The first Senate bill out of the gate is not a good one. Increasing regulations on the business of childcare.

The first Senate bill out of the gate is not a good one.

SB25-001, the Colorado Voting Rights act, is a confused, and confusing, jumble of terms and definitions sure to make trial lawyers happy, but which will solve a problem that I'm not sure actually exists as the sponsors seem to have imagined.


Mr. Armstrong from Complete Colorado wrote an op ed on it. So did I. I link to them below in this order.


Mr. Armstrong's is much more cerebral than my effort. I don't say that in any pejorative sense, his writing is just much more than way than mine. I also found his take on it interesting as it differs slightly from mine with more background.


Pick your flavor or have both, but consider speaking up against this bill. It's bad policy and it's also on my list.


https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/sb25-001

https://completecolorado.com/2025/01/28/democrat-bill-voting-quotas-colorado-elections-debacle/

https://completecolorado.com/2025/01/22/voting-rights-bill-flawed-solution-non-existent-problem/

---

Increasing regulations on the business of childcare

It's sometimes easy to think of childcare as not-a-business. Or perhaps to think of regulation on childcare as only having to do with keeping little ones safe.

There is another side to regulation on childcare, and childcare is indeed a business (there is nothing wrong or incompatible about that--lots of people express their talents and do good things while making their living).

What I mean is that I think it's sometimes easy to fall into "childcare exceptionalism", meaning the perception that childcare is not a business or somehow a special kind of business with different fundamental properties than other businesses.

It isn't. When you overregulate business, you harm it (in general a differential harm for smaller businesses). When the government steps into the market, it can cause harm. This is as true for childcare and preschool as it is for any other business.

A reader sent me an email, pointing out the two bills I link to below. They merit some attention because they do exactly what I mention above.

SB25-004 is linked first and represents an opportunity for our state government to get all over the business of child care. Specifically, it lists a series of requirements for any childcare operation owned or run by any business with 5 or more centers. More precise language is in screenshot 1 attached (from the bill's fiscal note).

I point you to the latter half of the second paragraph in the screenshot. I point you also to screenshot 2 attached which is a mashup of two different sections from the same fiscal note.

Extra regulation, extra rules and procedures for certain businesses but not others, whether intended to or not, make it harder and more expensive to run a business. They make our state less attractive to bringing new business here.

I don't know official statistics in this state, but from what I see where I live, there is certainly no surplus of good childcare. Why would we make it harder to get more?

Further, as you see in the second screenshot, these extra regulations will add costs to taxpayers because someone must track and enforce the new rules.

Turning now to the second bill, I want to first give you some needed context.

The second link below is to an earlier newsletter I wrote which gave an overview of the large regulatory burden on the early childhood education industry. Childcare centers, preschools have multiple agencies and bodies that oversee their work. They serve many masters.

I would also offer the perspective of someone married to an ECE teacher. When I say there is a lot of oversight and rules, I mean it. When I say that the regulations around continuing education and training are high (esp relative to the salary), I mean it. I hear plenty about it!

With that context, let's now turn to SB25-017. I read the rather lengthy description of the bill and I must admit I'm not quite sure exactly what is hoped for; I'm not sure what problem this is intended to solve.

I will leave it to you to read the language in the bill and/or fiscal note. I may not know exactly what this bill is intended for, but I have the sneaking feeling that what it will ultimately (also?) do is increase the regulatory, training, and oversight burden on preschools and day cares.

This perspective is informed by what I see in the fiscal note. Take a look at screenshot 3.

Any program that requires 3.5 new full time state employees and increases the budget of the Department of Early Childhood by $2.9 million is no small addition. That's a lot of administration needed for one bill.

How could something that balloons government this way not but burden both teachers and facilities?

I want childcare and preschool facilities to be safe and enriching environments for children. I also want them to be available to families. I'm concerned that the protectionist features of the first bill and the potential to add yet more burden won't do anything for the former concern and certainly be harmful to the second.

https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/sb25-004

https://open.substack.com/pub/coloradoaccountabilityproject/p/the-breaking-of-an-industry-the-burdensome?r=15ij6n&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=false

https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/sb25-017