You just might be a biased news outlet if ... Does anyone know anything about the Capitol Press Association? Another of life's bright spots as I age.
You just might be a biased news outlet if ...
... if you take one side's position and make it your headline.
The headline (and subhead) of the Denver Post article below is:
"Energy company wants to nearly double amount of gas it pipes into Adams County, bringing more air pollution. Holly Energy says it’s trying to supply special blend of gasoline to the northern Front Range during summer."
The company in question requested a change in their permit so they could move more gasoline through a Denver terminal. Not add storage (though they would convert a current diesel tank to hold gas), not refine more, move more through their facility.
Quoting the article:
"If state and federal regulators approve Holly Energy’s request, the company would increase the permitted amount of gasoline it pumps into Colorado by 82% to 13.3 million barrels per year from 7.3 million barrels, and the amount of ethanol would increase by 15% to 1.5 million barrels annually from 1.3 million barrels, Corrin Smith, a spokesperson for Holly Energy’s Dallas headquarters, wrote in an email."
Why? The company wants to bring in more of the EPA-mandated reformulated gasoline, the gasoline the Federal government requires those in the high-ozone areas of Denver to purchase in summer: people aren't going to stop driving and if the EPA mandates the special fuel, it's got to be there (I mean, unless you want shortages and price hikes).
The reformulated gasoline carries with it less potential for some pollution, but the potential to raise others. Quoting again, with links intact:
"The expansion would decrease the amount of volatile organic compounds — gases that vaporize into the air and are known to cause human health problems such as cancer — to 162 tons annually, according to the permit notice filed by the Air Pollution Control Division. That 13.2-ton decrease would be attributed to the fact that reformulated gas is less volatile and would create lower emissions at the facility, Smith said. However, the increased amount of fuel coming into Henderson would raise nitrogen oxide emissions by 9.5 tons per year to 15.5 tons annually and carbon monoxide emissions by 23.6 tons to 38.7 tons, the permit notice said. Nitrogen oxides contribute to asthma and can aggravate people who live with lung diseases, and they are considered a greenhouse gas, which forms smog and also contributes to climate change. Carbon monoxide can make people sick if they are exposed to high levels."
**Check the footnote at bottom for some extra context on carbon monoxide in the Front Range.
That's the rough outline of the story. Now that you have the background, let's revisit the title and the subtitle.
"Energy company wants to nearly double amount of gas it pipes into Adams County, bringing more air pollution. Holly Energy says it’s trying to supply special blend of gasoline to the northern Front Range during summer."
Missing some details, no? Makes some claims that, at best, need context (e.g. where does the area stand with regard to total nitrogen oxide emissions?). And, as the reader who sent me this noted, it frames some of the critiques made by environmentalists who oppose this in the article as fact. It takes the position of one group and makes it the theme of the story.
Oh, and it completely skips the EPA MANDATED nature of this special gasoline.
I do not at all object to the story of a company investing in infrastructure that will help them deliver a product consumers need (did I mention that this was EPA mandated?). I don't object to environmentalists getting their say about this. I don't object to (fair and full) accounting of pollution.
What is not fair, what is not journalism, is to frame the story from the very first words around one perspective.
**Missing context from the Post's article, another indication that we're pushing an agenda here, is the fact that back around August 2024, our state was actually removed from the EPA's monitoring list for carbon monoxide levels. That is, the EPA used to regulate Colorado for its carbon monoxide levels and they stopped because of our progress. I'm not saying adding additional carbon monoxide is a good thing, but it's worth noting we're currently far enough below the limit for it not to concern the EPA. More in my newsletter linked second below.
Who is the Colorado Capitol Press Association (CPA)?
Who is and who isn't media is a big question in Colorado Politics lately. This last few months have seen legislative and RTD efforts to set rules for access to public records that give one treatment to those the government calls media, another to ordinary citizens.
The different rules for different groups, along with the government definition being the one that gets used to do the sorting, have been a sticking point for me; it's something I've advocated against when reviewing current legislation and RTD rules.
Having it front of mind got me curious to know about another group of reporters: the rarefied few that have the privilege of being in and among legislators on the floor of our House and Senate. Both chambers are open to the public, of course, but ordinary plebians do their observing from the gallery and can't ask questions.
The members of the CPA, by contrast, get to be directly in the mix. They are next to legislators when they talk. They can ask questions while legislation is being shaped. Who runs the group? Who sets the rules? How does one join this august bunch?
I wish I had more to tell you, but after multiple emails, requests for statements, CORA requests, I don't think I have a full answer to share. I wonder if anyone involved does either: what I saw a lot of was people telling me to ask someone else, the someone else in turn asking me to ask the first one.
Link 1 below is where I started. It is the legislature's page on the CPA credentialing for the Colorado House (it's the same for the Senate so I won't put a link for that chamber). It has the rules, the history, and the application one would need to become a credentialed reporter who reports from the capitol.
I'll leave it to you to poke around in there to get all the details and history you want, but the broad strokes appear pretty straightforward. For convenience, I put a direct link to the rules second below.
The CPA was set up to provide reporters access to the floor of the House and Senate and it's expected that the correspondents allowed in behave themselves and not disrupt--disrupting here including advocating on legislation. Getting a pass to report from the floor requires that you be a full time paid correspondent for a news organization (or, if a freelancer or intern that you have a letter showing affiliation to a news organization).** The CPA gets to recommend people for credentialing to report from the floor, but ultimately the decision is made by the House and Senate leadership (speaker/president).
All that's on paper. All that is clear. Things get murky and unclear, however, when you start trying to get details.
There is no (repeat NO) contact information nor website nor phone for the CPA. The only way you can apply or ask questions is by emailing to the address you will see in link 1. That's it. I sent repeated emails to this address asking who was on the CPA board and who had credentials. I didn't get a response.
My next direction was to ask the Senate and House leadership as well as legislative staff. I got no answer from them (save for being directed to the email mentioned above) as to who was a member. I did get lists as to who was credentialed to report from the floor from legislative staff, but the lists came with repeated (ad nauseum) reminders that the list is not comprehensive and that I should ask the CPA for the most current list. I also got reminders that CPA was responsible for the list. If you would like to see what I was given, look at links 3 and 4 below. The third link is the uncomprehensive 2025 list and the fourth is the uncomprehensive list from 2023.
Before moving on, did I mention that I was told to relay to you that they're uncomprehensive?
I then ran down a hunch (suggested from a friend) that I reach out to Colorado Politics' own Marianne Goodland to see if she knew anyone at CPA. She did alright. She told me she was a member. Finally reaching someone who was on the CPA credentialing committee, I sent her several questions. Who is on the committee? Who makes decisions on credentialing and/or discipline if a rule is broken? Is anyone new this year? Who (now or in the past) has been denied membership?
Ms. Goodland sent the below in an email (quoting and with link intact--quick note, Ms. Goodland here uses Capitol Press Corps but it is the same as CPA):
"In response to your questions, the Capitol Press Corps offers the following: The members of the credentialing committee are myself, Bente Birkeland of Colorado Public Radio, Jesse Paul of the Colorado Sun, Nick Coltrain of the Denver Post and Marshall Zelinger at 9News. Our role is an advisory one. Final decisions on credentialing and enforcement, per the rules, are made by legislative leadership. We don't have lists of who has and hasn't been recommended by the committee. We believe most of your questions can be answered by reviewing the credentialing rules. A link is attached.
https://leg.colorado.gov/sites/default/files/associationrules_0.pdf"
Do you start to understand what I mean about fingers pointing at everyone else? Legislative staff refers me to CPA for questions about membership, tagging them as responsible. CPA says they're only advisors and don't know anything, in turn referring me to legislative leadership.
Can you guess prior to seeing what legislative leadership said?
My last stop on the circular tour was to send CORA requests to the President of the Senate James Coleman (D) and Speaker of the Colorado House Julie McCluskie (D). The records requested are shown in screenshot 1 attached.
President Coleman's response is screenshot 2.
Speaker McCluskie's is screenshot 3.
Nobody knows nothing apparently. Nobody emails nobody. Nobody keeps the list. Oh, and helpfully, Speaker McCluskie informed me of the process in her screenshot, referring me to the President of the Senate and CPA for more info.
I don't think anyone, at all, down there has any idea what is going on regarding credentialing. There's no conspiracy afoot. Rather, it's that no one is paying it any mind because no one is asking to go and they all know each other. I truly wonder if a fresh face on the floor might get some questions, but maybe not.
They know nothing (said like Sgt. Schultz).
One last quick note. I did consider trying to get credentialed to add to this post, but I would have had to give my word that I wouldn't advocate on bills and I'm unwilling to do that. Perhaps in the future.
**24 hour passes can be obtained for those just wanting to report for a day by going to a member of CAP and demonstrating the qualifications listed.
https://leg.colorado.gov/agencies/house-representatives/press-credentials#:~:text=Please%20click%20below%20for%20the,in%20the%20Capitol%2C%20Room%20351.
https://leg.colorado.gov/sites/default/files/associationrules.pdf
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1_Y0z6T0RnIat-PlIcEepJl6_CxX4KhGP/view?usp=sharing
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1mpNlQl9-B-Q7U6jqmGdxJYdc78TuRyYA/view?usp=sharing
Another of life's bright spots as I age ...
That time of the week again. Last post til Sunday and that means something interesting, not related to politics.
For a variety of reasons (bad choices with loud music, being dumb while metalworking, and age), I am starting to have some hearing loss. I was talking with someone recently about it and learned that apparently there is a connection between cognitive decline and hearing loss. I put an article related to this topic below if you want to read up.
In the limited reading I've done since, it seems that there is not much evidence of a causal connection (it's an association), and it seems like everything I've read relates to people much older than me (the research seems to show the association with dementia, loss of function, etc. in adults older than myself).
The going theories as to the pathology here seem to cluster around the idea of a lack of mental stimulation from the ears causing a lack of use. We all know the saying about using it or losing it, so I suppose not using those temporal lobes (among others) means you're losing them.**
In one sense, I don't dread hearing loss. World's too noisy as is and some loss of that would be a welcome relief frankly. But, I do work in a field requiring me to be able to interact verbally with humans and my daughter (far from her teens) has already started to do a few eye rolls here and there when I tell her to repeat herself.
That on top of being able to enjoy music/birdsong put with the possibility of losing yet more of my mind prompted me to book a hearing test. See what it takes to keep my brain in fighting trim.
Do they still make those old fashioned ear trumpets? If so, that's likely what my insurance will cover and what I'd want. I look forward to holding it to my ear and calling people sonny.
That's it til Sunday. Have a good rest of the day and see you then!
**Though, this did bring to mind the concept of brain plasticity. If you still stimulate your brain in other ways, say, by learning something new, I can't help but wonder if perhaps that brain tissue not being stimulated then would get repurposed as opposed to atrophying away. This is why I was careful to point out that the connection here is an association!