Re: “In defense of the Democratic caucuses and grassroots organizing,” and “Republican Party hung the heavy price on health care,” April 12 letters to the editor

Pop quiz:

Letters to the editor published in the Post are

a) an accurate reflection of the political leanings of its readership

b) a reflection of the Post¶¶Òőap editorial bias and accompanying discretion

c) all of the above

Hint: there is no right answer.

But whatever the reason, it¶¶Òőap obvious the published letters skew left and even hard left, Sunday after Sunday. One fellow in defense of the caucusing process in our state asserts, regarding Sens. John Hickenlooper and Michael Bennet, that “their centrist pandering to Republican colleagues in the Senate is deeply unpopular.” Wait, what? Plenty of adjectives apply to Colorado’s Democratic senators, but centrist isn’t any of them. Unless, of course, you skew hard left — really hard left.

And then there’s the writer who, as the headline summarizes, hangs the heavy price of health care on Republicans. “The reasons for our health care situation fall in the lap of the Republican Party ” before backtracking with “This is not a Republican or Democratic issue…” That¶¶Òőap not atypical for those who are somewhere left of center who want it both ways and deny the fact that health care policy is a political issue and nothing more. Rather than recognize that reality, they choose to occupy an imaginary moral high ground with empty phrases like “people will die…” .

The good news for those of us who are somewhere right of center is that the Op-Ed page doubles as the entertainment section for us.

Jon Pitt, Golden

‘Leftward’ movements that have benefited Colorado’s residents

Re: “Can Colorado’s GOP recover?” April 12 commentary

Columnist Kafer, mourning the loss of Republican power during the Trump decade, attributes the rise of Democrats in part to “some very smart, strategic decisions to move the state leftward.” The tone implies that leftward is undesirable and in need of correction by a revived Republican Party.

What if, though, leftward succeeded over the past 10 years because leftward policies create results that Coloradans want and value? What if leftward means good for the people? What if leftward eases people’s burdens and makes Coloradans’ lives better, fairer and healthier?

Leftward created:

1. , a state-wide, universal paid family leave program that allows workers to have babies, care for loved ones, and recover from illness in dignity.

2. Universal free full day kindergarten and pre-school, relieving some of families’ still enormous childcare burdens while improving early childhood education for all.

3. A mandate that employers post in job announcements, thus increasing applicants’ control in their job searches.

4. Prohibitions against landlords’ most abusive and practices, making tenants’ lives easier without endangering the landlord class.

5. A 2026 minimum wage of and hour, where the federal minimum wage remains at an aughts-era .

6. An attorney general who courageously fights the abuses of a federal executive branch and the monopolization efforts of grocery conglomerates, compared to a Republican attorney general who sought to destroy the Affordable Care Act (he failed).

Floy Jeffares, Lakewood

I suppose it is ironic that Krista Kafer’s column lamenting the changes in the Colorado GOP is published the day after the Colorado GOP has their state nominating meeting in Pueblo where they nominated two candidates, one of whom wants to “DOGE the mess out of everything” at the state Capitol (since that worked so well in Washington) and claims there is a pedophile ring at the state Capitol that he will reveal after he is elected. Both have stated they will free Tina Peters

The sad fact is that the Republican Party, both in Colorado and nationwide, has lost its mind and moral compass and is incapable of governing. When all you want to do is tear things down, rather than build things up, then you are incapable of making rational decisions and making things better. Unfortunately, this is where the Republican party is today, and they are no alternative to the Democrats in running the state (or nation), given the binary choice between the two visions of democracy.

I keep hoping for the day that the fever will break in the Republican Party and they return to the country-club Republican party I grew up around, where making things work was the call of the day, but it is increasingly looking like that will not happen in the remainder of my days on this mortal coil.

Martin Ward,ÌęAurora

Falsely claiming genocide

Re: “Bennet’s shortsighted move to back out of a forum,” April 12 editorial

In Sunday’s editorial criticizing Sen. Michael Bennet, the writer casually tossed out the accusation that “Israel waged a genocidal war” against the Gazans. Quite the opposite is true.

If Israel intended to eradicate Gazans, why hasn’t it over the past 2 1/2 years?ÌęIsrael has killed perhaps under 2% of Gaza’s civilians, while nearly all of Hamas’ deeply embedded military capability is gone. Why did Israel facilitate the delivery of over a million tons of aid, send millions of messages to civilians instructing them how to flee, execute elaborate evacuation plans, and abort a large portion of its military strikes due to civilian presence?

Clearly, Israel’s intent was to minimize civilian casualties while pursuing fighters in the complex, civilian-threatening, 3D battlespace that Hamas created.

“Israel has doneÌęmore to prevent civilian casualtiesÌęin war than any military in history,” according to , a U.S. war scholar.

Agreed, genocide is very bad. Falsely accusing genocide is also bad. Many agencies, media, and so-called experts are lining up to hurl the pithy genocide accusation at Israel. The editorial board should take a few moments to learn about the false accusation (see the 100-second by Dr. Sara Brown or the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies debunking genocide) before queuing up in that line.

Mark Brown, Littleton

Acknowledge the real potential harms to girls in transgender sports

Re: “Proposed initiative on transgender athletes puts our daughters at risk,” April 12 commentary

Mike Smith’s commentary against falsely claimed that it “puts our daughters at risk”. Initiative 109 focuses on designating a school athletic team or intramural sport, based on biological sex, whereby a team or sport designated for girls does not allow on the team persons who are biologically boys. That reduces the risk of injury to girls on the team or on an opposing girls’ team. That far outweighs Smith’s stated concerns about his tall daughter being falsely accused of being a biological boy. Most tall teenage daughters would not be mistaken for being a biological boy. Colorado schools have records of their students’ biological sex.

Read the full initiative on the secretary of state’s website to appreciate Smith’s many nonsensical remarks, such as his “When you write laws that treat every child as a potential suspect, you are not protecting kids,” and his “Initiative 109 is vague and poorly written, leaving critical questions unanswered about how it would actually be enforced.”

Smith mentions that a Utah State Board of Education member incorrectly implied on social media that a teenage girl was a biological boy. Smith falsely called it “one among many examples of the harm these policies cause to female athletes,” whereby he claims “you are not protecting kids – you’re endangering them.” He did not mention that the offending board member was by the Utah legislature and governor and was recently forced off the board.

Joseph B. Feiten,ÌęWestminster

Managing water rights is an unenviable — yet necessary — task

Re: “,” April 12 commentary

Kudos for the article on depleted water supplies in the Colorado River Basin, as that has critical, far-ranging impacts beyond just that watershed. It has long been recognized that management of the Colorado’s water supplies had a “structural deficit” (more water was allocated than is actually available), in part because the 1922 Colorado River Compact was based on a series of exceptionally wet years.

Additionally, the compact ignored the rights of Native Americans (who hold the senior water rights), did not consider Mexico’s water claims, and did not address any water needs for the basin’s environment.

Furthermore, the situation has been made much more dire because of “aridification,” which has increased temperatures, modified precipitation, and reduced river flows throughout the basin.

Now state and federal officials are faced with the daunting task of determining how the river should be managed in the future. I do not envy those individuals, for politically, it is a no-win situation. They must deal with the realities of nature and can no longer “kick the can down the road,” for the can has fallen off the cliff!

Given the ongoing rhetoric, I can’t say I’m optimistic, but hopefully, collective wisdom may prevail, and a solution will be found that provides equitable water supplies for all involved (states, tribes, and our environment). However, if agreement cannot be found and the situation results in litigation, there will be a lengthy and costly process, and no one wins.

Water touches every aspect of our lives as it is essential for our very existence, a key aspect of our quality of life, necessary for the environment, and critical to our economy. Therefore, I hope The Denver Post will continue to cover water issues beyond just the Colorado River.

ÌęGene Reetz, Denver

Editor’s note: Reets is a retired EPA senior water resources scientist.

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.

Re: “We can’t let fields become a wasteland of swirling dirt and noxious weeds,” April 5 commentary, and “Even at tax time, it’s good to be a billionaire,” April 5 finance column

Sunday’s Post featured two articles that speak to the necessity of seeing connections between seemingly disparate phenomena. In the Perspective section, Krista Kafer has depicted the dire conditions of Colorado’s parched Eastern Plains. Our diminishing water resources are being directed toward expanding cities. There must be a sincere collaboration between agricultural and residential development if we are all to prosper.

In a similar vein, the Business section featured an article on our inequitable national tax structure, which enables the wealthy to grow their wealth while most people, besieged by income taxes and rising property taxes, struggle.

The Post presents these two pictures, where there is an imbalance of resources — water and wealth. It is imperative to observe and address disparities where people and our natural world suffer due to myopic, self-centered behaviors. We are all connected. When one of us is unduly harmed, we are all inevitably diminished.

Evan Siegel, Westminster

Sometimes, you have to let the weeds take hold

Re: “We can’t let fields become a wasteland of swirling dirt and noxious weeds,” April 5 commentary

Good piece about water rights and noxious weeds. Reclaiming larger vacant rural landscapes with native plants is a very difficult, expensive, and lengthy process.

I spent much of my career as a landscape architect developing strategies for re-vegetating disturbed landscapes. While non-native weeds are a problem, they are here to stay. There is no realistic way to prevent them. We must accept that, while native landscape plant species are desirable in many ways, they generally can’t compete with invasive weeds in the short term. In some ways, non-native plants help stabilize soils while native species get a foothold. Keep in mind that weeds have evolved some very strong strategies to thrive in disturbed soil, despite farmers’ exhaustive efforts to control them.

Each of those farms you mentioned with vacant dry fields requires the resources to stabilize the soil, native grass and forb seeding, mulching and some follow-up repairs. The legal requirements should be more specific. It is not going to happen by itself in our dry, windy climate. I wouldn’t worry too much about the weeds until the vegetation is established.

After all, many of us, including those of European ancestry, are a type of invasive species. We want to live here too.

Frank Miltenberger, Denver

Thankful to lawmakers as they try to tackle state budget in tight fiscal times

Re:Ìę“Medicaid to take brunt of budget cuts,” April 5 news story

Thank you to Nick Coltrain and Meg Wingerter for a well-written, comprehensive look at the impossible budget situation the Joint Budget Committee and our state find itself in.

Bethany Pray of the Colorado Center on Law and Policy summed it up well with her quote, “We have a red-state budget and we have blue-state ideals …”

It is sad that good and humane policy is considered “blue state,” however. Or that restrictive fiscal policy is “red state.” But those are the times we live in. And the clash of ideologies must now be balanced on the backs of many hardworking people trying to keep their children out of institutional care and on the Medicaid providers that support them. The pain will be widespread. But particularly acute among the disabled population.

I am the full-time caregiver of an adult child on a Medicaid waiver. It gives our son access to an excellent day program. The providers barely make a living wage. Medicaid covers his medical needs. Those providers often operate at a loss. He requires 24/7 care, and we can meet his daily care needs without additional Medicaid assistance. But most families caring for a severely disabled child are not so fortunate. They are living on the edge.

Thank you to the public servants wrestling with impossible decisions. I hope our state makes the right choices at the ballot box come November and our leaders continue to explore fundamental changes to this fiscal vise we find ourselves in. Thank you to the reporters for providing an understanding of the complexities and consequences of the choices before the lawmakers. The more we all understand, the better we can all work toward long-term sustainable solutions.

Karen Roberts, Denver

Budget season is a time to reappraise what is important to the flourishing of Coloradans. It is time to dispel nakedly partisan worldviews and find common ground.

Reducing medical funding for the most vulnerable and marginalized in our community sends the exact wrong message about who we are as a state. We are at our best when we support those who face unimaginable physical/economic burdens with pride and dignity.

Rather than cut payments to families with children who have severe disabilities or pregnant immigrant women and children, can we consider withdrawing Medicaid payments for elective abortions?

Elective abortions for low-income women were previously subsidized using private money from the Cobalt Abortion Fund and other abortion advocacy non-profits. This is where funding for such morally controversial medical interventions belongs.

Public funding doesn’t increase abortion access but simply shifts the burden of funding abortions from private sources to the taxpayer. Let¶¶Òőap put those millions of Medicaid dollars to the service of our disabled children and needy immigrant community.

Tom Perille, Englewood

Republican Party hung the heavy price on health care

Re: “Health care costs are forcing terrible trade-offs” April 5 commentary

In reading Sunday’s Perspective section, this column stood out from all the others.

The reasons for our health care situation fall in the lap of the Republican Party. It has been trying to get rid of the Affordable Care Act since it was established, and in all that time, it has never come up with an alternative plan. Instead, it just keeps chipping away at the social safety net of most Americans.

This problem has been exacerbated by President Trump’s Department of Defense/ War, which has us engaged in another costly and senseless war in Iran.

We live in the wealthiest country in the world, and yet millions go without basic health care. This is causing people to skip their medications and actually go without health insurance altogether.

The result of this action is that hospitals still have to treat patients who come to them when their illness has progressed to the point that their care is actually more expensive. This makes absolutely no sense, and when the Department of Defense/War is asking for $1.5 trillion in addition to an enormous budget for ICE, it shows how far off our policies are for the American people.

This is not a Republican or Democratic issue, but rather a very grave policy issue putting the health crisis facing the American people in an untenable position. People will die because of a lack of medical care and ultimately cost our country more money. Basic health care is a right, not a privilege. Let¶¶Òőap start putting our budget where it can do the most good for all of us.

David Shaw, Highlands Ranch

In defense of the Democratic caucuses and grassroots organizing

Re: “Time to end caucuses in Colorado,” March 29 commentary

It¶¶Òőap no surprise, but still disappointing to see the entrenched and moneyed political interests working hard to rid our democracy of grassroots community organizing to get their candidates on the ballot.

Columnist Doug Friednash describes the caucus process as “deeply flawed, and an undemocratic way” to select candidates.

The opposite is true. It is Friednash’s favorites who have enough money to buy their way onto the ballot through the petition process and buy their way into winning the election with the loads of cash that will flow into their primary and general election coffers.

Our two entrenched and uber-well-financed U.S. Senators thumbed their noses at the caucus process. In reality, their centrist pandering to Republican colleagues in the Senate is deeply unpopular. Grassroots caucus activists, with very little or no money, are holding them accountable. Hickenlooper voted for 10 of the president¶¶Òőap 22 cabinet appointments, and Bennet voted for eight. Did they miss the anti-democratic and dictatorial statements of the president prior to these votes?

The Denver Post gave Friednash, a corporate Democratic centrist mouthpiece, the opportunity to take swipes at Melat Kiros, who garnered nearly two-thirds of the caucus vote for the 1st Congressional District race. It¶¶Òőap the incumbent senators and the CD 1 incumbent who are the “extreme radical candidates” who are out of touch with Colorado Democrats and our state’s values.

John Gudvangen, Denver

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.

Bennet, who is running for the Democratic nomination, said he had pushed for a public option during Senate debates leading up to the passage of the Affordable Care Act in 2010, and its omission turned out to be a significant missed opportunity.

If elected governor, he’d propose a state-run health insurance plan for people earning too much to qualify for Medicaid, but less than 200% of the federal line, he said. Colorado adults qualify for Medicaid if they earn up to 138% of the poverty line, with .

The Colorado legislature has flirted with the idea of a public option.

In 2021, lawmakers opted to create “Colorado option” plans, which are subject to more regulations but sold by private companies. Last year, almost half of the people buying on the individual marketplace opted for a Colorado option plan.

Phil Weiser’s health plan emphasizes primary care, using courts to lower costs

Bennet also proposed allowing school districts, county governments, certain small businesses and people between 25 and 35 to buy into the state employee health plan.

Campaign representatives didn't include cost estimates and said they couldn't share many details of the public option or the buy-in at this point, because the state would need to work with health care providers to design them.

Without information such as how many people would be eligible, what they'd pay toward their care and whether federal tax credits could offset some of the costs, estimating a price tag for a public option and other policies is impossible.

The senator's eight-page plan overview also called for:

• Making Medicaid more efficient
• Investigating private equity owners in health care
• Supporting rural hospitals
• Requiring health insurance to count more expenses toward patients' deductibles
• Forcing pharmacy middlemen to pass rebates to consumers

While the public option is an important part of the plan, all the pieces have to work together to move the system toward paying for value rather than service volume, Bennet said.

"We've got to really dramatically change the way we pay for health care," he said. "We're in a moment where we can’t continue to nibble around the edges of a broken system."

Attorney General Phil Weiser, who is also running for the Democratic gubernatorial nomination, had a similarly expansive plan, though without references to a public option or buy-in.

Weiser's plan calls for:

• Using the courts to fight cuts to public programs
• Creating a task force to inform decisions on health care funding
• Appointing a chief information officer to improve telehealth and establish guardrails
• Expanding price comparison tools
• Improving Medicaid eligibility determinations

Both plans were light on details about how the candidates would achieve their goals if elected, including how they'd pay for their priorities.

A spokesman for Weiser’s campaign declined to comment on Bennet's proposal.

Modisette, who owns a small construction business with her husband in Castle Rock, said they currently payÌęabout $175 a month for insurance bought on the . When enhanced federal subsidies expire in January, the family’s monthly cost would jump to $430, which isn’t feasible, she said.

While she’s been in remission from thyroid cancer for 10 years, Modisette still needs periodic blood tests and medication to replace hormones her thyroid would have produced.

While their two children qualify for — which covers kids from families that earn too much for — Modisette and her husband don’t have a public coverage option and are contemplating going without insurance. Other small business owners she knows are in a similar position, since they don’t have job-based coverage.

“It’s real people that are working really hard to build something of your own,” Modisette said. “If something bad happens, are we going to go bankrupt?”

Monthly health insurance premiums are poised to double next month for hundreds of thousands of Coloradans who have been receiving enhanced pandemic-era subsidies on the individual marketplace, according to the state’s . About 321,000 people received those subsidies in Colorado last year.

The loss of those subsidies, which Congress has so far declined to extend, at the end of this month will force individual marketplace customers across the nation to shoulder a larger share of their premiums in 2026.

The Denver Post spoke to Coloradans facing large premium increases about the choices they face as their insurance costs increase.

People facing significant increases have three general choices: find another source of coverage, choose a less expensive plan within the individual marketplace – with the possibility of facing more out-of-pocket costs if they need care – or go without insurance, meaning they would have to pay the full price for any medical care they need.

Customers who wanted their insurance to start Jan. 1 needed to pick a plan by Monday. Those who haven’t could still choose Jan. 15 for coverage starting in February.

Congress adjourned without passing any bills to extend the subsidies, but the House of Representatives will take up the issue in January. , who wants to move on, and joined a Democratic “discharge petition” that will force leadership to hold a vote on a bill that would extend the subsidies for three years, with no major changes.

Such a bill would face challenges in the Senate. The chamber voted down a three-year extension earlier this month. A Republican alternative, which would have placed $1,000 into health savings accounts, with the sum increasing to $1,500 for people between 50 and 64, .

House Republicans passed a bill expanding coverage options for small businesses and self-employed people, but it where it would need at least some Democratic support to move forward. , though none yet have the support to pass.

If Congress extends the subsidies in January, the state-run marketplace, , would have to shut down temporarily to reprogram. Congress , protecting customers from the rate increase coming at the start of the year.

‘Health insurance is rapidly becoming my mortgage’

Roger Allbrandt, of Centennial, said that if Congress doesn’t act, the subsidy for the plan covering him and his wife Claudia will drop from $1,036 to $503, raising their monthly premiums from about $35 to $862.

About two-thirds of their increase in cost comes from reductions in subsidies, and one-third comes from an increase in the overall cost of the plan.

Claudia recently started a new teaching job that provides insurance, but adding Allbrandt to her plan would put the monthly cost over $1,000. He’s planning to rely on the in Aurora for primary care and any emergencies.

They liked their coverage through the , but the increase is more than their budgets can handle, he said.

“I never have an extra $800/month to pay for health insurance. No way we can even consider the DHMP plan,” he said in an email.

Kate Tynan-Ridgeway, a retired teacher who lives in Littleton, said she also is moving to a less-than-ideal coverage option. Her premiums on the marketplace would have risen from about $600 a month to $1,200, so she decided to buy insurance through the , at about $800 a month.

The PERA plan comes with a $4,000 deductible, which is about twice the amount her previous insurance required, Tynan-Ridgeway said. Patients pay a larger share of their health care costs before hitting the deductible, with lower-premium plans requiring patients to pay for everything other than preventive services they legally must cover until they hit the deductible.

“I’m making harder decisions about when to seek health care,” she said.

Her husband, Patrick Ridgeway, aged onto this summer, which reduced their insurance expenses, Tynan-Ridgeway said. But she’s still considering picking up some odd jobs to offset the increased cost, she said.

“I don’t have a mortgage, and I feel like health insurance is rapidly becoming my mortgage,” she said.

In a , about one-third of marketplace enrollees said they would shop for a different plan if their costs doubled, and one-quarter said they would consider going without insurance.

About half said they already have some difficulty affording premiums, and three-fifths said they have trouble paying their deductible.

‘I worked hard, I did what I needed to do’

Myshel Guillory, of Eagle, would have preferred to stay in the individual market, but determined she’ll probably be better off paying out of pocket.

She was counting on health care costs rising 5% to 8% annually when she retired two years ago, but the price of insurance more than doubling threw off her plan.

The most affordable plan Guillory found would cost about $1,000 a month and have a $12,000 deductible. If she had an injury or illness severe enough to meet the deductible, health care would eat up one-quarter of her budget that year, Guillory said.

She looked for jobs with insurance around Eagle, but hasn’t gotten any callbacks, and is planning to go without coverage until either the subsidies return or she qualifies for Medicare in 10 years.

Friends of hers who planned to retire in their early 60s and use the individual marketplace as a bridge to Medicare are now holding onto those jobs, which doesn’t serve them or people who’d like to move up in their careers, she said.

“I planned, I worked hard, I did what I needed to do,” she said. “Sure, I have $1 million in the bank, but that needs to last.”

Most people who will receive subsidiesÌęnext year can still find an affordable option, particularly if they’re willing to consider a different company or to pay more if they need care, said Leah Denzel, an insurance broker and owner of .ÌęPeople earning more than , or about $62,000 for an individual, will no longer qualify for any assistance with their premiums.

The amount of the tax credit is based on the second-cheapest silver level plan available in each area, but customers can use it to buy any bronze, silver or gold plan, Denzel said. Bronze plans have lower monthly premiums and higher out-of-pocket costs for using care, while gold plans have the opposite design and silver plans land in the middle.

“For most people, there are options,” she said.

People near 400% of the poverty line have to make harder choices, though, particularly if their income can vary from year to year, Denzel said. The enhanced subsidies allowed people with incomes over that threshold to receive assistance for the first time.

In addition, the Trump administration has announced that people who received some level of subsidy, but then end up earning too much to qualify for it, will have to pay back the full amount, Denzel said. Anyone who might be close to the line will need to watch their income carefully, so they can claim subsidies if they qualify and drop them if their business picks up, she said.

While no one knows what Congress may do, Denzel said she’s recommending her clients choose an plan they can afford without the enhanced subsidies — and that they avoid short-term plans or health-sharing ministries that look cheaper, but .

“If they have any health conditions, they need an ACA plan,” she said.

I was in Congress when the ACA was negotiated and signed into law. While we were forced to accept less than the universal health care we wanted, we secured protections that have saved tens of thousands of lives: ending discrimination against people with preexisting conditions, allowing young adults to stay on their parents’ insurance while they find their financial footing, and guaranteeing that every plan covers basic, essential care.

This current fight over premiums is showing, once again, the flaws in our health care system.

Republicans have made clear that they have no appetite for meaningful reforms that would lower costs and increase access, like Medicare for All. They have been unable to devise any serious alternative to the ACA, instead advocating for failed policies like high-deductible plans and direct payments to Health Savings Accounts. They have subjected the ACA to death by a thousand cuts, weakening it at every opportunity. The fight around these tax credits is more of the same, tired playbook.

Realistically, Republican opposition means that larger reforms are unlikely in this current Congress. But that is why there is an urgent need to extend the enhanced tax credits, because they are the only thing standing between hundreds of thousands of Coloradans and skyrocketing health care bills. Now, notices are going out across the state warning families exactly what they’ll be forced to pay without Congressional action. The numbers are staggering.

According to the Colorado Division of Insurance, 225,000 people will face an average premium increase of 101%, which means their monthly costs will more than double overnight.

For many of my constituents, this is a real financial crisis. In my district, a family of four making $128,000 are seeing their premiums for a standard silver plan jump by $14,000 next year. That¶¶Òőap not a number any household can absorb without making painful choices.

Let me be clear: this crisis is completely avoidable.

If Congress simply extended the enhanced ACA tax credits, something Democrats have been fighting for all year, these increases would be softened dramatically. In fact, the premium spike would be cut by more than 80%, and lower-income families wouldn’t see any increase at all. And nationwide, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates that continuing these credits would keep over 5 million Americans from losing their health insurance.

Republicans know this, and still, they refuse to take the easy step of extending these tax credits to give us time to negotiate a long-term solution.

Meanwhile, the consequences will ripple across Colorado’s entire health care system. If thousands of Coloradans lose coverage, hospitals will be forced care for more people who cannot afford to pay. Those costs will then get passed to people with employer-based insurance. That means higher costs even for those who don’t get care through the marketplace. If Congress doesn’t act, our whole health care system will be at risk.

As the top Democrat on the Energy and Commerce Health Subcommittee, I’ve been demanding for months that my colleagues across the aisle join us in extending these tax credits. But open enrollment has already begun, and families need certainty before the new year.

Congress can solve this problem today. We can vote to extend the enhanced tax credits and prevent these devastating premium spikes. We do not lack a solution; we lack political will from my Republican colleagues.

Time is running out. I will keep fighting for my Republican colleagues to put politics aside and join me in lowering costs for Colorado families.

U.S. Rep. Diana DeGette represents Colorado’s 1st Congressional District.

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 Trump administration has ordered states to investigate certain individuals enrolled in Medicaid to determine whether they are ineligible because of their immigration status, with Colorado and four other states reporting they’ve together received more than 170,000 names — an “unprecedented” step by the federal government that ensnares the state-federal health program in the president¶¶Òőap immigration crackdown.

Advocates say the push burdens states with duplicative verification checks and could lead people to lose coverage just for missing paperwork deadlines. But the administrator of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Mehmet Oz, said in a that more than $1 billion “of federal taxpayer dollars were being spent on funding Medicaid for illegal immigrants” in five states and Washington, D.C.

Medicaid’s overall spending topped $900 billion in fiscal year 2024.

It wasn’t clear from Oz’s statement or an accompanying video over what period the spending happened, and CMS spokespeople did not immediately respond to questions, either for an earlier version of this article or after Oz’s statement was posted.

Only U.S. citizens and some lawfully present immigrants are eligible for Medicaid, which covers low-income and disabled people, and the closely related Children’s Health Insurance Program. Those without legal status are ineligible for federally funded health coverage, including Medicaid, Medicare, and plans through the Affordable Care Act marketplaces.

Colorado and other states disputed Oz’s comments.

“Our payments for coverage of undocumented individuals are in accordance with state and federal laws,” said Marc Williams, a spokesperson for Colorado’s Department of Health Care Policy and Financing, which administers the state’s Medicaid program. “The $1.5 million number referenced by federal leaders today is based on an incorrect preliminary finding, and has been refuted with supporting data by our Department experts.”

He added: “It is disappointing that the administration is announcing this number as final when it is clearly overstated and the conversations are very much in the education and discussion phase.”

Illinois Medicaid officials blasted Oz’s comments.

“Once again, the Trump administration is spreading misinformation about standard uses of Medicaid dollars,” said Illinois Medicaid spokesperson Melissa Kula. “This is not a reality show, and there is no conspiracy to circumvent federal law and provide ineligible individuals with Medicaid coverage. Dr. Oz should stop pushing conspiracy theories and focus on improving health care for the American people.”

The Washington State Health Care Authority, which runs the state’s Medicaid program, was also blunt.

“The numbers Dr. Oz posted on social media today are inaccurate,” said spokesperson Rachelle Alongi. “We were very surprised to see Dr. Oz’s post, especially considering we continue to work with CMS in good faith to answer their questions and clear up any confusion.”

Allegations of misspent Medicaid money

In August, CMS began sending states the names of people enrolled in Medicaid that the agency suspected might not be eligible, demanding state Medicaid agencies check their immigration status.

KFF Health News in October reached out to Medicaid agencies in 10 states. Five provided the approximate number of names they had received from the Trump administration, with expectations of more to come: Colorado had been given about 45,000 names, Ohio 61,000, Pennsylvania 34,000, Texas 28,000, and Utah 8,000. More than 70 million people are enrolled in Medicaid.

Most of those states declined to comment further. Medicaid agencies in California, Florida, Georgia, New York, and South Carolina refused to say how many names they were ordered to review or did not respond.

Oz said in his X post that California had misspent $1.3 billion on care for people not eligible for Medicaid, while Illinois spent $30 million, Oregon $5.4 million, Washington state $2.4 million, Washington, D.C., $2.1 million, and Colorado $1.5 million.

“We notified the states, and many have begun refunding the money,” he said. “But what if we had never asked?”

Washington, D.C.’s Medicaid director, Melisa Byrd, said CMS had identified administrative expenses for the district program that covers people regardless of immigration status that should not have been billed to the federal government and her agency has already fixed some of those areas. “We run a big program that is very complex and when mistakes or errors happen, we fix them,” she said.

The program plans to pay $654,014 back to CMS by mid-November.

All five states, plus Washington, D.C., are led by Democrats, and President Donald Trump didn’t win any of them in the 2024 election.

In recent days, Deputy Health and Human Services Secretary Jim O’Neill on X of people he said are convicted criminals living in the U.S. without authorization who had received Medicaid benefits.

O’Neill could not be reached for comment.

“We are very concerned because this seems, frankly, to be a waste of state resources and furthers the administration’s anti-immigrant agenda,” said Ben D’Avanzo, senior health advocacy strategist with the National Immigration Law Center, an advocacy group. “This duplicates what states already do,” he said.

Court blocks information sharing

As part of the administration’s crackdown on people in the U.S. without authorization, President Donald Trump in February directed federal agencies to take action to ensure they are not obtaining benefits in violation of federal law.

In June, advisers to Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. ordered CMS to share information about Medicaid enrollees with the Department of Homeland Security, drawing a lawsuit by Colorado and 19 other states alarmed that the administration would use the information for its deportation campaign against unauthorized residents.

In August, a federal judge ordered HHS to with immigration authorities.

State Medicaid agencies use databases maintained by the Social Security Administration and Department of Homeland Security to verify enrollees’ immigration status.

If states need to go back to individuals to reverify their citizenship or immigration status, it could lead some to fall off the rolls unnecessarily — for example, if they don’t see a letter requesting paperwork or fail to meet a deadline to respond.

“I am not sure that evidence suggests there really is a need for this” extra verification, said Marian Jarlenski, a health policy professor at the University of Pittsburgh School of Public Health.

Oz made clear that the Trump administration disagrees.

“Whether willful or not, the states’ conduct highlights a terrifying reality: American taxpayers have been footing the bill for illegal immigrants’ Medicaid coverage, despite many Democrats and the media insisting otherwise,” Oz said in his X post.

In an August press release, CMS said it would ask states to verify eligibility for enrollees whose immigration status could not be confirmed via federal databases. “We expect states to take quick action and will monitor progress on a monthly basis,” the agency said.

‘Pointless immigration status reviews’

Leonardo Cuello, a research professor at Georgetown University’s Center for Children and Families, called the CMS order to states “unprecedented” in the Medicaid program’s 60-year history.

He said the federal government may have been unable to verify certain individuals’ immigration status because names were misspelled or outdated, such as when a beneficiary is identified by their maiden instead of married name. The names may also include people helped by Emergency Medicaid, a program that covers the cost of hospital emergency services, including labor and delivery, for people regardless of immigration status.

“CMS is conducting pointless immigration status reviews for people whose hospital bills were paid by Emergency Medicaid,” Cuello said.

Oz noted in his post that federal law “does permit states to use Medicaid dollars for emergency treatment, regardless of patients’ citizenship or immigration status,” and that states can “legally build Medicaid programs for illegal immigrants using their own state tax dollars, so long as no federal tax dollars are used.”

The states Oz mentioned all such programs.

The verification checks create an added burden for state Medicaid agencies that are already busy preparing to implement the tax and policy law Trump signed in July. The measure, which Republicans call the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, makes many changes to Medicaid, including adding a work requirement in most states starting by 2027. The law also requires most states to more frequently check the eligibility of many adult Medicaid enrollees — at least twice a year.

“I fear states may do unnecessary checks that create a burden for some enrollees who will lose health coverage who should not,” Cuello said. “It¶¶Òőap going to be a whole lot of work for CMS and states for very little pay dirt.”

Cuello said the effort may have “greater political value than actual value.”

Brandon Cwalina, a spokesperson for the Pennsylvania Department of Human Services, which runs Medicaid in the state, said the state already requires every Medicaid applicant to verify their citizenship or, where applicable, their eligible immigration status.

However, he said, the directive issued by CMS “constitutes a new process, and DHS is carefully reviewing the list in order to take appropriate actions.”

Oz did not name Pennsylvania, which Trump won in 2024, in his post.

If a lawful resident does not have a Social Security number, the state confirms their legal status by checking a database from Homeland Security, as well as verifying specific immigration documents, he said.

Other state Medicaid agencies said they also needed to regroup before reaching out to enrollees.

“Our teams just received this notice and are working through a process by which we will perform these reviews,” Jennifer Strohecker, then Utah’s Medicaid director, told a state advisory board in August.

KFF Health News’ Renuka Rayasam and Rae Ellen Bichell contributed reporting.

is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF — an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about .

Re: “What DU’s move to end DEI looks like on campus,” Oct. 26 news story

Shame on Chancellor Jeremy Haefner and the cowardly leadership of the University of Denver. Dismantling the LGBTQ+ friendly lounge is just the first step in a long line of initiatives this university will take to bow down to the Trump administration’s hateful and discriminatory policies. Haefner states a “steadfast commitment” to inclusiveness, but we all know that this statement is void of intent.

The Post¶¶Òőap article states that Haefner noted that this year’s class of first-year students had the highest percentage of students of color in DU history at 34%. I hope the 34% leave. Let¶¶Òőap pull together as parents and students and disenroll next semester. Let¶¶Òőap disenroll in such large numbers that DU has to shut its door. Let¶¶Òőap put our college students in another university where they can thrive in a safe and inclusive environment — where they don’t have to go back in the closet or be fearful that their skin color will be the next reason to be afraid.

It is incredibly disappointing that Eric Duran and his co-director left DU, because now our students are down two allies. I guarantee they will find employment better suited to their ideals, but in the meantime, our students are suffering.

Kimberly Petitt, Thornton

Higher education is designed to challenge students, to challenge the institutions of higher learning to continue to break through imaginary barriers, assumptions and fears. DU, you have failed us.

David L Stevenson, Denver

Dems need to address the issues that got Trump elected

Re: “,” Oct. 26 news story

I would hope that the Democratic Party machine would have realized it wasn’t the candidate but the message that got Trump elected in 2024. He spoke to Americans about issues that were important to them: crime, illegal immigrants, the southern border, government waste and government bloating.

I’m certain he got the vote of many hundreds of thousands of Dems and independents who were tired of how things were going all across our government. He spoke harshly about the very problems Americans saw every day on TV news.

Our elected government leaders were not taking care of business. Criminals going free, open borders, high taxes, our government management and high cost of living that had been problems for years. The Democrats’ platform seemed mostly concerned with social programs instead of problem-solving and reducing government waste.

I’m also certain there are regrets by millions of those same voters, but who could have imagined what was going to come?

The Democratic Party needs to have a platform that speaks to the hard issues in America that affect us every day and a plan to solve them — not a platform of social welfare. I believe that is what many Dems and independents thought because that’s what voters said in 2024. Forgive them, for they knew not what they were doing.

Ralph Shepherd, Lakewood

Cost of health care is the disaster

Re: “Government shutdown: Voters expressing frustration,” Oct. 28 news story

Voters are frustrated with skyrocketing health care premiums? Big surprise there, as health care costs have outpaced wage increases for decades. Unfortunately, premiums reflect the actual cost of health care in a free market. What the premium increases tell us is that health care has become increasingly unaffordable in our current free-market system, leaving individuals with only a few options: finding money in family budgets that does not exist for many, having providers significantly lower the costs of their health care services or finding subsidies via government and/or charitable organizations.

Your position on potential solutions lies where you fit in the puzzle, hence the rationale for the current government shutdown. Speaker Mike Johnson said the Republicans “believe in the private sector and free market and individual providers.” Unfortunately, the free market is not working for the consumer. It seems to work very well for pharmaceutical, insurance companies and health care networks. But this is not sustainable nor is it good medicine to allow a significant part of the population to rely on emergency care instead of ongoing treatment for their illnesses.

Instead of arguing over who pays for it, maybe we should look deeper into the root causes for solutions. Better to bring costs into alignment with affordability than to look to others to subsidize. At the end of the day, more competition among health care providers, improved technology and significant changes to the way health care services are delivered are paths to affordability. Until then, we need the subsidies.

Joe Bryan,ÌęLoveland

All these years, the GOP has criticized the Affordable Care Act, aka Obamacare, for the petty reason that someone else came up with something. In the 15 years that we have been able to use the exchange, people have had protection against robber-baronesque tactics of refusing insurance because of pre-existing conditions. Sen. Rick Scott, R.-Fla., casts baseless blame on the ACA and calls it a disaster. Trump called the ACA a disaster in 2017. Let’s just overcome all this pettiness, extend the credits, and rename Obamacare “Trump Care.”

Mike Gallagher, Centennial

Where are the conservatives’ letters?

The Friday, Oct. 24, Open Forum consisted of only pro-lib comments. It would be wise for the editorial board to keep in mind that their readers are not all progressive Dems. Conservative readers make up a large proportion of subscriptions. We pay the same rates, and we expect the same ability to express our viewpoints.

Jeanne Slade, Morrison

Handing data over to surveillance cameras

Re: “Mayor extends Flock contract,” Oct. 23 news story

The Flock surveillance camera program presents alarming privacy concerns akin to an Orwellian reality. It¶¶Òőap bad enough that half a million taxpayer dollars were spent on the Flock surveillance camera program without the vote of the Denver City Council, the representatives of the people of Denver. That Mayor Mike Johnston signed a “free” contract extension with Flock, a private, for-profit corporation, despite public pushback, is even more disturbing. The City of Denver may not have paid the Flock corporation any money for this contract extension, but they surely paid them by allowing Flock to own everyone’s privacy rights who work, live or travel through Denver.

These Flock surveillance cameras don’t distinguish between a working person’s daily commute and a drunken driver speeding away from a hit-and-run. The mayor has now gifted all of our personal data regarding our movements — such as which businesses we support, which homes we visit, which hospitals and doctors we have appointments with, etc. — to this privately held corporation without our consent. We cannot trust this surveillance corporation to safeguard our personal data.

Denver’s Flock surveillance cameras are an egregious assault on all of our privacy rights and should be terminated immediately pending a decision by the representatives of the people of Denver.

Laura Jensen, Denver (on behalf of Del Pueblo Law, LLC)

Flock: Mayor Johnston got it right again

Re: “License-plate readers: Mayor extends Flock contract,” Oct. 23 news story

He made sound decisions regarding city layoffs; now, regarding the Flock contract extension, he’s made another great decision. The city needs as many creative law enforcement tools at their disposal as financially feasible. It¶¶Òőap hard to believe that some on the Denver City Council oppose this decision. Do they want more crimes to go unsolved? Did the city council want to drag out a decision-making process that would ultimately have the same result? The number of crimes that the Flock system helped solve speaks for itself, and there really is no downside to the additional guardrails. Kudos to Mayor Mike Johnston for his decisiveness and leadership in helping reduce crime. Now, on to helping the mental health crisis!

Don Ku,ÌęDenver

Don’t cut back now, RTD. Complete the journey

Re: “RTD ridership still falling,” Oct. 21 news story

Sitting in traffic on Interstate 270, I vow to take the Boulder Flatirons Flyer next time. I boast frequently to friends about the ease of taking the bus down to Denver, with the FF5 route going directly to Anschutz several times a day and the FF1 to Union Station about every 15 minutes.

I am disappointed to hear Denver RTD ridership is down, with possible cuts to routes. After all the money spent on our fine light-rail system, it would be a waste to back down in defeat. Ridership has been lost, partly due to COVID, and it will take time and ingenuity to build it back up.

If my experience with the Boulder system tells me anything, it is that frequent, regular departures make it sensible to take the bus. Cutting down on the number of routes and trips will discourage ridership. (My rule of thumb is, if a single trip takes much over an hour, I might as well drive.)

Traffic obstructs bus travel, which is why the light rail is so great. It¶¶Òőap important we work to make using it more attractive. Now that the safety issues are being addressed, with even a safety app available, the “last mile” could be better addressed, possibly with tweaks to bus routes or shuttles to better cover these long stretches of walking.

Surely people stuck in traffic day after day could be lured to public transportation, given enough convenience in using the system. Now is not the time to back down.

Frances Rossi, Boulder

During the renovation of Denver Union Station over 10 years ago, opportunities were missed to significantly improve RTD riders’ access to one of Denver’s highest-volume venues: Coors Field.

In fact, riders were actually pushed further away from Coors Field, to say nothing of downtown offices, when the light rail terminal, formerly adjacent to Union Station, was relocated two blocks west. To compound matters, those two blocks lengthened the connection between RTD’s light rail lines and the brand-new commuter rail system.

An opportunity existed to partially rectify this miscue by extending the light rail tracks a few blocks north to directly serve Coors Field, but this was not executed.

During the Union Station renovation, the new commuter rail tracks were constructed to pass directly behind Coors Field, yet inexplicably, no station was included!

To be fair, these missteps occurred well before the tenure of current RTD General Manager Debra Johnson. It remains to be seen how RTD will address these blunders in order to capitalize on at least 81 “high-volume events” per year for Colorado Rockies games, besides pre-season (and hopefully post-season!) games as well as additional special events at Coors Field.

Jeff Pletcher, Centennial

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 Trump administration took another step Tuesday to weaken protections for Americans with medical debt, issuing new guidance that threatens ongoing state efforts to keep that debt off consumers’ credit reports.

More than a dozen states, including Colorado, Washington, Oregon, California, Minnesota, Maryland, New York and most of New England, have enacted laws in recent years to keep medical debt from affecting consumers’ credit.

And more states — including several in conservative regions of the Midwest and Mountain West — similar protections, spurred by bipartisan concerns that medical debt on a credit report can make it harder for people to get a home, a car, or a job.

Nationwide, have some form of health care debt, with millions burdened by $10,000 or more in unpaid bills.

But , the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau asserts that federal law bars states from restricting medical debts from credit reports, arguing that only the federal government has this authority.

“Congress meant to occupy the field of consumer reporting and displace state laws,” the bureau concluded in an “interpretive rule” signed by Russell Vought, the White House budget director and acting head of the CFPB.

The guidance, which offers a new interpretation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, reverses policies advanced under former President Joe Biden that sought to empower states to expand protections for people with medical debt.

The Trump administration’s latest move will not immediately roll back existing state protections.

But advocates for patients and consumers warn that the new guidance may stall progress elsewhere, just as millions of Americans are poised to lose federal aid that helps them buy health insurance through the Affordable Care Act. The aid is tied up in the current budget showdown between congressional Republicans and Democrats.

“You’d be hard-pressed to find a crueler regulatory interpretation,” said Elisabeth Benjamin, a vice president for the Community Service Society of New York. The nonprofit has pushed for medical debt protections in that state.

Lucy Culp, who oversees state lobbying efforts by Blood Cancer United, formerly known as the Leukemia & Lymphoma Society, warned that the Trump administration’s guidance could reverberate across the country. “This rule will have a chilling effect on states’ willingness to pass these critical patient protections,” she said.

The CFPB did not respond to a request for comment.

The new CFPB guidance might spur more litigation challenging state restrictions on medical debt credit reporting.

Trade groups representing credit reporting agencies and debt collectors went to court early this year challenging that would have removed medical debt from credit reports nationwide. They argued that the administration exceeded its authority in issuing the credit reporting restrictions.

The federal restrictions would have helped an estimated 15 million people. But the Trump administration chose not to defend the new regulations, and a federal judge in Texas appointed by Trump ruled that the regulations should be scrapped. They never went into effect.

The Consumer Data Industry Association, which represents credit bureaus, did not respond to a request for comment about the new CFPB rule, but the industry group has argued that regulating medical debt should be left to the federal government.

“Only national, uniform standards can achieve the dual goals of protecting consumers and maintaining accurate credit reports,” Zachary Taylor, the group’s government relations director, in Maine this year before that state barred medical debts from credit reports there.

Broader health insurance protections could prevent more Americans from sinking into debt and depressing their credit scores.

But millions of Americans to lose health coverage in the coming years as a result of the tax and spending bill signed by the president in July.

“Millions of Americans are avoiding medical care, putting off needed surgeries, skipping essential treatments,” said Allison Sesso, president and chief executive of Undue Medical Debt, a nonprofit that buys up and retires patients’ debts and advocates for broader patient protections.

“This isn’t just a health care issue,” Sesso added. “It¶¶Òőap an economic crisis that¶¶Òőap keeping families from building wealth and fully participating in the economy. When credit scores are dinged by medical bills, everyone loses.”

is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF — an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about .

In October, the 34-year-old single mom was informed that, due to a lack of federal funding, she and her children may no longer qualify for their subsidized housing in Denver. Her car’s gas tank was empty Tuesday, her refrigerator and freezer picked clean.

How does the mother of three feed her hungry family when she also has to work 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. as a registered behavioral therapist caring for kids with autism? Kendall said her life feels like a cruel word problem she’s struggling to solve — and the math is not in her favor.

She locked down a stable, full-time job paying $21 an hour. Housing assistance typically covers a portion of her $3,000 monthly rent. She thought that, this year, she could finally provide her family with a Christmas without the help of charity.

Then the Trump administration announced it would , or SNAP, beginning Saturday, due to the U.S. government shutdown — suspending the federal food assistance program for the first time in its history.

SNAP, which costs the federal government about $8 billion a month, serves about one in eight Americans and is a pivotal piece of the nation’s social safety net. More than 600,000 low-income Coloradans, half of whom are children, rely on SNAP benefits for food monthly.

State and local leaders in Colorado, as well as food bank operators, this week scrambled to help meet the already overwhelming demand of people without means to eat.

On Thursday, a state legislative committee approved $10 million in emergency funding to expand grants for food banks and pantries across Colorado to address the food insecurity crisis. Officials in Colorado and other Democratic states filed a lawsuit Tuesday seeking to unlock emergency federal funds to help tens of millions of Americans keep buying food.

Gov. Jared Polis , Denver Mayor Mike Johnston and other leaders have urged Coloradans to donate to their local food banks. And the operators of those food banks have sounded the alarm about dwindling supplies as panicked residents prepared for an indefinite loss of grocery money.

For Kendall, the monthly $500 in SNAP benefits usually allows her to buy milk, meat, fresh produce — and sometimes even a luxury like juice, she said — for her 14-year-old, 11-year-old and 7-year-old. But those benefits are expected to end this weekend.

“I’m living day to day,” Kendall said. “My life is up in the air.”

Meanwhile, a growing line of families with young children stretched outside a Salvation Army food pantry in Aurora on Wednesday morning.

Salvation Army freezers, usually stocked with meat, sat empty. The food pantry, at 802 Quari Court, served double the number of clients since news about the suspension of SNAP benefits trickled out, said Carl Esquivel, who oversees the .

“It has been heartbreaking,” Esquivel said. “We try not to turn anybody away, but we have been very close to having to turn people away because we just don’t have enough.”

‘Everyone deserves to be able to eat’

Single mom Rachel Figueroa does not understand how people are bickering about politics while children are left to starve.

The 25-year-old mother of a 4-year-old and a 7-year-old relies on SNAP to make ends meet in her Parker household. Without that $375 per month, Figueroa plans to turn to food banks and the generosity of her family to keep her children fed.

“I don’t have extra money for groceries after I pay my bills,” Figueroa said. “I have my car payment. I have internet. I have our rent and miscellaneous things for my girls. I know the stigma around SNAP is it’s people who are lazy and don’t work and want to benefit off the government. I work. I always work. I work full-time, so without those benefits, we are not in good shape.”

Figueroa is a veterinary technician who has relied on SNAP for five years. The federal assistance affords her a trip to Walmart, where she grabs macaroni and cheese, eggs, milk, bananas, applesauce and a protein. If she can afford a treat, she’ll spring for chocolate milk for her kids.

“Everyone deserves to be able to eat,” Figueroa said. “I honestly have been so busy with work and the kids that I don’t have enough time to read up about politics, but this whole thing has opened my eyes that there are actually people out there who believe you and your kids don’t deserve to eat.”

At the Aurora Salvation Army, staff packed up boxes of whatever food they had on hand to distribute to the people lined up out the door. The food pantry is open 10 a.m. to noon and 1 to 3 p.m. Monday through Thursday. Food donations are accepted 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. Monday through Thursday.

The only meat in Wednesday’s boxes was a small tube of ground beef. The boxes are intended to last a month, Esquivel said.

With the recent influx of customers, the Salvation Army location this month already had to dip into December’s budget.

“That means we don’t know how our fiscal year will end,” Esquivel said. “What do we do then? Do we close down operations one day a week? Do we get rid of services? These are things we can’t do. We are here to serve people.”

‘This solution is riddled with holes’

Kendall is Native American, a member of the Oglala Sioux Tribe. The Indigenous woman said she lived on the reservation and knows what it takes to survive. She’s survived on rice and beans before and knows how to make bread from scratch, she said.

“But my kids aren’t used to that,” Kendall said. “I told my son we’re not going to have the luxury of getting things like chips anymore.”

Julia Walker’s brain is inundated with stories like Kendall’s — single mothers, children, seniors, the disabled, veterans and neighbors who are coming to her Arvada food pantry scared and hungry.

Walker is the founder and executive director of nonprofit , created during the pandemic out of a need to feed people and provide basic goods to her community.

In the past couple of weeks, as talk of losing food assistance benefits swirled, Walker said her small operation went from serving 25 families a week to 175. She has had to restrict the food pantry to Arvada residents only to keep up with demand.

“Quadrupling the amount of families we’re serving a week for a whole month is really going to take a toll on us financially and emotionally,” Walker said, noting that her small food bank is not a partner with larger operations like and likely won’t see any of the state’s emergency $10 million. “This is a very emotionally taxing position to be in when you have families coming every 30 minutes, crying and scared and trying to find hope.”

The Hope Connection and Community House is located at 5469 Reed St. in Arvada and is seeking non-perishable food item donations such as cereals, pastas, sauces, canned meats, applesauce and canned soups. Donations are being accepted at any time, and cash donations are accepted .

On Thursday, the legislature’s Joint Budget Committee approved a $10 million request from Polis to boost food banks across the state. Too little for the need, but it was what was available, given the state’sÌęown ongoing budget constraints.

“This solution is riddled with holes,” said Tom Dermody, chief legislative budget and policy analyst for the committee. “It is just as effective as us trying to plow a field with a fork. The scale of this particular emergency vastly outstrips any ability for the state to mitigate it in any truly meaningful way.”

The money will be distributed in three waves over the next month and targeted toward parts of the state with the highest number of SNAP beneficiaries. Because food banks can buy bulk foods at steep discounts, officials hope the money will stretch to the equivalent of $30 million to $50 million.

The government shutdown has continued as the Democratic minority in the U.S. Senate refuses to vote for a Republican budget bill that does not renew the expiring tax credits for people who buy health insurance on the individual marketplace. Democrats warn insurance premiums will shoot up by tens of thousands of dollars per year without the credits.

Republicans say Democrats must first agree to reopen the government before negotiations on the health care subsidies.

Democratic legislators have also argued that the administration is legally required to keep food assistance going as long as it has funding, but Trump’s U.S. Department of Agriculture said it will not use a roughly $5 billion federal contingency fund to keep SNAP running.

“This isn’t something we individually should be having to do right now,” state Rep. Emily Sirota, a Denver Democrat on the Joint Budget Committee, said, noting that she has donated personally to a local charity. “We all pay taxes here, federal taxes. And they should be going to support these programs that we pay taxes to provide for, and that¶¶Òőap not happening right now.”

Vanessa Pizarro, right, with Salvation Army Aurora Corps guest services, helps a client with the food pantry program in Aurora on Thursday, Oct. 30, 2025. (Photo by Andy Cross/The Denver Post)

‘What’s going to happen?’

Even in the most dire of circumstances, Coloradans have rallied around their neighbors.

Families have been dropping off carloads of goods to replenish wiped-out food banks, including at the Aurora Salvation Army, Esquivel said.

For those who want to best help, organizers said monetary donations to the food bank of your choice allow them to purchase more with their mass-quantity buying power, but they also encouraged donations of food, pet food and hygiene supplies.

like pasta purveyor Sfoglina have offered free meals and goods to neighbors in need. donated some of his yield. are providing Saturday meals for youth starting this weekend through the end of the year, no ID or registration required.

More information about how to access food resources in Denver or be a part of a food insecurity solution can be found at .

At a Thursday news conference, Mayor Johnston, flanked by City Council members and food bank organizers, encouraged those with means to help during this crisis. Mile High United Way has already seen about a 20% increase in 211 phone calls from Denver residents seeking help and resources, and the No. 1 question has been about accessing food, city officials said.

City Council member Darrell Watson said he is a product of SNAP benefits, having been raised alongside his six siblings by a single mother. Councilmember Jamie Torres said she stood in food bank lines with her mother as a child.

“What we’re talking about is supporting the families and children who will grow up to be the leaders of this city,” Torres said.

Torres worried that people too busy working to pay attention to the news will be shocked when they go to purchase food for their families and find their benefits drained.

“I’m not really big into politics,” said Kendall, the Denver mother of three. “I have to get up and go to work, but now it’s impacting me. Now I’m paying attention. What’s going to happen? What do I do?”

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Updated 4:30 p.m. Nov. 3, 2025: This story has been updated to clarify that Mile High United Way operates the 211 phone line.

The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, helps about one in eight Americans buy groceries. A halt to SNAP benefits would leave a gaping hole in the country’s safety net. Vulnerable families could see federal money dry up soon for some other programs, as well.

Funding for a group of Head Start preschool programs is set to run out Saturday.

Aid for mothers to care for their newborns through the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children, known as WIC, could run out the following week.

Tuesday’s legal filing from attorneys general from 22 states and the District of Columbia, plus three governors, focuses on a federal contingency fund with roughly $5 billion in it — enough to pay for the benefits for more than half a month.

President Donald Trump’s Department of Agriculture said in September that its plan for a shutdown included using the money to keep SNAP running. But in a memo last week, it said that it couldn’t legally use that money for such a purpose.

The Democratic officials contend the administration is legally required to keep benefits going as long as it has funding.

“It is clear President Trump and his USDA are making a deliberate, illegal and inhumane choice to not fund the SNAP program during the federal government shutdown despite the availability of contingency funds,” Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser said in a statement. “…We are asking the court to resume essential food assistance for the more than 600,000 Coloradans who use SNAP benefits to feed themselves or their families.”

The agency said debit cards beneficiaries use as part of SNAP to buy groceries will not be reloaded as of Nov. 1.

With their own coalition, 19 Republican state attorneys general sent Democratic U.S. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer a letter Tuesday urging passage of a “clean continuing resolution” to keep funding SNAP benefits.

Most SNAP participants are families with children, more than 1 in 3 include older adults or someone with a disability, and close to 2 in 5 are households where someone is employed. Most have incomes that put them below the poverty line, about $32,000 in income for a family of four, according to an analysis by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

The average monthly benefit is $187 per person.

Beneficiaries say that without the aid, they’ll be forced to choose between buying food and paying other bills. Food banks are preparing for a spike in demand that they’ll have to navigate with decreased federal aid themselves.

The debit cards are recharged in slightly different ways in each state. Not everyone receives their benefits on the first day of the month, though many beneficiaries get them early in the month.

States expect retailers will be able to accept cards with balances on them, even if they’re not replenished.

State governments controlled by both Democrats and Republicans are scrambling to help recipients. But several say they don’t have the technical ability to fund the regular benefits.

Officials in Louisiana, Vermont and Virginia have pledged to provide some type of backup food aid for recipients even while the shutdown stalls the federal program, though state-level details haven’t been announced.

More funding for food banks and pantries is planned in states including New Hampshire, Minnesota, California, New Mexico, Connecticut and New York.

The USDA advised Friday that states won’t be reimbursed for funding the benefits.

Republican South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster announced Tuesday that the state is opening a nonprofit fund typically used for disasters to give grants to food banks. But the fund is empty and will need immediate donations. Last year, it raised $6 million for Hurricane Helene relief. Each month, more than $100 million in SNAP benefits are delivered in South Carolina.

In Pennsylvania, where a budget stalemate has held up more than $25 million in aid to food banks, Democratic lawmakers are pushing for $60 million in emergency aid for food banks and meals on wheels programs.

The Trump administration is blaming Democrats, who say they will not agree to reopen the government until Republicans negotiate with them on extending expiring subsidies under the Affordable Care Act. Republicans say Democrats must first agree to reopen the government before negotiation.