Skip to main content

School Safety in Colorado

According to an article written by Meghan Lopez for ABC Denver on October 31st titled, Five bills aimed at improving school safety in Colorado move forward to the state legislature a Colorado legislative committee has decided to move forward with five pieces of legislation designed to approach the issue of safety in schools. These bills come as a response to the STEM shooting in Highlands Ranch on May 7th, 2019, where an adolescent shooter claimed the life of Kendrick Castillo. Colorado has had a lengthy and horrific history of school shootings, and little has changed to prevent their occurrence, so what makes these pieces of legislation different, and why has little changed to halt the occurrence of school shootings?

On the national level, legislators have provided several avenues to solve the epidemic of school violence throughout the years, yet little has changed to curb these horrific events. In fact, school shootings have become more prevalent as the years go by. The graphic below, compiled by the website FiveThirtyEight, shows that school shootings have been on the rise since their inception. This is likely a result of the legislative graveyard created by Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, where any bill that contains language that would potentially limit the rights of gun owners is struck down without further consideration.

As a result, the issue of gun violence in schools have been left for communities, and state and local governments to decide. These five pieces of legislation, which were compiled by an equal number of Democrats and Republicans, indicate that legislators in the state of Colorado may be finally willing to cooperate to curb the gun violence epidemic in Colorado schools, and may even be able to instigate change on the national level. This notion could be seen as surprising, as committees have been known to be distinctly partisan in recent years. According to the Adler textbook, “-the dominance of partisan agendas pervades nearly all committee activities.” (Adler et al, 178) It is not commonplace for opposing legislators to work together in the political system of today, especially in committees with such social importance. It is undeniably encouraging to see Colorado legislators working together on the safety of students in school.

This leap in bipartisan legislation in the state of Colorado could also potentially be attributed to another political phenomenon; the issue of policy congruence. According to the Adler textbook, policy congruence can be defined as, “how well a legislator’s issues or policy positions correspond to what her constituents want.” (Adler et al, 90) Colorado constituents, and the American voting base at large, want something to be done about the gun violence epidemic, especially in relation to school shootings. As a result, politicians on both sides of the aisle must tackle the issue of gun violence, as their policy initiatives should reflect the values of their constituents. The desire to be reelected to office is a strong motivational tool for legislators.

It can clearly be seen that there is a bipartisan effort to promote safety in Colorado schools by the legislature. This is encouraging news, as the nation as a whole is going through a political turmoil that has tested the strength of our democracy and our unity as a people. When local and state politicians work together to improve the well-being and safety of their constituents, the world becomes a brighter place.







Works Cited:

Adler, E. Scott, et al. The United States Congress. W.W. Norton & Company, 2019.

Koerth, Maggie. “These Researchers Have Been Trying To Stop School Shootings For 20 Years” FiveThirtyEight. 14, March, 2018, https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/school-shootings-are-still-rare-and-that-makes-them-hard-to-stop/

Lopez, Meghan. “Five bills aimed at improving school safety in Colorado move forward to the state legislature” Denver ABC 7. 31, October, 2019, https://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/local-news/five-bills-aimed-at-improving-school-safety-in-colorado-move-forward-to-the-state-legislature

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Proposition DD: Let the Bets Flow

On November 5 th , 2019, one of the two measures placed on the ballot in Colorado was Proposition DD, giving the electorate a referendum on the legality of sports betting within the state; it also would impose a tax upon the net revenue of those establishments accepting such bets, the majority of which would provide funding for the Colorado Water Plan and the remainder of which would be used to regulate sports betting and provide services for gambling addiction. Since 1992, gambling on the outcome of most sporting events had been outlawed nationally under the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act, or PASPA, though with the Supreme Court’s decision in Murphy v. National Collegiate Athletic Association , this Act was deemed unconstitutional, and state legislatures became free to legislate regarding sports betting and its legality. Proposition DD was put to a public ballot under the provisions of the TABOR amendment to the Colorado Constitution, a ‘Taxpayer Bill of Rights’ ...

The Proponents of Proposition DD

Proposition DD and its proponents One of the most significant and noteworthy results of the recent elections in Colorado was the passing of Proposition DD. A legislative proposition is a proposal placed on the ballot by the state legislature itself. The legislature in Denver referred the measure with House Bill 1327 during the spring season, with easy bipartisan support. [1] The proposition however did not receive such widespread support from the public, only narrowly passing, and being too close to call on election night. This is illustrated below. [2] The passage of Proposition DD legalised gambling on sports events, beginning in six months’ time; making Colorado the nineteenth state to legalise sports betting. Colorado’s seventeen casino operators will be eligible to apply for licenses for both physical and online sportsbooks, with the Colorado Division of Gaming being tasked to regulate the market. [3] ‘Yes on Proposition DD’ raised about $2.83 million for ca...

Immigration Visas and Polarization

Megan King  The story I decided to investigate in National News is , “ Federal Judges Block Trump Policy Targeting Legal Immigrants on Public Benefits ” by Claire Hansen demonstrates how difficult the policymaking procedure can be. In regard to the separations of powers, this ideology does give each branch equal representation, which in this case was to block a new policy. In this situation, three judges filed lawsuits because the new policy the Government was going to implement that visas could be denied if they think that immigrants who are going to use public benefits. It is known as the “public charge” policy which is basically, “any individual who is deemed likely to accept a benefit is considered a public charger” which was just another attempt from the Trump Administration desiring to stop immigration (Hansen). There has already been policies in place that set up circumstances that Immigration Courts and the Government have set up to deny immigration residence just in...