Colorado looks at guardrails for kratom
State of play: Colorado is poised to put constraints on the sale of the intoxicating herbal supplement that are similar to those in place for tobacco products, as concerns mount about fatalities and addiction.
A bill sent to the governor's desk would require kratom packaging to remain behind the counter and prohibit sales to those under age 21. A warning label would need to include dosage and drug interaction concerns, as well as warnings for pregnant women.
Other provisions include limiting synthetics and the high-potency component 7-OH to 2%.
Yes, but: The rules are the first of their kind for kratom in Colorado, but stop far short of what lawmakers and Gov. Jared Polis' administration initially proposed.
The original legislation created a regulatory system more like cannabis, with companies that process kratom paying an estimated $300 in fees to cover its costs. It also required state budget dollars to get it started.
Between the lines: The governor and Democratic leadership expressed concern about the startup costs for the new regulations, essentially stalling its progress in the legislative session.
But in the last week, a Republican lawmaker made a rare "super motion" to send the bill directly to the House without a committee hearing.
To win passage, lawmakers then eliminated the more restrictive regulations from the bill.
What they're saying:"I still think this is a step in the right direction to: One, get a harmful product out of the market, and two, take some steps toward what I think is the ultimate solution which is licensure," Senate bill sponsor Kyle Mullica (D-Northglenn) told us in an interview.
What we're watching: Now the attention is on Polis.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNET
33 minutes ago
- CNET
Congress Won't Block State AI Regulations. Here's What That Means for Consumers
After months of debate, a plan in Congress to block states from regulating artificial intelligence was pulled from the big federal budget bill this week. The proposed 10-year moratorium would have prevented states from enforcing rules and laws on AI if the state accepted federal funding for broadband access. The issue exposed divides among technology experts and politicians, with some Senate Republicans joining Democrats in opposing the move. The Senate eventually voted 99-1 to remove the proposal from the bill, which also includes the extension of the 2017 federal tax cuts and cuts to services like Medicaid and SNAP. Congressional Republican leaders have said they want to have the measure on President Donald Trump's desk by July 4. Tech companies and many Congressional Republicans supported the moratorium, saying it would prevent a "patchwork" of rules and regulations across states and local governments that could hinder the development of AI -- especially in the context of competition with China. Critics, including consumer advocates, said states should have a free hand to protect people from potential issues with the fast-growing technology. "The Senate came together tonight to say that we can't just run over good state consumer protection laws," Sen. Maria Cantwell, a Washington Democrat, said in a statement. "States can fight robocalls, deepfakes and provide safe autonomous vehicle laws. This also allows us to work together nationally to provide a new federal framework on artificial intelligence that accelerates US leadership in AI while still protecting consumers." Despite the moratorium being pulled from this bill, the debate over how the government can appropriately balance consumer protection and supporting technology innovation will likely continue. "There have been a lot of discussions at the state level, and I would think that it's important for us to approach this problem at multiple levels," said Anjana Susarla, a professor at Michigan State University who studies AI. "We could approach it at the national level. We can approach it at the state level, too. I think we need both." Several states have already started regulating AI The proposed moratorium would have barred states from enforcing any regulation, including those already on the books. The exceptions are rules and laws that make things easier for AI development and those that apply the same standards to non-AI models and systems that do similar things. These kinds of regulations are already starting to pop up. The biggest focus is not in the US, but in Europe, where the European Union has already implemented standards for AI. But states are starting to get in on the action. Colorado passed a set of consumer protections last year, set to go into effect in 2026. California adopted more than a dozen AI-related laws last year. Other states have laws and regulations that often deal with specific issues such as deepfakes or require AI developers to publish information about their training data. At the local level, some regulations also address potential employment discrimination if AI systems are used in hiring. "States are all over the map when it comes to what they want to regulate in AI," said Arsen Kourinian, a partner at the law firm Mayer Brown. So far in 2025, state lawmakers have introduced at least 550 proposals around AI, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. In the House committee hearing last month, Rep. Jay Obernolte, a Republican from California, signaled a desire to get ahead of more state-level regulation. "We have a limited amount of legislative runway to be able to get that problem solved before the states get too far ahead," he said. Read more: AI Essentials: 29 Ways to Make Gen AI Work for You, According to Our Experts While some states have laws on the books, not all of them have gone into effect or seen any enforcement. That limits the potential short-term impact of a moratorium, said Cobun Zweifel-Keegan, managing director in Washington for IAPP. "There isn't really any enforcement yet." A moratorium would likely deter state legislators and policymakers from developing and proposing new regulations, Zweifel-Keegan said. "The federal government would become the primary and potentially sole regulator around AI systems," he said. What a moratorium on state AI regulation would mean AI developers have asked for any guardrails placed on their work to be consistent and streamlined. "We need, as an industry and as a country, one clear federal standard, whatever it may be," Alexandr Wang, founder and CEO of the data company Scale AI, told lawmakers during an April hearing. "But we need one, we need clarity as to one federal standard and have preemption to prevent this outcome where you have 50 different standards." During a Senate Commerce Committee hearing in May, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman told Sen. Ted Cruz, a Republican from Texas, that an EU-style regulatory system "would be disastrous" for the industry. Altman suggested instead that the industry develop its own standards. Asked by Sen. Brian Schatz, a Democrat from Hawaii, if industry self-regulation is enough at the moment, Altman said he thought some guardrails would be good, but, "It's easy for it to go too far. As I have learned more about how the world works, I am more afraid that it could go too far and have really bad consequences." (Disclosure: Ziff Davis, parent company of CNET, in April filed a lawsuit against OpenAI, alleging it infringed Ziff Davis copyrights in training and operating its AI systems.) Not all AI companies are backing a moratorium, however. In a New York Times op-ed, Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei called it "far too blunt an instrument," saying the federal government should create transparency standards for AI companies instead. "Having this national transparency standard would help not only the public but also Congress understand how the technology is developing, so that lawmakers can decide whether further government action is needed." A proposed 10-year moratorium on state AI laws is now in the hands of the US Senate, where its Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation has already held hearings on artificial intelligence. Nathan Howard/Bloomberg via Getty Images Concerns from companies, both the developers that create AI systems and the "deployers" who use them in interactions with consumers, often stem from fears that states will mandate significant work such as impact assessments or transparency notices before a product is released, Kourinian said. Consumer advocates have said more regulations are needed and hampering the ability of states could hurt the privacy and safety of users. A moratorium on specific state rules and laws could result in more consumer protection issues being dealt with in court or by state attorneys general, Kourinian said. Existing laws around unfair and deceptive practices that are not specific to AI would still apply. "Time will tell how judges will interpret those issues," he said. Susarla said the pervasiveness of AI across industries means states might be able to regulate issues such as privacy and transparency more broadly, without focusing on the technology. But a moratorium on AI regulation could lead to such policies being tied up in lawsuits. "It has to be some kind of balance between 'we don't want to stop innovation,' but on the other hand, we also need to recognize that there can be real consequences," she said. Much policy around the governance of AI systems does happen because of those so-called technology-agnostic rules and laws, Zweifel-Keegan said. "It's worth also remembering that there are a lot of existing laws and there is a potential to make new laws that don't trigger the moratorium but do apply to AI systems as long as they apply to other systems," he said. What's next for federal AI regulation? One of the key lawmakers pushing for the removal of the moratorium from the bill was Sen. Marsha Blackburn, a Tennessee Republican. Blackburn said she wanted to make sure states were able to protect children and creators, like the country musicians her state is famous for. "Until Congress passes federally preemptive legislation like the Kids Online Safety Act and an online privacy framework, we can't block states from standing in the gap to protect vulnerable Americans from harm -- including Tennessee creators and precious children," she said in a statement. Groups that opposed the preemption of state laws said they hope the next move for Congress is to take steps toward actual regulation of AI, which could make state laws unnecessary. If tech companies "are going to seek federal preemption, they should seek federal preemption along with a federal law that provides rules of the road," Jason Van Beek, chief government affairs officer at the Future of Life Institute, told me. Ben Winters, director of AI and data privacy at the Consumer Federation of America, said Congress could take up the idea of pre-empting state laws again in separate legislation. "Fundamentally, it's just a bad idea," he told me. "It doesn't really necessarily matter if it's done in the budget process."
New York Post
34 minutes ago
- New York Post
Zohran Mamdani declares only $2,000 in bank in latest disclosure
Self-described 'nepo baby' Zohran Mamdani declared a measly $2,000 in the bank on his latest state disclosures. That's despite his privileged upbringing and family money — and an annual salary of $131,000 as a state lawmaker, a job he's had for five years. 9 Mamdani, here celebrating his recent primary win with his parents, had by all accounts a privileged upbringing. Getty Images Advertisement The 33-year-old socialist Democratic nominee for NYC mayor did list one unusual asset — four acres of land in his native Uganda that he acquired about a decade ago, worth between $150,000 and $250,000. He disclosed no US property or investments on the documents, released by the state this week. The $2,000 on his form comes from a retirement plan from the housing-focused social-justice organization Chhaya, where he worked briefly as a 'foreclosure prevention counselor' in 2019, before he was elected in 2020 to represent Queen's 36th District in the state Assembly. Advertisement 9 Mamdani lived in Kampala, Uganda until he was five, before the family moved to South Africa, and two years later NYC. Adrian Solumsmo – He's declared the exact same amount of 'less than $2,000' for five years in a row in filings to the state Legislative Ethics Commission. 'More drama from a guy who grew up with three silver spoons in his mouth,' quipped political strategist Hank Sheinkopf. 'If anybody believes that Mamdani is a poor person, they need to see a psychiatrist. This is a complete lie. He's trying to sell people this nonsense that he's this poor kid,' he told The Post. Advertisement 9 Mamdani lives in a rent-stabilized apartment and grew up in subsidized housing but complained about rent hikes. Getty Images State lawmakers are only required to report investments and retirement plans, and don't have to disclose how much they have in regular savings or checking accounts. They are also not required to reveal trust funds established by their relatives — and in Mamdani's case that could be a windfall, observers have noted. 9 Mamdani attended the Disney premiere with his mother Mira Nair in 2016. Getty Images for Disney Advertisement 9 Nair directed Disney's Queen of Katwe, a story about a girl from the slums of Uganda who becomes a chess champion. Getty Images for Disney Mamdani's mother, Mira Nair, is an Academy Award- and Golden Globe-nominated filmmaker, who has made movies for Disney and a series for Netflix, and whose productions have starred the likes of Denzel Washington. Nair sold a posh West Chelsea 2-bedroom that she had owned for more than 10 years in 2019 for $1.45 million. 9 Nair has received multiple awards for her films. Getty Images for Disney His father, Mahmood Mamdani, is a chaired professor of African history and colonialism at Columbia University who won multiple prizes and published more than a dozen books. Professors in similar positions make an average of $308,000 a year, according to American Association of University Professors data. The Harvard-educated couple still live in the stylish Ivy League and taxpayer-subsidized 3-bed, 3-bath corner apartment on Riverside Drive — with weekly maid service — where Mamdani grew up while he attended elite $66,000-a-year Bank Street School. 'This is all nonsense and an attempt to show that he's a man of the people when he's about as close to the people as Nelson Rockefeller was,' said Sheinkopf. Advertisement 9 The complex on Riverside Drive has 38 apartments, exclusively for Columbia faculty and staff. Google Maps 9 The family has lived in this bright 3-bedroom corner unit in upper Manhattan for 25 years. via Zillow Critics pointed to Mamdani's recently resurfaced hand-eating stunt as proof of the 'tax the rich' socialist trying to sell his narrative. 'A perpetual theatre kid who's pretending to be 'Third World.' It's all so, so performative + stupid,' railed Manhattan Institute fellow Renu Mukherjee on X. Advertisement 'He looks uncomfortable eating with his hands,' she noted. Mamdani was a self-described 'B-list rapper,' performing under the stage name 'Mr. Cardamom' before he went into politics. 9 Mamdani had a stint as a rapper under the moniker Mr. Cardamom before he went into politics. Mr. Cardamom/Youtube He also sometimes went by the moniker 'Young Cardamom,' like in the song '#1 spice' that was part of the soundtrack for his mother's Disney movie. Advertisement The former rapper turned politician disclosed up to $5,000 in royalties in 2024 from his musical stint. Mamdani's office declined to comment.
New York Post
38 minutes ago
- New York Post
Why the best Independence Day present would be more US citizens
You wouldn't have known it from the Democratic mayoral primary — dominated by promises of free stuff and anti-ICE grandstanding — but New York keeps driving residents away. Only Andrew Cuomo, in passing at a Queens rally, mentioned that from 2023 to 2024 Gotham lost 327,000 residents, per a May 15 Census report. That 3.7% drop was the largest hemorrhage of any big city in the country. It might make sense to stop the trend by doing something about high taxes and subway crime — but progressives are actually panicked about something else: a looming loss of still more Empire State seats in Congress, as determined by population count. Their solution isn't to hold on to high-earning taxpayers fleeing to Florida. Instead, they want to make sure residents not even eligible to vote — non-citizens, including illegal immigrants — aren't so afraid of ICE that they don't respond to Census surveys and don't get counted. Advertisement 5 Protestors in the Bronx holding signs that read 'I heart immigrant NY.' Getty Images They're particularly concerned about House legislation that would require the Census to ask about citizenship status. The New York Times, in what amounted to a recruiting campaign for their cause, reported on the efforts of 'a coalition of elected officials, community activists, and labor and civic leaders in New York City' that is 'already stirring ahead of the next census in 2030 amid a brewing battle over whether to include noncitizens in the population count.' Advertisement Their concern: 'threats from the Trump administration and the Republican-led Congress to exclude noncitizens, which could lead to a significant undercount of the city's population.' Lower East Side Council member Julie Menon, who in April keynoted a New York Law School conference kicking off the effort, has filed a bill to establish a City Office of the Census 'tasked with maximizing local participation in the federal decennial census.' 5 House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., speaks to reporters about the U.S. bombing of three sites in Iran, at the Capitol in Washington, Monday, June 23, 2025. AP This Fourth of July weekend suggests a better approach: A campaign to encourage legal immigrants to be counted by becoming citizens. There's a reason liberals don't mention that. Advertisement Dems are not trying to help residents vote, but merely to buoy the city's population to protect their congressional seats, including those of House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries and progressive star Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. In both of their districts, voter totals are abysmally low — because so many non-citizen residents can't vote. They represent a new version of what England used to call 'rotten boroughs,' districts guaranteed representation despite low population. All 435 congressional districts are required to have an equal number of residents — about 740,000. But they don't have to have an equal number of eligible voters. That means that districts with high numbers of immigrants — legal and illegal — are likely to have low voter rolls. In Jeffries's Brooklyn district, there are 267,000 foreign-born residents. Advertisement 5 A recent Census Bureau report revealed that New York City lost more residents than any other big US metro between 2023 and 2024. There's no way to know how many are citizens, but we do know that Jeffries was elected in 2024 with just 168,000 votes. Ocasio-Cortez needed 132,000 in 2024 — in a district where 300,000 residents are immigrants. In contrast, House Speaker Mike Johnson received 262,000 ballots just to win his primary election, in a district with just 22,000 immigrants It's a great deal for Democrats; they can safely ignore the views (in AOC's case) of 40% of her district. Who knows whether Hispanic immigrants are on board with democratic socialism? She doesn't have to care. 5 Dems like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, are not trying to help residents vote, but merely to buoy the city's population to protect their congressional seats, Howard Husock writes. LP Media If progressives want to do something constructive to make sure residents won't be concerned about being asked about their citizenship status — and be counted in the Census — there's an obvious (and positive) approach: encourage citizenship. There are, per the Mayor's Office of Immigrant Affairs, some 3.1 million immigrants in New York City. There's no way to know how many have become naturalized citizens—but there's no mystery about how to become one: those who have been legally in the US for at least five years need only pass a citizenship test. Common sense Democrats might actually want to encourage that approach. Doing so means learning enough English to read the questions. (The test is only offered in English.) That would help immigrants advance economically, too. Advertisement 5 Pres. Trump — here at the 2025 SOTU address — has threatened to disallow illegal migrants from being counted in future census polls. Getty Images The test, it's worth noting, consists of just 10 questions — but they're chosen among 100 possibilities, and cover US government and history. For July 4, let's make it possible for immigrants to have a real voice in government — by becoming citizens and voting. Howard Husock is a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute.
