Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Consumer Protection Sb157 topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate rejects bill to broaden consumer-protection remedy for deceptive practices after heated debate
Summary
Senate Bill 157, which would have narrowed limitations on private enforcement under Colorado's consumer-protection law in certain deceptive-practice cases, failed on third reading after floor debate and an adopted amendment narrowing the bill's scope; final vote: 16 ayes, 19 noes.
Senate Bill 157, a measure to change the scope of private enforcement under Colorado's consumer-protection framework for certain deceptive-practice claims, failed on third reading after the chamber voted 16 ayes and 19 noes.
Sponsor Senator Weisman offered a third-reading amendment (L008) that the Senate adopted unanimously, narrowing the bill's applicability to a single deceptive-practice statute within Title 6, the sponsor said. After further debate, the motion to pass the bill failed on a roll call.
The floor debate framed the bill as a question of who may seek redress for alleged deceptive or unfair trade practices. Senator Gonzales urged colleagues to view the bill as a way to protect "elders, people with disabilities, veterans" and other individuals he described as vulnerable, calling the bill "a test" of whether the Legislature will act to stand up to corporate power. "Where the corporate lobby takes another 157," Gonzales said, arguing the bill would let harmed Coloradans seek remedies without having to rely solely on the attorney general.
Sponsor Senator Weisman defended the legislative process that produced the bill and described iterative amendments made on second and third reading to address concerns. "Maybe we should take our power back," Weisman said in floor remarks addressing the judicially imposed barriers that currently limit private consumer suits in Colorado, and urged a yes vote.
Opponents, including Senator Carson, said existing remedies — fraud and negligence claims — remain available and argued SB157 was unnecessary and could expose individual professionals and small providers to significant treble damages and fee awards under the Colorado Consumer Protection Act. "Insurance is often not available for the Consumer Protection Act remedy," Carson said, arguing that the bill could put personal assets at risk and chill certain professions.
After the vote, the clerk announced the tally as 16 ayes, 19 noes, and the bill was lost on third reading.
