In the letter sent Tuesday evening, Jill Hunsaker Ryan, the executive director of the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, also asked the Aurora facility’s warden and health administrator to allow inspectors to review medical records for the detainee who contracted . A positive test result was identified late last month.

She directed officials to provide facility access to inspectors investigating the case, as well as records for other individuals who have been screened for TB and the information necessary to determine the disease’s potential spread.

By Wednesday evening, a CDPHE spokeswoman said facility officials had not yet responded to the requests.

The escalation came amid a nearly three-week standoff between Adams County health officials and the Aurora facility’s operators and federal officials — who, local officials say, have blocked investigators from interviewing detainees, inspecting the facility and reviewing records. Adams County officials issued a public health order last month seeking that information after the Geo Group, which operates the facility, and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, which has ultimate control over it, refused to cooperate.

“These barriers prevent public health officials from determining the scope of potential exposure and taking appropriate steps to protect detainees, employees, contractors, visitors, people who have been transferred or released, and others who may have been exposed,” Hunsaker Ryan wrote to the facility’s leaders in the letter. “Immediate cooperation is necessary for the investigation to proceed.”

A spokesman for Geo Group did not immediately respond to an email seeking comment Wednesday afternoon. Representatives for ICE and the Department of Homeland Security told The Denver Post earlier this week that there were no active tuberculosis cases in the 1,530-bed facility, though they did not respond when asked if that meant officials had moved any individual who had tested positive.

The agencies have not publicly acknowledged the positive test, which health officials said they identified on June 22 using samples taken from the facility.

In a Wednesday statement to The Post, Gov. Jared Polis said he was “deeply concerned by the reports of active Tuberculosis at the GEO facility in Aurora and the inability for local public health to do their jobs because of interference from the facility.”

“We are focused on protecting public health and urge the GEO Group to let Adams County Public Health do their jobs to investigate this alleged outbreak, including providing any necessary testing and treatment to prevent disease spread,” he wrote.

Immigration attorneys and advocates have told The Post that a number of detainees in the facility have been tested for TB in recent weeks and that at least one person had been removed from the facility. Because of Geo’s and ICE’s refusal to provide full access to the facility, health officials have said they cannot confirm reports of additional cases or quarantines.

Hunsaker Ryan’s letter lists the state laws that underpin the state’s access and information requests, as well as health inspectors’ legal responsibility to investigate TB cases. She did not say what the state will do if Geo and ICE do not comply by Friday.

CDPHE spokeswoman Hope Shuler wrote in an email to The Post that agency leaders still hoped facility officials would respond to the letter, adding that their goal was “to work collaboratively with GEO.”

“This is how we would treat any potential outbreak of a communicable disease,” Schuler said. “If we are unable to obtain the necessary access and information, we will determine appropriate next steps, but our goal right now is simply to gain access for purposes of determining whether we have an outbreak.”

The standoff is not the first time, in Colorado or elsewhere, that ICE and its detention center contractors have refused access to outside inspectors.

Adams County officials admonished the Aurora facility earlier this year for failing to provide sufficient information for an investigation into a separate suspected outbreak. In Washington state, to allow state health inspectors into a Tacoma detention center after the facility repeatedly denied them access.

After ICE moved to block members of Congress from conducting unannounced visits to detention centers, another federal judge ordered the Trump administration to grant access to the lawmakers, including Colorado’s U.S. Reps. Jason Crow and Joe Neguse.

Geo has also resisted recent attempts to more tightly regulate the conditions of its facilities. Last month, the company filed a lawsuit challenging a new state law in Colorado that requires regular outside inspections of detention centers; that legislation also covered investigations of communicable diseases.

On Monday, Geo Group announced that it had signed a contract worth up to $528.6 million to open a new detention center in Hudson, on the grounds of a shuttered prison the company once operated.

Romero had 55% of the vote when the Associated Press called the race just after 8 p.m. Tuesday. His opponent, Alex Kelloff, earned 45% of the vote. Approximately 66,700 votes had been tallied.

After his victory, Romero criticized Hurd for siding with President Donald Trump and pledged to fight to lower the cost of living.

“I am ready to take down Jeff Hurd and make sure the voices of Coloradans are heard in Congress,” he said in a statement.

Both Romero and Kelloff campaigned on similar policy platforms emphasizing that they’d address the rising cost of living, access to affordable health care, protection of public lands and opposition to Trump.

Kelloff, 53, is a political newcomer who entered the primary race more than a year ago after more than 30 years in the telecommunications industry. Romero, 61, is a U.S. Army veteran who leads a real estate company and has served on multiple local boards and governments in the Roaring Fork Valley. He entered the race in March.

Colorado’s 3rd District covers nearly half of the state, swooping from the desert and canyons of the Western Slope to the high mountains in southern Colorado and the southern end of the Front Range in Pueblo. Leaders from the Colorado Democratic Party on Tuesday said the district’s general election will be one of the most important for the party in November.

Hurd won the seat in 2024 after U.S. Rep. Lauren Boebert moved across the state to run in a different district. A Republican, former state legislator Ron Hanks, challenged Hurd from within his party in Tuesday’s GOP primary.

Hurd defeated Hanks, earning 68% of the 60,785 votes counted by 7:45 p.m. The Associated Press called the race at 7:40 p.m.

A Democrat has not represented the 3rd District since 2011.

But in 2022, voters nearly elected Democrat Adam Frisch, an Aspen businessman. He lost to Boebert that year by 546 votes. In 2024, Frisch ran again and earned 46% of the votes to Hurd’s 51% — a difference of nearly 20,000 votes.

Trump’s presidential campaign won the district in 2024 by a 10-point margin.

The race on the Western Slope is one of several contested congressional primaries in Colorado on Tuesday, with the 1st and 8th congressional districts‘ primaries covered in separate stories by The Denver Post. Three other districts had no competition for either major party, with their major-party November matchups already set.

Colorado Springs-based seat

Two Democrats vied for the chance to flip the 5th Congressional District, which covers Colorado Springs and its suburbs. Voters in the district have never voted a Democrat into the position, but the national party has identified the race to unseat incumbent Republican Rep. Jeff Crank as one to watch as demographics change and Trump’s approval ratings fall.

Jessica Killin defeated Joe Reagan for the district’s Democratic nomination. The Associated Press called the race for Killin just before 8 p.m., when she held 63% of the 52,400 votes counted at the time. Reagan earned 37% of the vote.

Crank ran unopposed in the Republican primary.

2nd District Republican race

In the 2nd Congressional District, two Republicans ran for the chance to unseat Democrat Rep. Joe Neguse. Kelley Dennison defeated Christina Blunt, according to the Associated Press, which called the race at 8 p.m. Dennison had 58% of the vote at that time and Blunt had 42%.

Neguse has represented the district since 2019. It covers a broad swath of north-central Colorado, including Boulder, Fort Collins, Summit County and the rural ranchlands around Steamboat Springs. Voters have not elected a Republican to the seat since 1972.

is a Larimer County massage therapist who says her priority is addressing the cost of living. is a Fort Collins business owner who is also focused on affordability and who said she “stands on Christ and the Bible, the Constitution and Bullets.”

Rep. Lauren Boebert’s matchup

Republican Rep. Lauren Boebert will face Democrat Eileen Laubacher in the general election after an earlier Democratic contest fizzled; only a write-in candidate, Jenna Preston, filed primary paperwork. The district covers much of the Eastern Plains and small sections of the Front Range, including Castle Rock.

Aurora-based 6th District

Incumbent Democratic Rep. Jason Crow will face Republican Jason Clark in the general election for the district that includes Aurora and sections of Denver’s southern suburbs.

7th District in west metro, mountains

No Democrat challenged incumbent Rep. Brittany Pettersen. She will face Republican Tim Bennett in the general election for the district, which covers the western flank of the Front Range as well as much of the Arkansas River valley from Leadville to Cañon City.

If Democrats regain control of the House this fall, DeGette could lead . She says she would have the chance to bring a “Medicare For All” bill — one of the Democrats’ white whale policies — to a vote. She also vows to use that position to make strides toward banning government restrictions on abortion access.

But her opponents in the June 30 primary, lawyer Melat Kiros and University of Colorado Regent Wanda James, say it����ap too little, too late.

“She’s not really done anything effectively in the last 10 years,” said Kiros, also a barista who’s pursuing a doctorate in public policy.

“We don’t have leadership in Congressional District 1,” said James, who is also a marijuana entrepreneur. “Seniority, when you have done nothing and not been effective, is not good.”

But DeGette is fiercely defending her record, saying her opponents don’t understand what the job actually takes and that she’s accomplished plenty in her three decades in Congress.

“I’ve never seen anybody pass a piece of legislation to lower costs through ‘disruption,’ ” she said in an interview with The Denver Post, referring to her opponents’ strategies.

The Democratic primary in dark-blue Denver for Colorado’s 1st Congressional District. The three-way race heated up earlier this year when Kiros soundly defeated DeGette in the Democrats’ Denver County assembly. Though the party assembly process isn’t typically representative of the people voting in the full primary election — in which Democrats as well as unaffiliated voters can participate — the event raised eyebrows among political observers.

It was the first time DeGette, 68, had lost a county assembly vote since she was initially elected in 1996.

“I think she has lost some contact with her constituents based on what you saw at the county assembly,” said former Denver Mayor Wellington Webb, who has endorsed James. “It����ap just time for a change.”

DeGette went on to narrowly earn her place on the ballot in late March at the 1st Congressional District party assembly, just clearing the eligibility threshold while Kiros, 29, won top billing. James, 62, landed on the ballot through a petition process.

Whoever wins the nomination will become the favorite in the November midterm against other general election candidates, including presumptive Republican nominee Christy Peterson.

If DeGette loses, the new representative would enter Congress as a freshman lawmaker. Karen Middleton, the president of the Cobalt Abortion Fund, an abortion-rights advocacy group based in Colorado, said that could be a problem during a critical moment in healthcare policy.

“Every time you turn over a member of Congress, you lose seniority, you lose committee assignments, you lose leadership,” she said. Cobalt hasn’t endorsed any of the three primary candidates.

A look at DeGette’s accomplishments

One of the main criticisms lobbed at DeGette in the primary campaign so far has focused on the .

During her time in Congress, DeGette has been the primary sponsor of 205 bills. Seven of them either became law or were incorporated into other bills that later became law, according to .

But focusing on that figure alone shows a fundamental misunderstanding of civics, said James Owens, a spokesman for DeGette’s campaign. Members of Congress do far more work than just introducing bills, he pointed out. They secure funding for projects in their districts, serve on committees, provide services to constituents, bring amendments, and work behind the scenes to build coalitions and shape policies.

Lawmakers can also find ways to weave their policies into other bills that may not bear their names.

“The effectiveness of a legislator is in their ability to get policy passed. And she’s been able to do that through all these different mechanisms, and those various avenues aren’t captured by a simple Google search,” Owens said. “Folks in Denver don’t care if your name is on the bill or if you were pushing to get it included in another bill, they just want the legislation to pass.”

Owens said by his count, DeGette has had a major role in passing more than 40 pieces of legislation for things like , tightening , allowing the Food and Drug Administration to , and funding for projects in the district. Her team says she also played a role in shaping parts of the Affordable Care Act, known as Obamacare.

DeGette was an architect of the 21st Century Cures Act, . That’s another bill that doesn’t include her name because a Senate version of the legislation, which was designed to accelerate biomedical research, is what eventually passed, Owens said.

DeGette says she’s also been instrumental in educating fellow members of Congress and building coalitions on complex issues like abortion access. She’s been one of two chairs of the Reproductive Freedom Caucus since 2005.

“The next day after Roe v. Wade was overturned by the Supreme Court, I called (then-Speaker) Nancy Pelosi on her cell phone … and I said, ‘Nancy, we need to put the Women’s Health Protection Act on the floor next week — and I will guarantee you I have the votes.’ ”

The House later passed that bill, but ultimately it failed in the Senate. DeGette said she has begun working on a plan to bring that legislation back if Democrats regain the House majority.

“I’m sure both of my primary opponents are pro-choice,” she said. “… But if you have a brand new person coming in saying, ‘Put my bill on a very important topic on the floor next week,’ they’re not going to have any ability to do that.”

DeGette is one of 45 members of the Democratic caucus on the litigation task force, which files legal motions and amicus briefs to support and challenge certain efforts in the courts. Earlier this month, to the U.S. Supreme Court that encouraged the justices to protect access to the abortion medication mifepristone.

DeGette has been the prime sponsor on eight unsuccessful bills related to stem cell research but was able to work with Obama on his executive order to .

Despite those actions, the a joint project from Vanderbilt University and the University of Virginia that analyzes items moving through Congress, ranked DeGette as below average in effectiveness in eight of 14 terms analyzed.

The center rated five of her terms as average. Only one term, her first, was rated as above average.

The group considers how skilled members of Congress are at moving their agenda items forward. It has ranked U.S. Rep. Joe Neguse, who represents Colorado’s 2nd Congressional District, as one of the most effective lawmakers in the House. Neguse, a Lafayette resident, is the House’s assistant Democratic leader.

But DeGette’s team says rankings like that lack context and don’t take into account all legislative accomplishments.

For instance, DeGette  in 2019. to be one of the nine impeachment managers for Trump’s 2021 impeachment trial in the Senate.

Promises for her next two years

If her fellow Democrats regain the majority, DeGette believes that, as the current ranking Democratic member of the Energy and Commerce Committee’s , she would become chair of that subcommittee.

Then, she would be able to decide which bills come before it. She would set the agenda, which would allow her to bring legislation implementing Medicare for All to the committee. For it to be successful from there, she said, she would lean on her connections to build a support group.

“It����ap having the vision and the ability to write the legislation, and then to push the legislation through and having the contacts to make that happen,” she said. “Legislative politics is a team sport, so you have to be able to be the captain of the team.”

Both James and Kiros are also supporters of Medicare For All, a proposal that can vary in details but typically means single-payer health insurance coverage for all Americans in a program run by the government.

DeGette said her hope is for Democrats to use the next two years to regain power on the national stage.

If the party wins a majority in the House or Senate in the midterms, she said that will allow Democrats to begin developing major policies that they can enact if they then win the presidency in 2028.

“I actually see the next two years as a huge opportunity,” she said.

DeGette has defeated primary challengers before, but this time her opponents have lined up long endorsement rosters. Kiros and local elected officials, including Reps. Javier Mabrey and Denver City Councilwoman Sarah Parady. James counts Webb and his wife, Wilma, as well as Ken Salazar, a former U.S. senator and Interior secretary, along with .

Both challengers also have fundraising in the six figures, with Kiros reporting about $375,000 in contributions through March 31 and James reporting about $234,000.

But DeGette has more than held her own, reporting contributions approaching $1 million, including heavy support from political action committees. And she from a litany of labor unions, abortion-rights groups and other organizations on her website.

Kiros and James offer something new

If Kiros is able to continue her momentum from the assembly process and win the primary, she would join a wave of young Democrats nationwide who are seeking to oust longstanding political figures.

Kiros, a Democratic socialist, sees herself aligning with members of Congress like U.S. Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York and Summer Lee of Pennsylvania.

She said that after Democrats lost the 2024 presidential and many congressional elections, she believes the party needs more competitive primaries.

“We need to make sure that we’re sending the best of the best to the general. And particularly looking at Democrats that have been there for decades — and so I looked at the congresswoman,” she said, referring to DeGette. “There’s nothing in her record to point to that shows that she’s fighting for working people right now in a way that����ap meaningful and tangible.”

DeGette responded to criticism that she has been in office for too long during her interview with The Post.

“I think there are people in Congress who’ve been there too long. But I think the voters of the 1st Congressional District know me, and they know that I’m a fighter for their values, and you need both,” she said. “You need people who have the experience and the leadership roles to know when the time is right to get these things done, and that����ap where I’m at.”

While Kiros is aligned with some of DeGette’s values, she has distinguished herself with her views on the Israel-Hamas war in the Gaza Strip. While DeGette has focused her comments on the need for humanitarian aid, Kiros has more directly criticized Israel and questioned its legitimacy as a state.

She said in a recent interview that she wouldn’t support providing offensive or defensive weapons to the country.

James, a Navy veteran and the owner of the cannabis company Simply Pure, said that if she was elected, she would do a better job of using the bully pulpit than DeGette does.

“I’ve lived here now for 20 years, and I don’t think that I have ever seen my congresswoman being interviewed on any television show,” she said. “I don’t believe I have ever seen my congresswoman stepping out and holding Congress or the other party to task anywhere.”

DeGette has taken a somewhat lower-profile approach to her position than some of her colleagues. She is less active on social media and appears at public events less often than some of her colleagues in Colorado’s congressional delegation.

She was absent, for instance, during a recent news conference in Denver with Mayor Mike Johnston and Democratic National Committee leaders as the group considers hosting its 2028 presidential nominating convention in her district. U.S. Rep. Jason Crow was present, but DeGette said she had a conflict. She said she did meet with the DNC delegation during its visit.

“Diana DeGette is nonexistent and has been nonexistent as long as I’ve been a resident of CD1,” James said. “That����ap why I’m running. … In Colorado’s capital city, CD1 should be leading the conversation.”

Mail ballots for the Democratic primary are set to go out starting June 8. The 1st District generally follows Denver city boundaries and includes Glendale and Holly Hills.

Tell us what you think about this story

For more than a year, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation has withheld $40 million awarded to the for the purchase of the water rights attached to Xcel Energy’s aging Shoshone Power Plant in Glenwood Canyon. The release of the federal funding brings the total amount secured for the purchase to $97 million — just shy of the $99 million needed for the project.

For years, the river district — a taxpayer-funded agency based in Glenwood Springs that works to protect Western Slope water — has worked to purchase the rights from the utility. Its leaders want to ensure that, even in dry years, the billions of gallons of water the rights command continue to flow west through the canyon and to the communities, wildlife habitats and farms downstream.

The district and other Western Slope entities feared the certainty of the flows would be threatened if another purchaser — like a Front Range utility — were able to snag the rights first.

The purchase is a “once-in-a-generation” investment in securing Western Slope water supplies, said Andy Mueller, the general manager of the Colorado River District, in a news release Friday. The federal dollars will add to the $20 million contributed by the Colorado Water Conservation Board and the $37 million raised by the district from Western Slope governments, organizations and irrigators.

“This award is a major breakthrough in our coalition’s effort to permanently secure historic flows on the Colorado River,” he said.

The Bureau of Reclamation in January 2025 — during the final days of the Biden administration — awarded the money to the Colorado River District as part of the Inflation Reduction Act. After taking office, President Donald Trump froze much of the funding allocated under the Biden-era act.

Members of Colorado’s federal delegation from both sides of the aisle pushed the Trump administration to release the money. Mueller thanked Republican Rep. Jeff Hurd, who represents much of the Western Slope, as well as Democratic Rep. Joe Neguse, Sen. Michael Bennet and Sen. John Hickenlooper for their work advocating for the funding.

“This is a major step forward for Western Colorado and an important step toward protecting one of the most critical water resources in our region,” Hurd said in a news release Friday announcing the release of the funding. “The Shoshone water rights are foundational to the long-term health of the Colorado River system and essential to the farmers, ranchers, municipalities, and communities that depend on reliable water supplies.”

The federal funding brings the Shoshone water rights deal — originally inked in 2023 — one step closer to completion. Xcel Energy still needs approval for the sale from Colorado’s public utility regulators, and the river district must go through the state’s water court process.

The Trump administration in already-awarded Inflation Reduction Act funding for four other water projects related to the shrinking and overallocated Colorado River.

Still yet to be funded are nine more projects previously awarded a combined $52 million from the act, according to Hickenlooper’s office.

Evans brought in more than $1.2 million during the first three months of 2026, according to federal campaign finance reports due Wednesday. He ended March with more than $3.4 million in the bank. That’s an eye-watering sum, easily surpassing the roughly $2 million that Evans’ Democratic predecessor, then-U.S. Rep. Yadira Caraveo, had gathered at the same point in early 2024.

Evans has no primary challenger, meaning he won’t need to start seriously spending his cash until after his Democratic opponent emerges from the June 30 primary.

In other federal races, U.S. Sen. John Hickenlooper significantly outraised a state senator challenging him in the Democratic primary, while another incumbent — Republican U.S. Rep. Lauren Boebert — was outraised by an even greater factor by her only remaining Democratic challenger in the state’s most conservative-leaning district.

The race for Evans’ 8th Congressional District seat, which sits in a rural-suburban area north of Denver, will be among the most closely watched contests in the country this fall. Two of the Democrats hoping to topple Evans have started marshalling their own financial resources.

State Rep. Manny Rutinel posted a strong quarter, hauling in more than $952,000 to bring his cash-on-hand total to more than $1.76 million. He raised more — and has banked more — than his former state House colleague, Shannon Bird, who joined the race a few months after Rutinel last year.

Bird raised nearly $567,000 in early 2026, and she ended the quarter with just over $1 million to play with as the primary season entered its final three-month stretch.

The third Democrat in the race, Marine veteran Evan Munsing, has outlasted several more established candidates — including Caraveo, who mounted a brief comeback campaign last year. But his fundraising has slipped farther behind Rutinel’s and Bird’s: Munsing raked in $115,000 last quarter, and he spent almost double that.

As a consequence, his cash pile has been halved, from the $213,000 at the end of 2025 to $108,000 at the end of March.

Between the three Democrats and Evans, the CD8 candidates raised more than $2.8 million over the last three months. Between them, the four candidates have nearly $6.4 million on hand.

More than half of that pile lies, waiting, in Evans’ coffers.

“I’m grateful for the outpouring of support from Coloradans who are ready to keep fighting for safer communities, a stronger economy and a more secure future,” Evans said in a statement Wednesday.

Here’s what else was revealed by the latest federal campaign finance reports, which came out just after the major parties’ primary ballots were finalized through assembly votes and petitioning.

Hickenlooper’s haul grows for primary challenge

In his Senate reelection race, Hickenlooper raised nearly $1.4 million last quarter, the first full reporting period since his primary challenger, state Sen. Julie Gonzales, entered the race. That’s more than he raised in the prior quarter.

Though he spent more than $1.2 million in the early part of 2026, the incumbent Democrat will still enter primary season with a hefty $4 million in the bank.

Gonzales, meanwhile, has reported more anemic fundraising. She raised more than $264,000 this past quarter, compared with the nearly $180,000 she posted in her first month in late 2025, showing a slowing pace. Her most recent total in the bank sat at just over $114,000.

In a blog post Wednesday, Gonzales acknowledged that her campaign was “living paycheck to paycheck.” But she appeared undaunted and said she raised $130,000 in the first week of April, after the reporting period’s end.

DeGette’s balance grows as challenger picks up pace

A different primary challenge is brewing in Denver’s 1st Congressional District.

U.S. Rep. Diana DeGette, a Democrat who’s been in Congress for nearly 30 years, is facing two Democratic opponents: University of Colorado Regent Wanda James and Melat Kiros, a lawyer and doctoral student who last month beat DeGette in an assembly nominating vote.

Whether that victory translates to an incumbent-toppling result in June remains to be seen. DeGette raised more than $263,000 last quarter, a bit more than she’d raised at the end of 2025. Her cash-on-hand total ticked up, too, and now sits at $636,000.

Kiros also saw a boost, bringing in more than $174,000, double her prior quarter’s total. With $118,000 in the bank, she trailed DeGette’s total entering primary season.

James’ fundraising went the opposite way. The regent raised more than $72,000 last quarter, below her fourth-quarter total last year. Her spending also ticked up, bringing her cash on hand down to just more than $54,000.

Boebert challenger keeps raking in cash. Will it matter?

Among Colorado’s incumbents in Congress, Boebert has long been a fundraising lightning rod. That remains true, even as she settles into the comfortably conservative 4th Congressional District, which covers Colorado’s Eastern Plains as well as Douglas County, after a district switch in the last election.

Eileen Laubacher, a retired rear admiral in the U.S. Navy, raised more than $2 million for the second consecutive quarter. After a big spend of $1.5 million, she still ended the quarter with more than $3 million in her campaign’s pocket. Another Democratic candidate, Trisha Calvarese, also had raised big money in her second run against Boebert before she dropped out two weeks ago.

Boebert, in contrast, raised just under $90,000 in the last three months, and she reported $160,000 on hand in late March.

It’s important to remember that Boebert now represents a district where, in a 2021 analysis, by more than 26 percentage points. In 2024, Boebert’s win wasn’t even half that — and .

Hurd amasses cash to defend Western Slope seat

In Boebert’s old 3rd Congressional District, her erstwhile Republican opponent, U.S. Rep. Jeff Hurd, is looking to defend a seat that’s reliably, if not comfortably, red. Hurd raised more than $609,000 last quarter, bringing his war chest to just under $2 million.

He also picked up a primary opponent at the Colorado Republican Party assembly last week — former state Rep. Ron Hanks — but his fundraising advantage is hefty.

Two Democrats are jockeying to take on Hurd in November. Alex Kelloff, a Snowmass businessman, has been in the race longer. He raised $192,000 last quarter, adding a bit to his cash-on-hand total of $458,000.

Kelloff’s newcomer primary opponent, fellow businessman Dwayne Romero, raised more than $505,000 in his first month in the race, and, after expenses, had slighty more on hand than Kelloff.

Democrat brings in cash to flip Colorado Springs district

Colorado’s other Jeff among Republican congressmen — Hurd’s fellow freshman, U.S. Rep. Jeff Crank —  raised $345,000 last quarter as he looks to defend the conservative 5th Congressional District. Crank’s war chest now tops $1.1 million.

His likely opponent, Democrat Jessica Killin, brought in nearly $670,000, bringing her on-hand total to more than $1.5 million. Army veteran Joe Reagan, who is challenging Killin for the Democratic nomination, raised $86,000 and ended the first quarter with $33,000 in the bank.

Democrats have been targeting the district, which — after Boebert’s current seat — is the most conservative in the state.

Incumbents’ cash hauls

While DeGette looks to ward off her primary opponents, Colorado’s three other Democratic members of Congress are without well-known Republican challengers. But they’re still slowly building up their campaign bank accounts.

U.S. Rep. Joe Neguse, of the Boulder-based 2nd Congressional District, brought his cash on hand to just under $3 million last quarter. U.S. Rep. Jason Crow, of Aurora’s 6th Congressional District, raked in nearly $940,000 to start 2026 (which, his campaign said, was his largest single-quarter haul), and he had more than $2.5 million under his campaign mattress.

U.S. Rep. Brittany Pettersen, whose 7th Congressional District covers the center of the state up through parts of metro Denver, had more than $915,000 on hand.

Those sums will allow the Democrats to support not only their own campaigns but others’ races and causes, too. Crow’s latest campaign finance report listed a nearly $60,000 contribution to the Rocky Mountain Immigrant Advocacy Network, for instance, while Neguse gave $35,000 to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.

On Saturday, at least, you call them Democrats. Then, in two weeks, you call them Republicans.

The Democratic Party faithful are gathering this weekend in the southern Colorado city for their first in-person statewide assembly since 2018 — and the party’s most consequential assembly since then, to boot. A slew of candidates are vying for the party’s nominations to the state’s top offices, nearly all of which are open because of term-limited incumbents.

The Colorado Democratic Party’s state assembly on Saturday at Memorial Hall marks the first major winnowing of those candidates. It’s also a chance for the victors to rally the base — and, they hope, ride a wave of victory headlines to the June primary election, where voters will have the final say on nominations.

In two weeks, on April 11, the Colorado Republican Party will follow suit with their state assembly, at Massari Arena on the Colorado State University Pueblo campus.

The stakes are similar in each case. Party members, picked among neighbors at precinct and county caucuses across the state in the weeks before, will name their preferences for a slew of elected offices, from U.S. senator and governor to members of the state House of Representatives. 

The assemblies aren’t the end of the nomination process — indeed, some of the highest-profile names in Democratic politics are foregoing it. But the event will exclude from June 30 primary ballots those candidates who rely on the assembly and fail to clear its 30% threshold of support. The assembly vote winners will land on the ballot’s top line.

“The most exciting thing about (the assembly) is how it levels the playing field for grassroots competitors to have a shot at sharing a message that, in some cases, resonates broadly,” Colorado Democratic Party Chair Shad Murib said.

The assembly puts candidates in front of swaths of some of the most dedicated Democrats in the state to make their case, one five-minute speech at a time.

The candidates also get the chance to rub elbows in hallways and have one-on-one conversations with voters about why they should hold the office they’re seeking — making potentially invaluable inroads, particularly for lesser-known candidates looking to knock off longtime officeholders.

Already, the caucus and assembly process revealed an organizing gap for one longtime politician. Candidate for Congress Melat Kiros walloped U.S. Rep. Diana DeGette at the Denver County assembly in mid-March, winning nearly two votes for every one the 15-term congresswoman pulled in. On Friday night, Kiros easily cruised to a place on the June primary ballot, earning 67% of the party’s nominating vote to DeGette’s 33%. Though she lost, DeGette avoided the unthinkable — falling below 30% and falling off the ballot.

Former Gov. Roy Romer, a Democrat who led the state from 1987 to 1999, praised the caucus and assembly process as a way for regular people to steer the party, rather than letting someone just throw tens of millions of dollars into an election. He’ll be introducing Attorney General Phil Weiser, a candidate for governor, at Saturday’s assembly.

“This way is a movement,” Romer said in an interview. “When you’re petitioning, you’re a little more distant from people. This is working with people, community by community. This is a way to come together and say this is our nominee.”

Alternatively, candidates can qualify for the ballot by collecting petition signatures. U.S. Sens. Michael Bennet and John Hickenlooper both pursued that option. Bennet is running for governor against Weiser, while Hickenlooper is seeking reelection.

They each collected nearly 15,000 signatures, or some 10 times the number of people who will be at the assembly, and were the first candidates to qualify for the June primary.

On the Republican side, state Sen. Barbara Kirkmeyer and pastor Victor Marx have both submitted more than 20,000 signatures to the secretary of state’s office to qualify for their party’s gubernatorial primary. More than a dozen other GOP candidates have also filed for the office. The GOP assembly next month is expected to pare down that field substantially.

Seth Masket, a University of Denver political science professor, cautioned against making assumptions about the routes the candidates take to the ballot.

Further-left and further-right candidates tend to benefit from the caucus and assembly process because they tend to attract a more passionate followings, he said. That doesn’t mean they necessarily do or don’t have a broad base of support, but they do have supporters who care enough to spend a weeknight at a caucus or a spring Saturday in a convention hall.

Candidates who are more mainstream in their party — and especially those with money — generally find it easier to petition onto the ballot. They can also avoid the risk of being kept off the ballot by an organized, enthusiastic base of opposition that only needs a few hundred people to potentially keep them below the 30% threshold necessary for ballot qualification. (The threshold drops to 10%, however, if the candidate goes a hybrid route of pursuing both petitions and the assembly vote.)

“(A successful assembly candidate is) not necessarily the candidate that’s going to win the primary, but it is a candidate that has a passionate following,” Masket said. “Not every candidate has that and, to be honest, more mainstream candidates don’t tend to have that kind of following. What they do have is more general name recognition and support from party members.” 

Recent electoral history in Colorado has shown that assembly victories rarely translate into overall victory in the primary.

In 2010, Bennet, who had been appointed to the Senate but not yet won an election, . In 2018, then-U.S. Rep. Jared Polis lost the caucus vote in his bid for governor. In 2020, Hickenlooper likewise lost the caucus in his first bid for the U.S. Senate.

All three went on to win the party nomination in the primary, and then they won the general election. 

So far this cycle, public polls show Bennet and with wide leads over their competitors, even as they cede the assembly to their rivals.

“Both methods require any candidate to earn the backing of voters from every single corner of this state,” Jordan Fuja, a spokesperson for Bennet����ap campaign, said in a statement. “… Colorado voters are looking for a governor with the experience, vision, and commitment to delivering the results we need. Michael has held a commanding lead since he first entered this race because Coloradans know he is the right candidate to protect Colorado from (President Donald) Trump’s chaos and build an economy that works for working people.”

Hickenlooper, meanwhile, had initially intended to go through the caucus and assembly process before putting his efforts into the petition process. 

In a statement, his campaign acknowledged the switch, saying the intent was voter outreach.

“Our focus in participating in the caucus process at the beginning was to help energize the base, meet with voters, and support the work of our county parties,” spokesperson Jess Cohen said. “The senator appreciates everyone who has participated in the process and really enjoyed having conversations with folks across the state.”

Hickenlooper’s decision to pull back, meanwhile, left openings for his rivals — and a chance to rally a fired-up Democratic base that has shown it����ap open to change.

“It����ap clear to me that the base of the Democratic Party is interested in evaluating who talks a good game and who walks the walk,” said state Sen. Julie Gonzales, a Denver progressive who’s running against Hickenlooper. “Who’s actually done the work and put in the muscle to listen to people and to translate those frustrations, those hopes, those anxieties, into concrete and durable policy. That����ap the work.”

Candidates seeking state and federal office through the state Democratic assembly

Besides state legislative races, here are the candidates seeking placement on the Democratic primary ballot at the state assembly in Pueblo. The party has been organizing multicounty assemblies separately for congressional candidates.

U.S. Senate: Karen Breslin, state Sen. Julie Gonzales and Jessica Williams

Governor: Antonio Martinez, William Moses, Erik Underwood and Attorney General Phil Weiser

Attorney General: Boulder County District Attorney Michael Dougherty, Secretary of State Jena Griswold and David Seligman

Secretary of State: State Sen. Jessie Danielson and Jefferson County Clerk Amanda Gonzalez

State Treasurer: State Sen. Jeff Bridges, John Mikos and state Rep. Brianna Titone

Source: Colorado Democratic Party

The plaintiff is the University Corporation for Atmospheric Research, a nonprofit consortium of 129 North American universities that manages NCAR on behalf of the National Science Foundation. The UCAR sued several federal agencies and their leaders in Colorado’s federal court.

The administration’s plans to neuter NCAR are part of a “campaign of retaliation” against Colorado’s state government and its leaders for maintaining mail-in voting and refusing to grant clemency to Tina Peters, a former county clerk and Trump ally convicted of felonies in an election misconduct case, the lawsuit alleges. NCAR is slated to become collateral damage of the larger power struggle, the lawsuit alleges.

Since December, the administration has sought to transfer the management of NCAR’s supercomputer, canceled millions of dollars intended for climate research, imposed gag orders on employees, proposed the sale of the center’s iconic headquarters and solicited public comment on how to restructure the organization.

“These actions pose a direct threat to national security, public safety, and economic prosperity and risk setting back the country’s global leadership in weather and space weather modeling and forecasting,” leaders from the university group . “We are hopeful that this lawsuit will prevent future unlawful action by the agencies.”

The Trump administration first announced its intention to “break up” NCAR in December, with a top budget official calling it “one of the largest sources of climate alarmism in the country.”

While the institute investigates climate change, its mission is much broader and encompasses every aspect of how the earth’s atmosphere and weather systems interact. That includes research on earthquakes, flooding, drought, geomagnetic storms in space, wildfires, wind, storms and more.

The center, founded in 1960, provides the data and models that other institutions and universities rely on for forecasting and research. Industries like aviation, agriculture and shipping also rely on its information to make decisions.

About 820 employees work for NCAR, approximately half of whom live in the Boulder area and work at the center’s iconic building perched on a hill on the edge of town.

A spokesman for the National Science Foundation said the organization does not comment on pending litigation, but a White House spokesman defended the administration’s changes to NCAR.

“President Trump is using his lawful and discretionary authority to ensure federal dollars are being spent in a way that aligns with the agenda endorsed by the American people when they resoundingly reelected the president,” spokesman Kush Desai said in an emailed statement Tuesday. “Allegations of funding being allocated due to retaliation are imagined and entirely false.”

The federal leaders seeking to dismantle NCAR have not detailed any concerns with the quality of the work completed there or regulatory compliance, the lawsuit states.

“The Agencies’ adverse actions designed to weaken UCAR and undermine or dismantle NCAR’s operations are all part and parcel of the campaign to punish Colorado,” the lawsuit states.

Trump has repeatedly demanded that Colorado leaders end the state’s primarily mail-ballot voting system and release Peters. Trump on Dec. 11 issued a federal pardon to Peters — which had no legal bearing on her conviction in state court.

When Peters remained incarcerated in a state prison in the days that followed, the administration rescinded $109 million in federal transportation funding allocated to Colorado and implemented new rules for its food-assistance program. Trump vetoed a bipartisan bill passed by Congress that would have helped finance a Republican-supported water project, and his administration denied the state’s applications for wildfire and flooding relief money while announcing plans to take apart NCAR.

Since then, Colorado Gov. Jared Polis, a Democrat, has publicly voiced concern that Peters’ nine-year sentence was too “harsh” and floated the idea of reducing it. Most recently, though, his office has indicated that he will wait until after the Colorado Court of Appeals finishes reviewing Peters’ convictions.

The dismantling of NCAR has already begun, Monday’s lawsuit says.

The administration has sought to of the Cheyenne-based , which is relied upon by thousands of researchers across the globe for weather forecasts and data. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, without warning, canceled a multimillion-dollar agreement with the University Corporation for Atmospheric Research for climate science.

In February, the National Science Foundation began requesting detailed records regarding NCAR’s budgeting, staff expenses, and grants that the lawsuit characterized as needlessly burdensome. The foundation, which oversees NCAR, also banned its employees from making any public comments on the changes.

“Far from advancing any legitimate purpose, the Agencies’ retaliatory actions are undermining the Trump Administration’s objectives of maintaining superiority in weather forecasting, technological advancement, and supercomputing,” the lawsuit states.

The plans to dismantle NCAR prompted a recent rebuke from some members of Colorado’s congressional delegation. Republican Rep. Jeff Hurd joined three Democrats — Rep. Joe Neguse and U.S. Sens. Michael Bennet and John Hickenlooper — in a letter submitted last week to the National Science Foundation to oppose the administration’s plans.

“In sum, we oppose the restructuring and weakening of NCAR, which would erode critical research capacity, disrupt long-standing partnerships, and diminish our ability to understand, anticipate, and respond to extreme weather-related risks,” their letter read.

The laboratory, the National Center for Atmospheric Research, has been targeted for months by the Trump administration. In a social media post in December, Russell Vought, the White House budget director, called the Colorado center “one of the largest sources of climate alarmism in the country.”

The center, founded in 1960, is responsible for many of the biggest scientific advances in understanding of weather and climate. Its research aircraft and sophisticated computer models of the Earth’s atmosphere and oceans are widely used in forecasting weather events and disasters.

Scientists say the move to dismantle the center would weaken research that is crucial to understanding the atmosphere, space and oceans, air pollution and climate change. It would leave emergency officials and planners less prepared for extreme weather events, critics said.

The center’s staff includes about 830 employees working under the University Corporation for Atmospheric Research, a nonprofit consortium of colleges and universities that oversees the center for the federal government.

The center also operates a massive supercomputer, known as Derecho, in Cheyenne, Wyoming, that scientists use to predict the behavior of wildfires, space weather, hurricanes and other complex weather patterns.

Proposals are due Friday to the National Science Foundation from institutions that want to take over management of the center’s research portfolio and various facilities; comments from the public about the center’s future are also due then.

Michael England, a spokesperson for NSF, which oversees the center, said the proposals and comments from interested parties would not be made public. He would not say when the officials would make a final decision about the fate of the center.

“I don’t have anything on that for you,” England said.

Colorado’s elected officials have been fighting to preserve the center. Putting it on the chopping block would also be an economic blow to the state. President Donald Trump has feuded with Gov. Jared Polis, a Democrat, over Trump’s pardoning of a former Colorado election official who was convicted of multiple state felonies after she gave Trump’s supporters unauthorized access to voting machines after the 2020 presidential election.

“Breaking up the institution would have detrimental impacts,” Polis said in a statement Thursday. “People evacuate more quickly and safely from fires because of NCAR.”

The center’s data, Polis said, “improve forecasting of severe weather events like fires and floods, support safer aviation and transportation, and help businesses and communities make informed decisions.”

In a letter to the NSF’s acting director, Brian Stone, Reps. Joe Neguse, a Democrat, and Jeff Hurd, a Republican, wrote that dismantling the center would increase costs and “erode critical research capacity, disrupt long-standing partnerships, and diminish our ability to understand, anticipate and respond to extreme weather-related risks.”

Neguse said the proposals and comments should be made public, and he intended to press the NSF should it refrain from doing so.

He has asked the NSF inspector general to review allegations from a whistleblower that Trump administration officials began negotiating the transfer of the center’s space weather program to a private company in January, before the review had been completed.

According to Neguse’s letter to the inspector general, the whistleblower confirmed the report with an employee of an unnamed for-profit company during a January meeting of the American Meteorological Society in Houston.

“I remain deeply concerned about any attempts to improperly transfer public assets to private companies,” Neguse wrote.

Scott Rayder, the CEO of Lynker, a firm in Leesburg, Virginia, that provides space weather forecasts for the U.S. military and other federal agencies, said he was submitting a proposal to the NSF to take over management of the center’s High Altitude Observatory, whose scientists study solar flares, space radiation and other atmospheric phenomena.

“Our thinking here was that this is important and we need to save it,” Rayder said about the observatory. “These are critical functions. If you are going to break them up, don’t let them go. They need to be kept together.”

Rayder said in an interview that his firm had not been negotiating with officials from the Trump administration. Scott McIntosh, Lynker’s vice president for space operations, was the deputy director at the center until 2024 and also ran the observatory.

The University of Oklahoma is making a proposal to the NSF “on how the nation can best preserve that legacy and organize our atmospheric science capabilities to meet current and future needs,” said Matthew Wade Hulver, the university’s vice president for research and partnerships.

The University of Wyoming has begun negotiations with NSF officials about taking over management of the Derecho supercomputer, according to Chad Baldwin, a university spokesperson.

Baldwin said it was too early to know who would set the research priorities for the supercomputer. But some scientists say the university’s goals may not match the priorities of the larger U.S. scientific research community.

“How much will be focused on climate versus weather versus other disciplines?” said Carlos Javier Martinez, chief climate scientist at the Union of Concerned Scientists, an advocacy group, and a former postdoctoral researcher at the center.

“It feels rushed,” Martinez said about the NSF process. “I question whether the public comment period is of good faith.”

Also unclear is the fate of the center’s Mesa Laboratory, which was founded in 1960, designed by famed architect I.M. Pei, and used as the setting for the 1973 Woody Allen sci-fi comedy film “Sleeper.”

In a January letter, the NSF said it wanted proposals to sell the buildings and transfer the center’s two high-flying research aircraft to another federal agency.

This article originally appeared in .

A whistleblower reported to Neguse’s office that one or more Office of Management and Budget officials proposed or negotiated an arrangement to sell parts of NCAR’s space weather program to a private company, according to Neguse. The whistleblower reported the allegations to Neguse’s office, he said, and the information was reportedly confirmed by an employee at the company in question. Neguse did not name the company.

Neguse sent a letter to the Inspector General of the National Science Foundation on Monday, demanding an independent investigation into allegations of potential conflicts of interest and regulatory improprieties.

“As our office understands it, neither the OMB nor the NSF have clear legal or statutory authority to unilaterally dissolve or sell Federal programs,” Neguse wrote in the letter.

Officials from the Office of Management and Budget and the National Science Foundation did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

In the letter, Neguse references federal laws that make it “clear that this research must be conducted by federal research agencies.” Neguse argues that it is not within the Office of Management and Budget����ap authority to “sell-off space weather programs to private companies.”

The whistleblower’s report comes after the NSF in a Dear Colleague Letter that it will consider proposals for new private or public ownership to take over the NCAR’s Mesa Lab in Boulder. The NSF also requested that interested parties submit a document of interest or ideas for operations, with a March 13 deadline.

“The report of misconduct described above further includes allegations that (Dear Colleague Letter) is simply a political ploy to feign proper conduct, and that the OMB has already determined that NCAR’s space weather program will be transferred to the aforementioned for-profit company and that NCAR’s NWSC supercomputing facility will be transferred to the University of Wyoming.”

The NSF that the NCAR-Wyoming Supercomputing Center will be transferring operations away from the National Center for Atmospheric Research and to an unnamed third-party operator.

“The federal (Dear Colleague Letter) process is not a mechanism for reaching pre-determined outcomes nor for selling or awarding federal programs to private companies, and it cannot be used to bypass the law and hand federal programs to preferred private companies without undergoing competitive merit-review processes,” Neguse wrote. “In this instance, if allegations of a predetermined transfer or selloff were proven to be true, it would clearly violate the spirit and letter of the “Dear Colleague” process and likely violate Federal law. Therefore, it is vitally important that your office investigate the same.”

Neguse also included NSF Acting Director Brian Stone, OMB Director Russel Vought and Former OMB Associate Director Stuart Levenbach on the letter.

.

Vietnam Syndrome — the deep reluctance to project American power abroad after the trauma of the Vietnam War — was first widely recognized as a driving ideology within Democratic circles just as I arrived in Washington, D.C., to begin my career. The mood of the city then was shaped by the revelations of the Vietnam War, the publication of the Pentagon Papers, and the findings of the Church Committee, chaired by Frank Church, on which Colorado’s freshman senator, Gary Hart, served. Americans learned of CIA overreach, covert interventions, and hard truths about government deception. The national psyche shifted.

By the time the Iran hostage crisis unfolded under President Jimmy Carter, the Democratic Party was deeply wary of military force. Carter chose negotiation and restraint as 52 American diplomats were held for 444 days by the new Islamic Revolutionary regime. Whether one agrees or disagrees with his approach, it reflected a broader hesitancy shaped by Vietnam’s shadow.

That hesitancy has never fully disappeared.

Today, as the United States and Israel act together to degrade the military capabilities of the Iranian regime — a regime that has funded and armed proxy militias across the region for decades — I am struck by the cautious, almost antiseptic language coming from many Democratic leaders.

For example, Colorado Sen. Michael Bennet said this week: “Any use of military force must be consistent with our constitutional framework and avoid drawing the United States into another open-ended conflict in the Middle East.” That concern is understandable.

No American wants another Iraq or Afghanistan. But when constitutional process becomes the primary lens and the strategic objective becomes secondary, it echoes the old reflex: avoid strength for fear of entanglement.

Rep. Jason Crow, a former Army Ranger, emphasized that “Congress must be consulted before further escalation,” underscoring the need for oversight and warning against “another prolonged regional war.”

Rep. Joe Neguse similarly stressed that, “First and foremost, our constitution is crystal-clear: the decision to take our nation to war rests with Congress.”

Process, process, process. Deflection from the embrace of American strength to rid the world of the worst of the worst.

I write this not as a detached observer. I spent formative years in Washington working in pro-Israel politics, engaging both Democrats and Republicans, and watching firsthand how internal party debates over strength and restraint played out. In the year 2000, I ran as the Democratic nominee in Congressional District 6 now held by Jason Crow. Yet today, I view these events from the front row.

Six years ago, I became a dual U.S.–Israeli citizen and now spend most of my time in Herzliya, just north of Tel Aviv. Since Saturday morning, much of our community life has shifted underground. We move between home and reinforced shelters as Iranian ballistic missiles — fired from roughly 2,000 miles away — target civilian neighborhoods. These are not symbolic gestures; they are designed for mass casualties. The families in these shelters are not abstractions in a policy debate. They are neighbors.

From this vantage point, the debate in Washington feels tone-deaf.

When Iran’s leadership vows Israel’s destruction and arms groups who are committed to that goal, deterrence is not theoretical. It is existential. The current joint operation — undertaken by President Donald Trump in coordination with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu — may be politically controversial, and both leaders are undeniably flawed. But the strategic objective of preventing a violent theocratic regime from expanding its destructive reach is neither reckless nor novel. It is long overdue.

This is where Vietnam Syndrome still lingers — not as a slogan, but as a mindset. The instinct to lead with caution rather than clarity. To emphasize process before principle. To worry first about overreach rather than about the consequences of inaction.

I do not expect unanimity. I do not expect cheerleading. But I do expect moral clarity when civilians are under sustained attack and when a regime that has destabilized a region for nearly half a century is finally facing meaningful consequences.

From Washington, these questions are strategic. From Herzliya, they are personal. The Democratic Party once prided itself on combining moral leadership with pragmatic strength. The challenge now is whether it can rediscover that balance — not abandoning caution, but refusing paralysis. History shows the costs of both overreach and retreat. The test of leadership is knowing the difference.

Ken Toltz is a 3rd-generation Denverite, long-time political activist, and a former Democratic nominee for Colorado’s 6th Congressional District. He now lives in Herzliya, Israel.

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.

Updated March 6, 2026 at 8:19 a.m. Due to a columnist’s error, the original version of this opinion column misquoted Rep. Joe Neguse.