complete their degrees with manageable levels of student loans. It means that schools are able to provide opportunities that many students — especially those from lower-income families — might never otherwise have. At Colorado College, approximately 83% of our students from Colorado receive financial aid, and 90% of all DePauw students receive some financial aid.
These scholarships are not luxuries. They are the mechanisms by which our institutions create upward mobility, develop future leaders, and build strong communities where they employ faculty and staff. They are how we educate students not just for their first jobs, but for a lifetime of learning, leading, and adapting to a rapidly changing world.
We know this because we both have lived it.
For Kyle, receiving financial aid to attend Colorado College led to a transformative experience that reshaped his future. The college’s distinctive academic environment and close-knit community nurtured intellectual growth as well as personal confidence and a lifelong sense of purpose. Crucially, it connected him to professional networks, mentors, and social capital.
For Greg, strong academic programs, small class sizes, faculty mentorship, and Division III athletics gave him the tools and confidence to thrive. Starting with foundational internships during college and continuing into a fulfilling career, he brought the value of that education back to the Denver community where he co-founded an investment firm.
The proposed endowment tax hike threatens this important educational ecosystem. It’s a tax not just on institutions but on opportunity itself. It would harm the very students federal education policy should be helping most, leading to fewer scholarships, fewer faculty positions, and fewer programs that impact college campus communities.
At a time when higher education is under enormous pressure to deliver value, accessibility, and flexibility, Congress should be supporting models that do exactly that rather than putting them at risk. Small colleges already operate more efficiently than their public counterparts — delivering lower taxpayer cost per student, higher four-year graduation rates, and better long-term earnings for graduates. These are institutions that work.
Congress is still considering this proposed tax increase, but it’s not too late to prevent this mistake. We urge Colorado’s congressional delegation and their colleagues in states across the country to protect small colleges from this tax increase. It doesn’t just hurt the schools. It hurts the students, communities, and the nation they are helping to build.
Kyle Samuel is a graduate of Colorado College in Colorado Springs and chairs the college’s Board of Trustees. Greg Sissel is a Denver resident and chairs the Board of Trustees for DePauw University in Indiana.
When I visited Bryce Canyon National Park recently, the shared paths were crowded with electric motorcycles. They say they are e-bikes: If they can rip uphill at 20 miles per hour without pedaling, I think of them as motorcycles. E-bikes can be class 1, 2, […]
ColumnistsWhen I visited Bryce Canyon National Park recently, the shared paths were crowded with electric motorcycles. They say they are e-bikes: If they can rip uphill at 20 miles per hour without pedaling, I think of them as motorcycles.
E-bikes can be class 1, 2, or 3. Class 1 provides assistance when the pedals are turned. Class 2 has a throttle that can propel the bike without pedaling. Both have a top speed of 20 mph. Class 3 bikes, also pedal-assisted, have a maximum speed of 28 mph. Only class 1 and 3 are allowed in national parks.
Friends with e-bikes tell me they like them because the pedal assistance means they can ride farther with less effort, even uphill. The bikes keep them active outdoors. I ride my bike for exercise. If I ride 12 miles on what I consider a real bike instead of
20 mph on an e-bike, we probably get the same workout.
At the Grand Canyon, by the end of the day the rim road is littered with abandoned rental e-bikes that ran out of juice. Rather than pedal a heavy bike with a useless battery, riders simply leave them on the side of the road for the rental company to retrieve. On a recent catered mountain bike ride, one of the participants rented an e-bike so she could keep up with her husband. But the guides had to spend many hours recharging the bike before they could leave. I wonder just how practical it would have been on a multi-day trip.
I recently read a plaintive screed from a mountain biker with a moral dilemma. He has a coterie of buddies who ride. When one of them had knee surgery, that person bought an e-bike so he would not hold everyone up. The group kept riding on trails where e-bikes are banned, figuring that with 10 real riders and one e-bike they were OK.
Over the course of time, Mr. E-bike started leaving the others behind, so they felt obligated to buy their own e-bikes while still poaching the non-e-bike trails. Was it now immoral, he wondered, because they were all riding illegally? He was advised to let his conscience be his guide.
Horses erode trails worse than bikes do, and bikes wear a trail down more than hikers. If the rationale for riding an e-bike is that it allows one to go farther, that is more trail to be worn down. E-bikes pollute less than gasoline motorcycles. However, a human-powered bike doesn’t pollute at all—unless one counts heavy breathing.
Outdoor enthusiasts are already vying for increased access to wild lands. ATV and 4X4 owners in Utah are incensed that the BLM plans to close certain roads to them and allow (gasp) mountain bikers to have sway.
On the other hand, mountain bikers are pressuring managers of designated wilderness to allow them access to these heretofore closed trails. E-bikers are upset that many trails are still open only to analog bikes.
It’s a slippery slope. When a local area was declared a wilderness, many residents complained that now they could no longer visit. “I have bad knees: I need my ATV.” But if I cannot afford an ATV, then I need a more developed road to visit in my 4-
wheel drive. If I cannot afford a 4X4, pave the road so I can drive it in my car.
In China, there is now a plan to build an escalator to the top of a mountain so that “everyone can enjoy the view.” Where is it written that everyone must be able to go everywhere by any means necessary?
A recent article in an outdoor magazine predicts that e-mountain bikes are the wave of the future, and bicycle vendors expect e-bikes to soon outsell analog bikes. If I stick with my must-pedal bike, I guess I will be considered a Luddite.
I do not suppose I really want e-bike riders to bow to me as they go by because I am doing all the pedaling myself. I would, however, appreciate it if they would not smirk as they pass. On the other hand, I guess I could refrain from yelling: “At least pretend to pedal!”
Marjorie ‘Slim’ Woodruff is a contributor to Writers on the Range, an independent nonprofit dedicated to spurring lively conversation about the West. She is an educator at Grand Canyon and doesn’t mind picking fights.
What the? A masked man on a unicycle has been stealing Pride flags in Longmont. A cursory news search revealed similar thefts in Fort Collins, Pennsylvania, and Oklahoma sans unicycle. Although I don’t recognize Pride Month, these thefts anger me. The thieves aren’t just stealing; […]
ColumnistsWhat the? A masked man on a unicycle has been stealing Pride flags in Longmont. A cursory news search revealed similar thefts in Fort Collins, Pennsylvania, and Oklahoma sans unicycle. Although I don’t recognize Pride Month, these thefts anger me. The thieves aren’t just stealing; they are attempting to silence those who do celebrate.
Meanwhile, CNN reported that consumer brands have scaled back Pride Month promotions in fear of consumer boycotts and reprisal from the Trump administration, given its opposition to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) efforts. There is nothing wrong with the former — customers can buy or not buy from whom they please — but the latter is unacceptable.
Governments should neither support nor oppose Pride month activities. That means not arbitrarily denying promoters parade permits, which occasionally happens, or hosting government-sponsored celebrations like President Joe Biden did. The purpose of government is to protect the life, liberty, and property of its citizens, not to weigh in on cultural conflicts one way or the other.
Individuals should be able to participate or abstain without pressure or harassment from government or other individuals.
Which sums up my entire feelings about Pride — the nationwide effort to celebrate the LGBTQ+ community every June, that culminated in a parade, 5K and festival in Denver this weekend. I don’t endorse the movement but support the right of others to do so.
But don’t you have any gay friends? No, actually. I have plenty of friends who are attracted to the same sex, but they’re not my “gay friends.” How someone identifies sexually means nothing to me unless I wish to date him.
Besides, I’ve known people who were straight and are now gay, and people who were gay and are now straight, people who are living as the opposite sex and people who have “de-transitioned” back to their biological sex. What category should I put them in? The plus?
Don’t your gay and trans-identifying friends disagree with you about politics and religion? Probably. I have yet to meet anyone who agrees with me on everything. Fortunately, there are 7,852 potential topics of discussion, so it’s easy to steer clear of the controversial. But if we do decide to discuss sensitive issues, we can do it with respect.
Don’t you want people to feel pride in who they are? Not necessarily. Frankly, I find the word “pride” troublesome. Pride can indicate personal satisfaction in an achievement. I take pride in my gardens and gardening ability, for example. Or it can mean confidence in an identity, especially one that feels assailed. Back in college, my girlfriends and I often said “I’m proud to be a woman” to signify defiance against gender stereotyping. Right after September 11, Lee Greenwood’s song about being proud to be an American got more radio play than when it was released in 1984. We were all singing it.
It’s understandable that people who feel unaccepted because of their sexuality use the word “pride” in this way. The trouble with identitarian usage, however, is that only some people are allowed to apply it that way. One can be proud to be a woman but not a man, proud to be Black or Hispanic but not white, proud to be gay but not straight.
For this reason, I’ve stopped using the words “proud” or “pride” and adopted more inclusive terms regarding group identity. I do not say I’m proud to be a woman or American. Rather, I say I love being a woman, and I’m grateful to be an American. My nationality and sex are attributes and not a matter of pride since I have not earned them. They contribute to but do not make me the unique person I am. I am a category of one. That goes for everyone else.
Krista L. Kafer is a Sunday Denver Post columnist. Follow her on Twitter: @kristakafer.
Sign up for Sound Off to get a weekly roundup of our columns, editorials and more.
To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.
The apprehension and two-week detention of Caroline Dias Goncalves was a waste of federal resources and a violation of human decency. Goncalves, a nursing student from the University of Utah, has not been charged with any crime, and because the activities of Trump’s immigration force […]
OpinionThe apprehension and two-week detention of Caroline Dias Goncalves was a waste of federal resources and a violation of human decency.
Goncalves, a nursing student from the University of Utah, has not been charged with any crime, and because the activities of Trump’s immigration force are shrouded in secrecy, it is unclear whether she has any sort of immigration action pending either.
We do, however, have video of her initial contact with law enforcement because police officers in Colorado are required to wear and use body cameras.
The teen was pulled over on Interstate 70 as she drove through Grand Junction on her way to Denver. The Mesa County Sheriff’s deputy asked her to come sit in his car with him while he looked up her registration and insurance information, both of which were outdated. But before he let her go back to her car, he asked about her accent and where she was from. We hear absolutely zero accent on the video. “Born and raised or no?” he asked after she replied Utah. She explains she was born in Brazil.
The deputy let her off with a warning but then texted all of her information to federal agents on an encrypted Signal chat. Officials picked her up a short time later and brought her to Aurora, where she was held without due process for two weeks until a judge let her out on bail.
“And the moment they realized I spoke English, I saw a change,” Goncalves said in a statement issued. “Suddenly, I was treated better than others who didn’t speak English. That broke my heart. Because no one deserves to be treated like that. Not in a country that I’ve called home since I was 7 years old and is all I’ve ever known.”
In President Donald Trump’s America an undetectable accent and brown skin is enough to get an out-of-state teenager detained in one city, extradited across state without any hearing or due process, held for two weeks in a detention center full of criminals awaiting deportation, fed mushy food, and then let go without any public explanation or transparency.
We don’t know Gonclaves’ exact immigration status. According to The Denver Post and the Salt Lake City Tribune, she came as a child with her family on a tourist visa. That would mean she entered the United States sometime around 2013. Given that approximate date, she would not qualify for Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, but her parents had filed for asylum, which almost always carries dependent children, too.
One thing is clear: Trump has ordered Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials to focus their time and efforts not on criminals who should be deported, but on people like Gonclaves, who are contributing members of our society that make America stronger. He’s come up with arbitrary quotas that we are certain drive this overly aggressive targeting of good people.
The Washington Post reported concerning data this week – since Trump’s inauguration, the percentage of detained individuals who are convicted or accused criminals has dropped. That means the Trump administration is amping up its efforts to deport people like Gonclaves, who are going to school or working hard.
Since Trump took the White House, an incredible 23% of those detained are noncriminals. In comparison between 2019 and January 2025, the average was 7%. That is made more concerning because the percentage increase occurred even as the total number of detainments increased. More good people than ever are getting snatched by ICE, often with no due process for several weeks – long enough for someone to lose a job, fail a class or miss an important life event like a family member’s wedding or the birth of a child.
The Washington Post’s columnist Philip Bump extrapolated that the detention of noncriminals had jumped 900% under Trump. These detentions and pending deportations are not making anyone safer. Indeed, we are less safe when Americans of color or who have accents are afraid of everyday interactions with police.
The deputy in Mesa County had no business asking Gonclaves about her nationality and likely violated a state law by forwarding the information to federal officials.
Colorado law enforcement should stay the course and not assist this administration’s cruel and ineffective pursuit of noncriminals for deportation.
Sign up for Sound Off to get a weekly roundup of our columns, editorials and more.
To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.
Calling for Trump protests ‘dangerous’ and met with pessimism Re: “A common cause: What would it actually take to force Trump to resign?” June 22 commentary Using the example of a protest in Puerto Rico (with a population less than 1% of the U.S. total), […]
OpinionRe: “A common cause: What would it actually take to force Trump to resign?” June 22 commentary
Using the example of a protest in Puerto Rico (with a population less than 1% of the U.S. total), where more than 1 million people protested for days and nights, banging “pots and pans” over what they felt were “disgusting messages,” is a poor example to use when calling for millions of Americans to protest over illegal migrant rights in our country.
That aside, as a moderate independent voter, I find it disturbing that a major newspaper editor would call a sitting president “a danger to our economy, a threat to our freedoms, an ally to our enemies and a constant source of lies and misinformation.” That language, combined with the intent to incite millions of Americans to take to the streets by calling for a protest over a controversial political position (that millions of conservatives support), is dangerous given the extremely polarized politics we have today.
One may want, and even call for, a “peaceful” protest, but realistically we cannot expect millions of Donald Trump supporters, who voted him into office, to idly stand by and not counter-protest. Riots, destruction, injuries, and deaths would seem inevitable. And, at the end of the day, does anyone really believe that a protest, such as Megan Schrader calls for, would actually convince Trump to resign?
Jim Malec, Roxborough Park
I read the article Sunday about what it might take to peacefully depose President Donald Trump. Finding a “core value” right now in the United States would be very difficult. Using Puerto Rico’s demonstrations doesn’t seen to rise to the level we need. It is a small island with nothing like the population of the mainland United States.
A small island could easily find core values and share them among one another. They are small. We are large.
Do you think book burning would do it? No, we’ve already had that. How about bodily autonomy? Nope, we had it and didn’t like it. First and Fifth Amendment rights are gone, folks. Voting rights are being erroded. How about a full-blown concentration camp? Been there, done that at Amache in Colorado during WWII. Perhaps gas chambers? What stopped the Nazis from destroying Europe? The violent intervention of the U.S. armed forces. What kept the Confederate states from forming their own country? The violent Civil War fought to keep our nation whole.
I don’t think we have any core values any longer. I’m definitely not advocating for another civil war, but I’m not sure banging drums and pans outside Mar-a-lago is going to solve our problem. Our democracy is great, but can we keep it?
Betty Green, Colorado Springs
“No King’s Day” was a representation of liberals as self-absorbed, ideological and self-deluded. Liberals who suck at the teat of a pathetic liberal mouthpiece like The Denver Post are nothing more than useful idiots to the left ideology. They’ve been indoctrinated by left-leaning schools, woke companies and liberal news outlets. Donald Trump a king? Give me a break. Trump is the only thing keeping this country from descending into a socialistic, pathetic shadow of itself.
Thank you, Jack, from Aurora, and Kay, from Denver. The military parade celebrating our armed forces was awesome, and the “No Kings” protests were pathetic.
Scott Gardner, Aurora
Just a correction: the author wrote, “a man who took office with the support of a majority of American voters…”
In fact, Trump did not win with a majority of the votes. Less than 50% of the voters marked his name on the ballot. More people voted for someone else than voted for Trump, by about 500,000 votes.
Fred Waiss, Prairie du Chien, Wis.
Re: “Readers question coverage of “No Kings” protests and Trump’s parade celebrating Army,” June 22 letters to the editor
After reading the Open Forum letters criticizing The Post for its coverage of the military parade and the “No Kings” protests, I think you should be proud of your reporting. Ticking off both sides of this issue means you’re doing something right.
Steve Titus, Boulder
Re: “Owner, now sober, says Rox need fresh eyes,” June 22 sports story
Patrick Saunders just anchored himself as the best sports journalist in the Rocky Mountain region with his news-breaking article and interviews with Charlie and Dick Monfort. Not only did Saunders obtain an interview with the Monforts — which no one else has done during this abysmal Rockies’ season — but he presented the information with journalistic integrity, objectivity, and honesty.
It is rather unfortunate that Saunders has been relegated to doing most of the beat coverage of the Rockies during this stretch of bad baseball, but his reporting and weekly analysis is always spot-on while never pulling punches, as it were. With no quarter to rant on with the opinion columnists, Saunders has been the one voice covering the team that is most reliable, unbiased, yet critically minded about the Rockies’ shortcomings. There is no other local or regional journalist who provides Rockies fans with insight, information, and analysis like Patrick Saunders.
While other local publications often run Associated Press coverage of Rockies games, Saunders provides fans with hometown flavor — despite often being unable to cover road games in person.
What Patrick Saunders has done with his latest piece is award-winning journalism. It represents the best of what he does amidst the troubled times of the team he covers. Kudos to Patrick Saunders. Hopefully, the dreadful baseball he covers does not prompt him to switch to another sport. Rockies fans and the Rocky Mountain Region need him on the baseball beat.
Dan Sage, Centennial
If, indeed, it is difficult to play in Denver because of the altitude, then we should win every home game. The visiting teams do not train here, nor are they used to the mile-high issues.
Shirley Schley, Denver
Re: “Tax bill: Report: 6 rural hospitals in state could close,” June 22 news story
In her article, writer Meg Wingerter addressed the appalling possibility of Colorado losing six rural hospitals should the Republicans’ so-called “One Big Beautiful Bill” be approved as is by the Senate. She did an excellent job explaining how this would impact thousands of Coloradans. She did not mention that all of Colorado’s Republican congressional representatives voted “Yes” on this bill — demonstrating their willingness to rip health care from the most vulnerable and their utter disregard about the impact of doing this — oh, and add billions of dollars to the U.S. deficit along the way.
But in her article, Wingerter referred to the “left-leaning” Urban Institute and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and their analysis of the bill’s impact. I cannot help but wonder why that descriptor was needed. Was this to suggest that they couldn’t be trusted, that their analysis was somehow “tainted?” And does that mean that The Denver Post will continue to use the description “left-leaning” and its corollary, “right-wing” in all articles? If so, why isn’t this damaging bill described as “right-wing”?
Christine Soto, Denver
Re: “Lindell now owes Dominion executive $2.3 million for his lies, but his con continues,” June 22 commentary
Rarely have I agreed with Krista Kafer, but it is for that reason that I am responding to her “Election lies” column in last Sunday’s Perspective section of The Denver Post.
Even today over half the Republican Party still believes the 2020 presidential election was stolen by Joe Biden. In Oklahoma they are trying to add that theory to the curriculum they are teaching their students.
Christopher Krebs, whose job, among others, was to make sure the 2020 election results were fair, actually lost his job for daring to speak up, saying the 2020 election was one of the most accurate elections in the history of our country.
Even as Donald Trump has started his second term in office, he continually says he won the 2020 election.
Mike Lindell, the “My Pillow Guy,” recently lost a defamation suit against Eric Coomer, the former security director for Dominion Voting Systems. Rather than be contrite, he doubled down on his lie.
When are the majority of Republicans going to finally acknowledge that Donald Trump lost the 2020 election and move on? Only then can this country start to heal.
The “No Kings” protests were a start. Let’s hope it is only the beginning and we truly start to believe the emperor has no clothes because he truly doesn’t.
David Shaw, Highlands Ranch
Sign up for Sound Off to get a weekly roundup of our columns, editorials and more.
To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.
After years of heartbreak and rising fatalities, Colorado has reached a long-awaited turning point in the fight against fentanyl. For the first time in more than a decade, we are seeing a meaningful decline in overdose deaths — not just in isolated communities, but across […]
ColumnistsAfter years of heartbreak and rising fatalities, Colorado has reached a long-awaited turning point in the fight against fentanyl. For the first time in more than a decade, we are seeing a meaningful decline in overdose deaths — not just in isolated communities, but across the state and the country. This progress is real. It’s hopeful. And it’s the direct result of coordinated efforts at every level of government.
But now is not the time to let up. The fentanyl threat hasn’t disappeared — it has evolved. And if we lose focus, the gains we’ve made could quickly slip away.
Data from the Centers for Disease Control’s National Center for Health Statistics shows that overdose deaths nationwide dropped by almost 27% from 2023 to 2024. In Colorado, fatalities declined by 18%, falling from 1,998 to 1,637. Most notably, fentanyl-related deaths dropped 35% percent — from 1,238 to 804. These are the most encouraging numbers we’ve seen since before the COVID-19 pandemic and might signal a long-overdue reversal of a devastating trend.
This progress is thanks to the tireless work of public health professionals, community advocates and law enforcement — especially here in Colorado — who have made it their mission to save lives and hold traffickers accountable.
At the federal level, law enforcement has made dismantling the fentanyl supply chain a top priority. In 2024, the DEA seized more than 60 million counterfeit pills and nearly 8,000 pounds of fentanyl powder nationwide — enough to deliver more than 380 million lethal doses. These seizures represent lives saved and underscore the scale of the crisis.
The urgency continues in 2025. In just the first four months of this year, more than 22 million fentanyl-laced pills and 3,100 pounds of powder were seized nationwide — clear evidence of the threat’s persistence and the relentless pace of interdiction work.
In Colorado, the FBI’s Denver Field Office is leading targeted enforcement efforts through specialized task forces that work closely with federal, state, local, and tribal partners. These teams are disrupting not only drug shipments but also the trafficking networks behind them.
In recent months, joint operations resulted in the arrest of 43 traffickers and the seizure of more than 1,000 pounds of methamphetamine and 45 pounds of fentanyl from Colorado streets. In one case worked with the Jefferson County Sheriff’s Office, deputies recovered 50,000 fentanyl pills from a single vehicle.
These are not just statistics. They represent real threats removed from real neighborhoods. Every arrest and every seizure disrupts transnational criminal groups and reflects the strength of interagency collaboration.
But the FBI’s work goes beyond seizing drugs. We are also targeting the financial infrastructure that keeps these criminal organizations alive. By tracking illicit money flows and dismantling laundering networks, we’re cutting off the cartels’ ability to operate and grow.
Recent federal policy directives are strengthening our ability to act. The designation of certain cartels as Foreign Terrorist Organizations has expanded enforcement tools and improved intelligence sharing. These changes are allowing us to move faster, collaborate more effectively, and strike at the heart of trafficking operations with greater precision.
Still, law enforcement cannot do this alone. As we enter the summer months — when overdose rates often rise — we need communities, families and policymakers to stay engaged.
That means parents having honest conversations with their kids. It means community groups continuing prevention and outreach. And it means elected leaders supporting strong enforcement, treatment and recovery programs.
Colorado has shown what’s possible when we work together. The success of our FBI-led task forces — powered by local, state, tribal and federal partnerships — proves that intelligence-driven, unified action saves lives.
But the fentanyl threat remains. Traffickers adapt. So must we.
This is a pivotal moment. We have momentum. Now, we must press forward — with urgency, unity, and unwavering commitment to protecting Colorado families.
The fight is not over. But together, we can keep making progress — and save even more lives.
Mark Michalek is the Special Agent in Charge of the FBI Denver Field Office. He is also a U.S. Air Force Academy graduate.
Sign up for Sound Off to get a weekly roundup of our columns, editorials and more.
To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.
Keep our public lands public Re: “Public land, on and off the chopping block, needs our continued support,” June 25 commentary I appreciate the commentary by T.A. Barron. Loss of our public lands, even in small increments, is stealing from our birthright. Furthermore, in addition […]
OpinionRe: “Public land, on and off the chopping block, needs our continued support,” June 25 commentary
I appreciate the commentary by T.A. Barron. Loss of our public lands, even in small increments, is stealing from our birthright. Furthermore, in addition to recreation, they support local economies, ranching, logging and natural resource extraction. Most of these lands will end up as either multi-million dollar homes used for a few weeks per year or as large properties the public is excluded from. Readers need to contact their congressional representatives and senators to demonstrate their opinions on this issue now. Democrats will certainly vote against this bill when it returns to the House, so constituents of Representatives Crank, Hurd, Evans and Boebert have the greatest opportunity to be effective.
York Miller, Denver
The megabill currently in the Senate includes a mandate to sell 2 million to 3 million acres of public lands, mostly in the West, that are currently managed by the U.S. Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). Here is why no bill should ever include such things.
First, public lands are a matter of economic well-being. A 2024 report states that recreation on BLM lands contributes $8.8 billion to the economy in Colorado alone. Recreation in U.S. National Forests contributes $12.5 billion in GDP nationwide.
Secondly, public lands are a matter of overall human well-being. Protected natural areas benefit our civilization in more ways than we realize. For example, forests and wetlands filter water, reducing water treatment costs. These places provide habitat for creatures that pollinate our crops. Also, spending time in nature has proven physical and mental health benefits. This sell-off of public lands has human health implications.
If this goes through, it won’t just affect mountain town dwellers like me who want options for places to hike my dogs. Even if you live in a big city and would never dream of going camping, this will affect you and our country. To quote a renowned folk singer, “this land was made for you and me!”
Laurel Smerch, Mancos
In The Denver Post Tuesday morning, June 24th, were two separate but interrelated articles: “Factories having trouble filling nearly 400,000 open positions” and “Justices allow Trump to restart deportation of migrants away from their home countries.” Policies driven by logic and some compassion instead of unbending ideology and fear would benefit everyone in our country.
Robert Morales, Centennial
Re: “Hotline service tailored to LGBTQ+ youths to end,” June 18 news story
As a family physician, I am concerned about the well-being of our LGBTQ+ neighbors. An executive order is terminating the Trevor Project, a suicide helpline for LGBTQ+ youth, on July 17.
The Colorado Health Institute indicates that 8.9% of Colorado adults, almost 400,000 individuals, identify as LGBTQ+. Twenty percent of Colorado youth under the age of 30 identify as LGBTQ+. This large minority of our population experiences major social stressors and disparities in access to mental health care.
According to the Centers for Disease Control, suicide is the second leading cause of death among 10 to 14-year-olds, and the third leading cause among 15 to 24-year-olds. LGBTQ+ individuals are four times more likely to attempt suicide. The Trevor Project estimates that more than 1.8 million young LGBTQ+ Americans seriously consider suicide each year, with one attempt every 45 seconds. These are sobering statistics!
The Trevor Project supported 1.3 million individuals in the past 3 years. It is unconscionable that LGBTQ+ individuals might be unable to access a critical and simple support: a lifeline to a sympathetic, understanding ear in a time of crisis. We cannot afford to lose the promise of these youth, who will be the leaders, teachers and scientists of tomorrow. We must promote their safety.
Please sign the Trevor Project’s petition to reverse the planned cuts or ask your legislators to support the Trevor Project. If you are or someone you know is considering self-harm, call or text the Suicide Lifeline at 988. Time is of the essence!
Maria Yvonne Chansky, Denver
Sign up for Sound Off to get a weekly roundup of our columns, editorials and more.
To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.
Beware those hiding behind masks I can remember in my younger days (I am now 83) when we used to watch “cowboy” movies. Of course, then, the bad guys always wore masks. Of course, times have changed, and until recently, if you were pulled over […]
OpinionI can remember in my younger days (I am now 83) when we used to watch “cowboy” movies. Of course, then, the bad guys always wore masks. Of course, times have changed, and until recently, if you were pulled over or had some dealings with the police, they were unmasked and would provide you with their name and even their badge number.
Times have again changed since President Donald Trump, and we again have men wearing masks and sometimes identifying who they are, but have no problem shoving their victims around. They still appear to run in gangs anywhere from three or four to a dozen or so.
Are they attacking only criminals? Some of those “criminals” appear to be international college students who have done nothing illegal, or men, women, or children who appear in court to follow procedures and do the right thing only to be grabbed, even in restrooms … or a young woman with a baby and a 2-year-old child whose husband is a veteran … or they even will grab a U.S. senator.
I have always had wide respect for our officers who serve and respect citizens. Unfortunately, this is not the case now, and we have gangsters and mobsters pretending to be for law and order.
Wayne Wathen, Centennial
The U.S. Senate Finance Committee just released its proposals for changes to the One Big Beautiful Bill (OBBB) reconciliation act. If it is possible, ignore the deficit total (if made permanent) of $4.8 trillion and consider the proposed increases in the college endowment tax, which further penalizes our top research universities, this time for the loyalty of their alumni in contributing to their endowments.
On top of this administration’s planned cuts to Pell Grants and the loss of federal research dollars for the future (and failures to pay for past work completed), with higher taxes on endowments through the OBBB, our top schools will be forced to limit even further their affordability to undergraduates (and in-state students in particular).
Please tell your senators and Congress members not to raise taxes on college endowments and to end the assault on college education.
John A. Eckstein, Denver
Re: “Bill could loosen silencer rules,” June 24 news story
Let’s acknowledge the gun-store owning U.S. congressman from Georgia, Andrew Clyde, for dropping his fiscal opposition to Trump’s Big, Beautiful Bill, in exchange for getting a new provision that will dump 90 years of federal law outlawing gun silencers, as well as legalizing several currently banned automatic weapons, and removing a layer of background checks. Needless to say, Republican House and Senate folks are joining in, since they need to pick up any support they can for Trump’s bill.
Just think, these silencer devices will make school shooters so much more emboldened and capable, and their kill tallies ought to soar! Criminal types will feel so much more secure, knowing that police triangulation sensors (common in cities these days, and paid for by us) won’t be triggered by those quiet gunshots! They can also feel more confident with any street gun crimes, knowing fewer witnesses will hear trouble. Reportedly, even law enforcement agencies across America oppose the reintroduction of gun silencers.
Congress, can y’all please reconsider?
Peter Ehrlich, Denver
Sign up for Sound Off to get a weekly roundup of our columns, editorials and more.
To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.
Recent media coverage of U.S. Rep. Lauren Boebert’s bill calling to delist the gray wolf from federal protection misses the most salient point: Boebert loathes wolves. Three years ago, Boebert rivaled Disney’s 101 Dalmatians villain Cruella De Vil by appearing in a horrid video calling […]
ColumnistsRecent media coverage of U.S. Rep. Lauren Boebert’s bill calling to delist the gray wolf from federal protection misses the most salient point: Boebert loathes wolves.
Three years ago, Boebert rivaled Disney’s 101 Dalmatians villain Cruella De Vil by appearing in a horrid video calling for the shooting of wolf pups and turning them into “little hats.”
Hostility is not a sound platform for serious-minded, science-based wildlife policy. Nor for a healthy Colorado that adheres to humane ethics.
Gray wolves are not recovered and continue to need Endangered Species Act protection. Without it, gray wolves will be subject only to state laws. But existing state laws have failed egregiously. In the Northern Rocky Mountain states, where wolves have been delisted, state legislation allows unlimited hunting, trapping and killing of gray wolves, sending wolf populations into declines reminiscent of the historic kill levels that resulted in near-extermination.
Boebert’s bill — the Pet and Livestock Protection Act — does nothing to measurably or responsibly protect pets or livestock.
According to a federal study by U.S. Department of Agriculture, 97.6% of all deaths in adult cattle nationwide were not due to predators, but caused by respiratory problems, weather-related illness and other threats. In fact, domestic dogs often attack, injure, and sometimes kill livestock, especially sheep and calves.
In Colorado, ranchers and wolf advocates are working together to prevent conflict. Wolf advocates from Rocky Mountain Wolf Project raised $75,000 to buy conflict reduction equipment for ranchers to use. It works when used correctly, as reported by Idaho rancher Glenn Elzinga, who has not lost any cattle or had to kill any wolves in the past decade.
These voices and stories need to be elevated.
And don’t be fooled. Boebert’s anti-wolf bill is designed for the destruction of a native species intrinsic to a healthy Colorado and the West. The bill is symbolic of the mindset of past centuries, when wolves were killed out of ignorance and unfounded fear. Today, her call to kill wolves is supported by U.S. Reps. Jeff Crank, Gabe Evans and Jeff Hurd.
Delisting wolves nationwide will affect Colorado. Just look at the cascading effects of wolves of Yellowstone. It’s a marvel to witness how the wolf as top predator holds the balance of nature, bringing back beavers and biodiversity.
Hunters can appreciate the recovery of gray wolves has coincided with an increase in elk numbers in all three Northern Rocky Mountain states, according to Colorado State University research. Wolves are removing elk, deer, and moose infected with chronic wasting disease — present in 37 states and 3 provinces.
Gray wolves are one solution to the climate crisis, allowing trees and shrubs to flourish which sequester planet-warming carbon dioxide. Trees and shrubs enable water to be stored in soil, instead of rapidly running off and floods. Woody plants also shade streams and protect them from bank erosion which provides habitat for fish and water for human use.
Wolves are killed across the Northern Rockies using steel-jawed traps, neck snares, packs of dogs and even snowmobiles.
Conservationists are right now working to restore Endangered Species Act protections for wolves in Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming through a federal district court that could rule in a matter of weeks.
Wolves in these three states do not have federal protection. In 2009, U.S. Fish and Wildlife promised to restore protections for wolves in these Northern Rockies if state lawmakers and wildlife managers acted recklessly toward wolves. The agency has failed to hold up to that promise.
We see state lawmakers in these three states allowing the year-round, unlimited trapping of wolves, and killing with the use of night-vision scopes. People who dislike wolves have turned motorized vehicles into weapons. One famous case involved Cody Roberts, who ran over a young female wolf with a snowmobile, taped her mouth shut, then paraded her in a bar before shooting her.
Bounties are paid today for dead wolves.
This is a war on wildlife. Boebert is one of the loudest generals. Tell our Colorado lawmakers that wolf loathing has no place in Colorado, and to protect our wolves with federal protection nationwide, because wildlife has no borders. And, it is time to elevate the voices from the West Slope and Front Range working together. This is not the time for stoking fear, division, and animosity for such an ecologically valuable species.
Jim Martin is a past CU regent who can be reached at jimmartinesq@gmail.com.
Sign up for Sound Off to get a weekly roundup of our columns, editorials and more.
To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.
The radical notion of selling off public lands came back as part of the 2026 budget reconciliation. And this time it seems that only the Congressional rule keepers can keep the giveaway of America’s heritage to private interests — off the chopping block. Congress could […]
ColumnistsThe radical notion of selling off public lands came back as part of the 2026 budget reconciliation. And this time it seems that only the Congressional rule keepers can keep the giveaway of America’s heritage to private interests — off the chopping block. Congress could have, too, if its representatives had listened to widespread public sentiment.
Last week, the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee updated its budget bill to include making over 250 million acres of public lands in 11 western states eligible for disposal, including recreation areas, wilderness study areas, inventoried roadless areas, critical wildlife habitat and big game migration corridors, according to analysis by The Wilderness Society.
At the same time, Trump’s Interior Department is aggressively pursuing ways to industrialize, privatize and monetize the public lands. But these places, rich with ecological values, are held in trust for us to conserve and deliver intact to future generations.
Despite the administration’s rhetoric about wanting to reduce the deficit, its goal is to dispose of these lands — to remove them permanently from the public domain. This serves an ideology that reflexively favors private ownership over public enjoyment, whether by diminishing long-term protections on public lands, promoting their immediate development or selling them outright.
What are the effects of this wrongheaded policy?
First, once it’s gone, it’s gone forever. Any land pulled out of the public domain for development will never be returned. As a result, wild places will no longer offer open space for people to hike, hunt or fish, wildlife to thrive, waterways to flow unimpeded and much more.
Second, it’s a slippery slope. We lose environmental protections not by a one-time tsunami of destruction, but by nibbles. If we lose a piece of land today for an appealing idea (for example, deficit reduction, space for housing), then tomorrow we will hear an equally appealing idea to develop the neighboring piece. Then the next day, even more land will be needed for another reason. And so on. The process of destruction by nibbling will never end until there is nothing left to devour.
Third, there’s one upside: It’s an excellent opportunity for conservationists to expand public support for nature. The current attack on public land is enabling conservationists of different stripes to come together and build alliances. Think of hunters and fishers, farmers and ranchers, mountain bikers and horseback riders, campers and birders who all cherish open lands–whatever their politics.
Fourth, we need to make the case for urgency. If public land advocates don’t stand strong now to protect nature, who will? Right now, we need to defend the water, the trees, and the wildlife on the public lands for generations to come. We need to tell our representatives in Congress that their duty is to never sell out the public estate.
Fifth, standing up for nature brings out the best of humanity. The framing of the “debate” in Congress and the public is always human-centric, the same approach that has caused so much environmental destruction throughout the world. Ignored is what would be lost, from water storage and wetlands to places for wildlife to live out their lives. We must tell the story of what nature brings us just by being left alone.
Compared to most developed countries, America is extraordinarily rich in public lands that everyone can enjoy, no matter their income or their background. Thanks to those who came before us who knew their value, Congress set aside these unique places as designated wilderness, national parks and monuments, and other special types of land, not to mention national forests and Bureau of Land Management lands that serve multiple purposes. That means all of us can roam land that has no fences or “No Trespassing” signs.
Humility and restraint, not privatization and exploitation, are the words that unite us as we fight to preserve our public lands. This is the public’s land, and let’s keep it that way forever.
T. A. Barron is a contributor to Writers on the Range, writersontherange.org, an independent nonprofit dedicated to spurring lively conversation about the West. He is a board member of World Wildlife Fund and The Wilderness Society, and the author of more than 30 books.
Sign up for Sound Off to get a weekly roundup of our columns, editorials and more.
To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.