On Monday, a bipartisan group of lawmakers voted to kill one of the first bills put forward by Rep. Ryan Gonzalez (R-Greeley), a repeal of Colorado’s cage-free egg law that he worked on with the Libertarian Party of Colorado (LPCO). The measure failed to advance beyond committee as lawmakers argued whether the repeal would have any impact on the cost of eggs.
Last week, the Colorado Times Recorder reported that according to LPCO leadership, Gonzalez introduced the bill on behalf of the LPCO.
During the legislation’s hearing, Rep. Karen McCormick (D-Boulder County) who chairs the House Committee on Agriculture, Water & Natural Resources, asked Goodman, about the LPCO’s collaboration with Gonzalez on the bill, citing CTR’s reporting.
Goodman stated that while Gonzalez didn’t sign the pledge that LPCO asked candidates to sign in exchange for staying out of their races, Gonzalez did make a video in which he said he agreed with all of the pledge’s positions. Gonzalez wound up winning his election by a margin of 554 votes.
“I’ve offered candidates across the board – I’ve been largely ignored – but some candidates offered to sign our pledge, some candidates didn’t sign the pledge,” Goodman explained. “Rep. Gonzalez didn’t sign the pledge, but he did send a video to our convention, to our state delegates, and he told our candidates all the things in the pledge he agreed with and why he would make a better vote than a Libertarian who might spoil his chances.”
Goodman said that, after they hadn’t run a candidate in HD-50 and Gonzalez won his race, he reached out to LPCO leadership.
“He said as a thank you, ‘What legislation could I bring to the floor to help represent the Libertarians who helped get me elected?’” Goodman recalled. “We played around with a few ideas, but with this situation being so relevant, and having so much to do with the economic market, which Libertarians passionately love to study, that [HB25-1074] is what we decided.”
In a brief interview before the hearing, Gonzalez confirmed his work with the Libertarian Party.
“I worked, in part, with them [LPCO]. It wasn’t just them; it was also other stakeholders,” Gonzalez said. The Greeley Republican did not specify which other stakeholders and has not responded to multiple requests for further clarification.
Late last year, before Gonzalez even introduced the bill, the LPCO posted a draft of the proposed repeal on Facebook, writing: “Rep. Gonzalez is introducing a bill on our behalf since we didn’t run anyone against him in his race.”
Libertarian activists have rallied around the proposed legislation, with several members of party leadership in addition to Goodman testifying before the House Committee on Agriculture, Water & Natural Resources on the bill’s behalf.
Goodman told CTR during a brief recess that this legislation was crucial to her on a personal level. During her testimony, she told lawmakers that as a mother of four in rural Colorado, eggs are a key protein source to keep her family nourished, which her family now struggles to afford.
Goodman told CTR that there was no formal vote within the LPCO for this legislation specifically and that she is not aware of any plans from the Libertarian Party to put forward any other legislation via Gonzalez or another lawmaker. She did say she hoped there would be opportunities to work with lawmakers across the political spectrum to advance the ideals of the Libertarian party.
In an interview on LPCO activist Brandon Wark’s Free State Colorado podcast, Gonzalez disputed CTR’s characterization of his video promise to the Libertarians as secret, but described his introduction of the bill as proof of his commitment to the LPCO.
“I’m sure you’ve seen the story [by the] Colorado Times Recorder wanting to call it a secret deal, right? There was nothing secret about the deal, said Gonzalez. “It wasn’t a pledge. It was- and honestly, the story, because it broke out a few days ago and Hannah, I actually reached out to them because they wanted to get her point on that. But they were there at your guys’s convention in March and they watched my video. So there was nothing secret about it. And they didn’t say anything until now. So, I mean, they’re very progressive, it is what it is. But for me, I think it basically shows that I’m a person of my word. I’m going to honor my commitments and promises because I’m not going to make promises I can’t keep.”
LPCO leadership also understood Gonzalez’s “promise” to them as binding. Goodman and Campaigns Director Jacob Luria explained to their fellow members at the state convention that should he win, the newly elected state representative “is willing to owe us [Libertarians]” something, specifically legislation.
Gonzalez introduced the bill with state Sen. Barbara Kirkmeyer (R-Brighton), who is rumored to be eyeing a run for governor.
In 2020, the state Legislature initially passed a law setting cage-free requirements for hens, with bi-partisan support, partially in response to a stricter ballot measure that was being pushed by out-of-state animal welfare advocates. Notably, Rep. Matt Soper (R-Delta) originally voted for the legislation in 2020.
This year, Soper, who still sits on the House Agriculture Committee, initially voted to advance the repeal, but he changed his vote to postpone the bill indefinitely.
Reached for comment, Soper noted the origin of the 2020 bill, which he described as an “amazing compromise” given the circumstance- a well-funded outside group threatening to run a statewide ballot initiative. He said that voting for it at the time felt like voting with a shotgun to his head.
“Obviously, I’m going to support a colleague to try to help advance the bill and to reverse the 2020 legislation, said Soper. I would love to see it reversed. Even though I supported it in 2020, I will say it felt like supporting something with a shotgun to your head that you really had very little negotiation room. But all of us on House Ag back in 2020 supported it, except Richard Holtorf. And that included people like Mark Catlin. Yeah. And we obviously were not going to support something that our producers couldn’t comply with. And they at the time were were balking, but they also knew that the battleship on the horizon was not worth taking on if you could avoid it with a peaceful, negotiated approach in the legislature. And that’s what happened in 2020. The bill before us the other day. I mean, would I like to reverse things? Absolutely. But I have a lot of egg producers in my district. And I I have trouble telling them that they spent thousands of dollars to comply with the law. And now the legislature would be willing to reverse that and allow their competitor to come in and for essentially pennies on the dollar, undercut them.
“If we’re not going to reverse it, then I did not want to say that I objected to it being PI’d [postponed indefinitely] and to be on the opposite, because I felt like that I still owed it to my constituents who are part of the egg-laying community. How could I look at them with a straight face and say that I was so emboldened on the policy that I was going to vote yes on reversing it and I would object to it being PI’d? So when it came to the PI vote, you know, I wanted to make sure that at least at that point in time, I would not be part of the side that said ‘I’m just going to have the symbolic objection.’ Because I also know that the reason for why our egg prices have gone up is the avian bird flu. And I don’t think that it’s good public policy for legislators to point fingers at legislation that are not necessarily the driver of the reason why our egg prices have gone up.”
Aside from Soper, Gonzalez, other Republicans, and Libertarians primarily blame the 2020 law for the rising cost of eggs.
Several reasons have caused egg prices to increase across the country, both due to inflation and an avian flu epidemic that has caused the deaths of millions of egg-laying hens in the U.S. According to the report from the USDA, the wholesale price for a dozen large eggs in the Colorado region range between $6.62 to 6.72 currently — in January 2024 the average was $2.01-2.10.
The executive director of the Colorado Egg Producers, Bill Scebbi, referred to the bill as a “misguided response to a complex economic factor.” Scebbi argued that Colorado producers already transitioned to cage-free egg housing and that a repeal just after the requirement came into effect would further market instability.
“The current cost and reduced availability of eggs are due to a nationwide and ongoing impact of avian influenza. Not state regulations.” Scebbi told the committee.
“It appears that people are under the impression that cage-free laws have caused a shortage in eggs, and they have not,” Scebbi said in an interview with a local NBC affiliate, KOAA5. “The shortage of eggs is due to avian influenza across the United States. We don’t have enough hands producing eggs, and our eggs are sold on a commodity market, so it’s supply and demand, that’s in pay here.”
The term ‘cage-free’ does not mean that chickens are raised free-range; rather, they are confined to an enclosure that has at least one square foot of floor space.
Gonzalez’s bill is the only one so far this session that the Libertarian Party LPOC has had direct involvement in. Goodman made clear she sees the fact that it was introduced and debated as a win, even though it was ultimately killed.
The bill does fit the theme pushed more broadly by Gonzalez’s own party. Colorado Republicans are promoting their attempts to repeal regulations, licenses, and a variety of fees implemented in previous sessions, despite the fact that that most passed with bipartisan support.
Many of those opposed to the cage-free egg law not only claimed it is hurting Colorado families, but also mentioned the ten-cent grocery bag fee, which is the target of another of Gonzalez’s repeal bills.
The House GOP is also proposing repealing the licensing fee that funds background checks for substitute teachers at childcare facilities, and the boating use fee from 2008 that funds the program to keep invasive zebra mussels out of our lakes.
While State Republicans have tried to paint these fees as the result of overzealous Democratic lawmakers, Bell Policy Center Director Chris Kennedy, a former legislator who was in office when these targeted bills were passed, noted on X that they were enacted with Republican support.
“Strange move to go after the funding the protects our kids by ensuring childcare workers go through background checks — a bill that received strong bipartisan support, including Republican sponsors in both House & Senate. But I guess honesty has never been their forte,” Kennedy posted.
Erik Maulbetsch contributed to this article.
