Altogether, the Secretary of State’s office certified 83,696 signatures out of the 86,105 needed to place a measure on the ballot this year. Organizers have until Feb. 21 to come up with 2409 more valid signatures. They expressed confidence today that they could do that.

Campaign leader Mason Tvert issued this statement via email:

Today’s news is unexpected, but it is really just a very small bump in the road on our journey to end the irrational policy of marijuana prohibition in the state. Fortunately, we started this signature drive in 2011 so that we would have the opportunity to cure any shortfall in our count. We now have 15 days to collect approximately 3,000 valid signatures. Given that we were able to collect an average of 3,000 valid signatures per week during the first six months, we are confident we will complete this process successfully and qualify the initiative for the ballot. Then, in November, the people of Colorado will help us tax and regulate marijuana and end the insanity of punishing adults who make the rational choice to use a substance less harmful than alcohol.

Today’s announcement follows one made January 19 by the Secretary of State’s office that because a random sampling of signatures turned in by initiative supporters indicated that the total number of valid signatures would likely be within 10 percent of the total number needed, a line by line verification of signatures was required under state law.

This measure would allow adults to possess up to one ounce of marijuana. A second group is working on another initiative that would legalize marijuana without placing a limit on how much a person could have.

Image: Campaign supporter and attorney Brian Vicente speaks to the press the day the petitions were handed over to the Secretary of State. (Kersgaard)

“I was stunned to find out that Komen announced it had decided to cut funding to Planned Parenthood, which is the largest provider of women’s health care in the country,” DeGette said. “I was pleased when they reversed that decision. But I am concerned about how Komen is making its decisions.”

DeGette explained that she has had concerns about Komen decision-making for a while and that its perilous up-and-down journey through some of the murkier reaches of the abortion-politics swamp this week demonstrated confusion at the heart of the organization.

“As the attacks on Planned Parenthood [in Congress] revved up last year, Komen was touting the fact that it didn’t support stem cell research, even though they know stem cell research shows great potential to treat breast cancer.”

DeGette elaborated that thought in a release sent out minutes ago.

I have grave concerns that last fall, seemingly during the same time they decided to change [the funding policy to cut off Planned Parenthood], Komen also enacted a new policy of refusing to fund the pursuit of lifesaving ethical embryonic stem cell research (ESC), despite a history of recognizing its great potential. Given the massive resources of their organization and the great potential of ESC [to bolster] breast cancer treatment and [the search for] cures, it is deeply disturbing that Komen has turned its back on this research because of the same political pressures that led them to the original Planned Parenthood decision.

A politically-motivated grant process has no place in the pursuit of life-saving screenings, treatments, and research.

DeGette has long been an advocate for stem cell research and re-introduced her Stem Cell Research Advancement Act last year. The act passed the House and Senate years ago but fell victim to a George W. Bush veto. The legislation would establish a more permanent legal framework in which scientists could conduct stem cell research without being subject to the start-and-stop political pressures that shape life on Capitol Hill.

DeGette said she was “very glad” that Colorado’s Komen affiliates “stood up for science-based care” when they asked to be excluded from — and when Aspen Komen rejected altogether– the ban on funding Planned Parenthood and did so based on the statistically proven vital work Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains has done over the years to detect and head-off breast cancer among thousands of Coloradans with severely limited health care options.

DeGette said the Komen story this week was a wake-up call.

“I can’t tell you, we had such an outcry. My website and Facebook accounts were just full of messages,” she said.

“My daughter is 22 and she said this was the first time in her life she donated to Planned Parenthood. People need to be assured this major organization [Komen] is making science-based decisions.

DeGette said it was clear this week’s funding flap was part of a larger messaging battle.

“You know I sit on the Stearns committee doing the investigation into Planned Parenthood,” DeGette said, referring to the Planned Parenthood audit called by Florida anti-abortion Rep. Cliff Stearns and based on a mostly debunked Americans United for Life report on alleged Planned Parenthood misdeeds and corruption. The Stearns investigation was the reason Komen initially gave for throwing Planned Parenthood off its funding rolls.

“Listen, some Republicans in Congress have had a vendetta against Planned Parenthood for years, but 97 percent of what that organization does is well-women visits. For many of those women all over the country these are the only type of annual checkups they receive. There is no public tax money being spent on abortion and abortion is a small part of Planned Parenthood’s mission.

“I have been saying for years that these lawmakers don’t just oppose abortion. They oppose birth control and disease prevention for women. It’s the 21st century and we’re arguing about birth control?

“A lot of Americans woke up this week and said, ‘wow, the GOP agenda really is extreme. It’s about opposing contraception and mammography.’

“We want Komen to get back to science-based funding decisions”

DeGette is the head of the congressional Pro-Choice Caucus and has been a lead critic of the attacks on Planned Parenthood launched on Capitol Hill this year. Together with California Rep. Henry Waxman, she denounced the Stearns investigation as “unwarranted” and as a legalistic cover to “harass and shut down an organization simply because Republicans disagree with the work that it does.”

Got a tip? Story pitch? Send us an e-mail. Follow The Colorado Independent on Twitter.

The proposal the BLM released Friday is a thorough overhaul of the Bush-era leasing inventory: it slashes shale from 1.9 million acres to 462,000 and sands from 431,000 acres to 91,000.

Oil shale is found in northwestern Colorado, Wyoming, and Utah and it contains an organic precursor to oil called kerogen. Despite decades of attempts, oil shale has never proven commercially viable. Squeezing fuel from the rock requires copious quantities of water and heating the shale underground to something above 700 degrees over a period of several years. Everything that must go into oil shale production is considered far more environmentally harmful than the production of conventional oil.

“While I have long felt there is potential for oil shale development, it is critical that a number of unanswered questions be resolved before commercial-scale leasing takes place,” Sen. Mark Udall, D-Colorado, said in a prepared statement. “Fully understanding the demands of oil shale development on Colorado’s water and local communities is essential to ensuring responsible development.”

Last year, the BLM announced it would reconsider the Bush-era land leasing plan as part of a settlement of a lawsuit by environmental groups in 2009 that challenged the 2008 action.

“For the sportsmen, farmers, ranchers and communities on the Western Slope that depend on clean air and clean water, making sure development is done right the first time is vital to their way of life,” said Udall, noting that the BLM will be accepting public comment on its plan for the next 90 days.

Sen. Michael Bennet, D-Colorado, issued a statement reminding residents of “Black Sunday,” May 2, 1982, when Exxon’s massive Colony oil shale project went bust on the state’s Western Slope.

Udall and Bennet

Rep. Lamborn

“Oil shale is one of the most promising new sources of American-made energy and the United States is fortunate to have an abundance of oil shale resources, including in Colorado,” Lamborn said.

Environmentalists and others immediately panned Lamborn’s bill.

“We already face a water shortage in the West that threatens farmers and ranchers,” said Bill Midcap of the Rocky Mountain Farmers Union. “We simply cannot gamble away our water on oil shale speculation at the risk of losing our farming and ranching economy that we depend upon for our food and fiber. … We should use existing research and development projects to determine how much water will be needed before we consider commercial leasing of oil shale.”

In a letter to the president, the two Colorado Democrats, along with Maurice Hinchey, D-N.Y, call on Obama to support the Fracturing Responsibility and Awareness of Chemicals (FRAC) Act, which would require the disclosure of chemicals used in the natural gas extraction process called “fracking.”

In his State of the Union speech last month, Obama emphasized natural gas as a key resource in his “all-of-the-above” strategy to reduce the nation’s reliance on foreign oil and to make the United States a global leader in clean energy. Obama followed it up with speeches at Buckley Air Force Base and another in Nevada in which he called the United States “the Saudi Arabia of natural gas.”

Rep. Diana DeGette

“With hydraulic fracturing expanding across the country, it is more important than ever we ensure the economic benefits of natural gas do not come at the expense of the health and safety of our families,” DeGette said Thursday.

DeGette, Hinchey, and Polis also requested an expansion of an ongoing Environmental Protection Agency study of hydraulic fracturing, which received a congressional hearing Wednesday so charged Academy Award-nominated filmmaker Josh Fox of “Gasland” ended up in handcuffs.

“The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is currently embarking on the first, independent and comprehensive study of the risks that hydraulic fracturing poses to drinking water,” their letter states. “Unfortunately, media reports indicate that some in the oil and gas industry are seeking to narrow and even undermine this important study. This must not be allowed to happen. We urge you to maintain a strong commitment to the research that is under way by providing the necessary resources and support. We also urge you to consider expanding this research to cover hydraulic fracturing’s impact on air quality and human health.”

The House members also questioned the shale gas statistics cited in the State of the Union address.

Rep. Jared Polis

“We also believe it’s critical to have an accurate understanding of exactly how much shale gas lies beneath the surface,” their letter states. “Much has been said about our country’s potential supply of shale gas. Some in the industry have claimed we have an ocean of natural gas buried beneath our surface. Despite these claims, independent estimates about shale gas reserves reveal great uncertainty. In fact, just this week, the Energy Information Administration slashed its estimate of technically recoverable resources of U.S. shale gas by half. Furthermore, the United States Geological Survey’s estimates released last year are even lower. This is an enormous swing and it should be a caution to those who claim these new shale gas fields are the silver bullet to our country’s energy challenge. We must take care to ensure that any ‘bridge fuel,’ doesn’t instead prove to be a bridge to nowhere.”

Devalued land, contaminated water

On Tuesday, in the lead up to a hearing on a controversial federal study of water contamination from natural gas drilling, residents in the Pavillion, Wyo., area voiced unwavering support for the EPA.

“The Pavillion area was heavily drilled for natural gas,” said John Fenton, an alfalfa farmer. “No consideration was given to well spacing or to the impacts on the people or the environment. Our land and the land of our neighbors has been damaged and devalued. The water has been contaminated and the air fouled. Our health has also been attacked, my wife is losing her sense of smell and her sense of taste, my youngest son has developed seizures and I suffer chronic headaches and fatigue.”

Fenton was one of three landowners from the Pavillion area to speak to the press in a teleconference the day before the hearing over the EPA’s draft report, which has been criticized by gas industry executives, Wyoming officials and some members of Congress.

At the hearing, GOP lawmakers questioned the integrity of the EPA’s draft report, alleging it “jumps to conclusions” in making connections between fracking and water contamination. EPA officials clarified the scope of the draft report and explained the uniqueness of the Pavillion gas field.

“We make clear that the causal link to hydraulic fracturing has not been demonstrated conclusively, and that our analysis is limited to the particular geologic conditions in the Pavillion gas field and should be assumed to apply to fracturing in other geologic settings,” James B. Martin, EPA’s Region 8 administrator in Denver, testified. “It should be noted that fracturing in Pavillion is taking place in and below the drinking water aquifer and in close proximity to drinking water wells — production conditions different from those in many other areas of the country.”

The EPA on Tuesday issued more than 600 new pages of data to support its draft report.

Fenton praised the EPA for paying attention.

Louis Meeks’ well water contains methane gas, hydrocarbons, lead and copper, according to the EPA’s test results. When he drilled a new water well, it also showed contaminants. (Photo by Abrahm Lustgarten/ProPublica)

“When the people of the Pavillion area began to notice negative impacts to their water they looked to the state and industry to provide answers and help to remedy the contamination,” he said. “However there was no help from the state of Wyoming or the natural gas industry. The people of the Pavillion area were told that there was no way the natural gas drilling and fracking operations in the Pavillion area could have caused damage to the water. When industry did admit that problems existed they blamed the impact on the landowners saying that they lacked proper hygiene or that they had contaminated the wells themselves.”

“During the entire time we’ve known our water is bad, we contacted our elected officials, the Wyoming Governor, Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality, and the BLM, who administer the Tribe’s minerals under our property, asking for help. They continually said our water was fine,” added landowner Louis Meeks. “While reading the EIS for the Wind River Gas Field Development Project, I saw Region 8 EPA Greg Oberley’s name and called him to ask for EPA’s help. Several of our impacted neighbors also contacted the EPA. After site tours of the Pavillion area, we were invited to go to Denver to explain the problems we were having with our water. We welcome and are thankful for the help that the EPA has given us.”

The EPA is extending the public comment period on its study into March and it also sent out a request for peer review. Martin and other officials stressed that the study is not final.

In the meantime, natural gas prices are plunging due to a surge in supply. Several oil and gas companies recently announced plans to close off natural gas wells, pull out rigs and slow spending.

Got a tip? Story pitch? Send us an e-mail. Follow The Colorado Independent on Twitter.

“We’re so grateful to our Aspen and Denver Komen affiliates,” Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains Spokesperson Monica McCafferty told the Colorado Independent. “The [directors] here stuck their necks out and stood by us and the national organization followed their lead. They turned the lens on the national leaders and on their explanations about the new policies and those explanations just didn’t seem very sincere.”

Komen seemed overwhelmed by reaction to its new funding policy. The decision lighted up the mediasphere and drew strong responses from national political leaders even as Komen executives floundered in articulating exactly how the policy came to be formulated, how it would be applied and how it would further the fight against breast cancer.

As news reports piled one on top of the other over the last 48 hours, it seemed increasingly clear that the new Komen policy was the work of recently hired hardline anti-abortion executive and board personnel. The spotlight fell on Senior Vice President Karen Handel and Board Director Jane Abraham, the former an anti-Planned Parenthood Georgia gubernatorial candidate and the latter a director at the anti-Planned Parenthood Susan B Anthony List. The two seemed likely to be leading efforts internally to push the same line of anti-Planned Parenthood arguments that have shaped partisan proposals on Capitol Hill and in state capitol chambers across the country this year, proposals that were largely formulated and promoted by anti-abortion activist organizations such as Americans United for Life and the Susan B. Anthony List.

“We want to apologize to the American public for recent decisions that cast doubt upon our commitment to our mission of saving women`s lives,” Komen said in a release Friday.

“We will continue to fund existing grants, including those of Planned Parenthood, and preserve their eligibility to apply for future grants, while maintaining the ability of our affiliates to make funding decisions that meet the needs of their communities.”

The foundation said it planned to update its new funding policies to “ensure that politics has no place in our grant process.”

McCafferty said the turn of events should act as a corrective to the activist message campaigns that have worked to demonize Planned Parenthood by distorting its mission and that have resulted in the loss of tens of millions of dollars that otherwise would have been spent more effectively on women’s health.

“It’s definitely a joyful moment for women,” she said of the reversal. “The outpouring of support from people around the country has been overwhelming. It demonstrates the way our country is behind the Planned Parenthood mission.”

Got a tip? Story pitch? Send us an e-mail. Follow The Colorado Independent on Twitter.

“The [Aspen Komen] decision to break from its national office over a poorly thought-out policy sends a strong signal about the importance of doing what is best for our communities,” PPRM President and CEO Vicki Cowart said in a release sent out late Thursday night. “Planned Parenthood and Komen share a common goal and vision– and that is to advance women’s health. We know people depend on both our organizations to serve and support low income and underinsured or uninsured individuals across our state.”

“We hope [the Aspen decision] sends a strong signal that, when it comes to the issue of women’s health, there is no room for politics,” she said.

Komen’s Denver and Aspen affiliates asked for waivers from the new anti-Planned Parenthood policy, citing the major role played by Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains (PPRM) in battling breast cancer in the state. The national organization granted Denver Komen a waiver but turned down Aspen Komen’s request.

Planned Parenthood cares for roughly 1,000 patients a year in Colorado through Komen funding and has proven enormously effective at detecting breast cancer.

PPRM found nearly 20 percent of all of the cases of breast cancer discovered through Denver Komen spending last year and did so on a relative shoestring, pulling down only 4.3 percent or $125,000 of the $3 million Denver Komen donated to clinics and research centers in the northern Front Range.

Planned Parenthood spokesperson Monica McCafferty told the Glenwood Springs Post Independent last night that Aspen Komen gave PPRM’s Glenwood Springs clinic $40,000 last year for breast-cancer prevention and care and that the clinic used the money to perform 300 breast exams, teach 850 women to do self-examinations, refer about 40 women for mammograms and to help pay for those tests.

The Aspen Komen announcement came as a series of moves that have ignited the politics mediasphere in the wake of news that Komen would withdraw funding from Planned Parenthood nationally. It’s difficult not to see Aspen’s rejection of the new policy as a revolt. The decision, made unanimously by Aspen Komen’s board of directors and announced in ads placed in two local papers, suggests the level of dissent bubbling up within the larger Komen organization to what appears to be a politically motivated decision handed down from leadership who failed to sufficiently consult with local Komen decision-makers familiar with operations on the ground.

Indeed, despite varying rationales given by national Komen representatives for the controversial policy change and assurances that the decision to cut off Planned Parenthood was not tied to this year’s especially fraught anti-abortion anti-Planned Parenthood politics, sources inside Komen are beginning to confirm that the new policy was adopted specifically to cut off Planned Parenthood and was the work of recently hired anti-abortion personnel, including former Georgia Republican gubernatorial candidate Karen Handel and Susan B Anthony List Chairman Jane Abraham.

In its advertisement, Aspen Komen said halting funding to Planned Parenthood would be “contrary to its mission.”

In its release on the Aspen announcement, Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains said it applauded the “brave and courageous move by the Denver and Aspen affiliates of Susan G. Komen for the Cure Foundation to put women’s health above a politically-motivated decision that would have halted funding breast cancer prevention, screenings, and education at Planned Parenthood health centers in Colorado.”

Nearly two dozen members of the U.S. Senate sent a strongly worded letter to Komen Thursday asking the organization to rethink its decision to distance itself from Planned Parenthood.

Got a tip? Story pitch? Send us an e-mail. Follow The Colorado Independent on Twitter.

It turns out his message of eliminating the Federal Reserve, returning to the gold standard, hewing closely to the Constitution, reducing the size of the federal government, reducing American involvement abroad and ending the drug war resonates with a lot of people.

While he may be able to draw a large and enthusiastic crowd in Denver, he appears to have no chance of gaining the Republican nomination for president. While his reportedly racist past may not diminish his ability to draw a crowd, it would likely keep him out of the White House should he miraculously gain the nomination.

“It sounds like the revolution got here before I did,” he said upon being introduced to thunderous applause. “I was hoping to get 30 or 40 people today so I’m glad you showed.”

Ron Paul packs a hotel ballroom in Denver earlier this week. (Kersgaard)

His message, though, was primarily about reducing the size and role of the federal government. In fact, that was his only theme. In more than 30 minutes on stage, he did not advocate a single new government program, did not speak well of any existing programs and did not promise his fans anything other than to get government off their backs.

Video of entire speech is at the bottom of this article.

“When government grows, liberty is diminished. The role of government should be to defend liberty.

“If we want to cut spending, we should start with the outrageous spending we’re doing overseas. No more wars without a congressional declaration. We need to stay out of the internal affairs of other nations and stop acting like we have the authority to go policing around the world.”

He added his opinion that the U.S. has neither the wisdom nor the money to be involved in other countries’ affairs.

“They would like to paint those of us who don’t believe in fighting all these wars as lacking in patriotism and not supporting the troops, but they fail to remember that our campaign gets more money from active military than all the other Republicans candidates combined.”

Paul said the government needs to do a better job of taking care of returning veterans, calling the suicide rate among veterans tragic and unconscionable.

“Another reason we should be leery of all these wars is that during war time people have traditionally been willing to give up some of their liberties. I’ve come to the conclusion that you never have to give up personal liberties for more security.

“We all understand the trauma of 9-11, but it was no excuse to give up our liberties. There was no excuse to pass the Patriot Act.

“It doesn’t make us any safer, it teaches us to be submissive to the state,” he said about today’s airport security measures.

“You won’t hear Ron Paul change his tune to suit his audience,” one member of the audience told The Colorado Independent. That sentiment explains part of his appeal. Whether speaking to a crowd of fans, speaking at a debate or being interviewed on TV, he stays on point.

He said the Federal Reserve will be eliminated, that it isn’t a question of “if” but only a question of “when.”

“Complete paper money has been around about 40 years and it has done a lot of damage but it is on its last legs, let me tell you. There is no doubt that we do want to end the Fed, but the thing is, we don’t have to worry too much about it. We might have to be concerned about when.

“We are operating on an unconstitutional system of money, and it has brought havoc, it has brought bubbles, it has brought us this recession/depression of the past four years, so we cannot solve our problems and get back on economic growth unless we address the subject of monetary policy and that is one thing the American people are paying a lot more attention to now. It is the first time in the 100 year history of the Federal Reserve that it is a major issue in a presidential campaign,” he said.

“They like to portray those of us who believe in honest money– which has been around about 6000 years– as weird, but maybe just printing money is weird, maybe just printing paper and calling it money is weird,” he said to wild applause.
For a Motley Fool interview with Paul on the subject of the Federal Reserve, click here.

Paul said Americans are somewhat divided on the issue of freedom, with some people pushing for economic freedom and others advocating personal and social freedom, but with the two groups seldom coming together.

“We need to have some fundamental changes in how we understand what it means to be free. We have concentrated more on the material benefits of a free society and forgotten about the fundamentals of a free society.

“Some defend economic liberty, some defend personal liberty, but few defend both. We have to understand they are unified. You have the right to run your life as you choose but you should also have the right to keep the fruits of your labor,” he said.

“The drug war needs to be repealed as well. There was an experiment in the early part of the last century, that was prohibition of alcohol. Back then they thought they had to amend the Constitution to put all these prohibitions on people. Now they just do it.

“That was a bad experiment, but the country woke up and repealed it. We really need to do that again. As a physician, let me tell you… we treat drug addiction differently than we treat alcohol addiction.”

Paul concluded his Denver visit by saying that if he had to choose between freedom and wealth, he would choose freedom.

“But we don’t have to make that choice, the freer the society the more prosperous it is,” he said before leaving the stage. He did not return for an encore.

(Video: Ronpaul2008dotcom)

“Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains (PPRM) does important work to educate women about breast cancer and provide screening exams that are critical to early detection,” he wrote in a release. “I applaud Komen’s Denver affiliate for pushing back on their national organization and insisting that they be allowed to continue providing grants to PPRM, which help ensure access to affordable, life-saving services for Colorado women on the Front Range.

“Women’s health should never be used as a political football, and I hope the national organization of Susan G. Komen reverses its decision to end its partnership with Planned Parenthood elsewhere in our state and across the country.”

Staffers earlier said Udall was crafting a response to the Komen news with Colorado Senator Michael Bennet. It’s unclear if Udall and Bennet at this point still plan to pen a letter to Komen together. Colorado’s senators’ staffers told the Colorado Independent the two wanted to directly address news coming out of Colorado, where the two major women’s health organizations, Komen and Planned Parenthood, seemed to be coming to their own agreement.

A group of roughly two dozen U.S. Senators signed onto a letter to the national Komen foundation decrying the decision to pull back crucial support in the battle against breast cancer for what seemed to be clearly partisan political reasons.

Komen’s rationale for the move has shifted in the hours since it made its decision public.

Known for its marketing savvy– this is the group that hosts enormously popular “races for the cure” around the country and that launched the omnipresent pink-ribbon campaign– Komen first said the decision was not tied to this year’s turbo-charged anti-Planned Parenthood abortion politics but was simply the results of new rules governing grantee eligibility, specifically new rules that precluded organizations under investigation from receiving Komen cash.

The congressional investigation that moved Planned Parenthood off Komen funding lists, however, was very much a product of the anti-Planned Parenthood politics that shaped this year’s House Republican agenda. It was launched by anti-abortion Florida Rep. Cliff Stearns and based on a specious and mostly debunked report by anti-abortion group Americans United for Life.

The Komen policy changes seemed transparently motivated by the House investigation, especially in light of the fact that leadership at Komen has recently included strong anti-abortion, anti-Planned Parenthood figures such as Senior Vice President Karen Handel and Komen Advocacy Alliance board member Jane Abraham.

As the Washington Post reported, however, Komen CEO Nancy Brinker just hours ago walked back reference to the Stearns investigation, saying the new funding rules “had very little to do with the ongoing congressional probe” and were based on the fact that not all Planned Parenthood clinics provide mammograms.

“We have decided not to fund, wherever possible, pass-through grants. We were giving them money, they were sending women out for mammograms. What we would like to have are clinics where we can directly fund mammograms.”

Northern Colorado Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains clinics will continue to draw funds, as will clinics in Texas and Southern California, she said, because “they are the only provider” of breast health services in the areas they serve.

Denver Komen gave Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains $125,000 last year, or 4.3 percent of the nearly $3 million Denver Komen spent fighting breast cancer here, but Komen got big bang for those bucks. Planned Parenthood detected nearly 20 percent of all of the cases of breast cancer discovered through Denver Komen spending.

Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains serves patients whose health-care options are severely limited. Roughly 84 percent of PPRM patients have no health insurance and 62 percent live at or below the federal poverty line.

Got a tip? Story pitch? Send us an e-mail. Follow The Colorado Independent on Twitter.

The letter comes on the heels of news that roughly two dozen of Udall and Bennet’s colleagues in the Senate have signed on to a letter strongly urging Komen, the high-profile marketing firm behind the breast-cancer pink-ribbon campaign, to reverse the decision it announced this week to cease funding Planned Parenthood breast cancer screening and education efforts.

The Senate letter has reportedly drawn support from a wide spectrum of Democrats, including moderates like Montana’s John Tester. It decried the Komen decision as the latest front in the partisan political battle launched against Planned Parenthood this year that has driven moves inside and outside of government to strip funds from the reproductive healthcare and abortion provider.

“It would be tragic if any woman– let alone thousands of women– lost access to these potentially life-saving screenings because of a politically motivated attack,” the letter reads.

The support the letter has garnered reflects the increasingly high-level pushback Komen has received this week. News outlets have reported the intense back-and-forth that erupted in the wake of the announcement as it unfolded and as it played out on the internet, where supporters and detractors have waged furious social media messaging battles.

Denver Komen is one of select foundation affiliates across the nation that have asked for a waiver from the controversial decision to cut Planned Parenthood funds and has made the case in its public statements for its continuing to fund Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains (PPRM), pointing to the vital role the embattled organization plays in fighting breast cancer here.

PPRM provides distinctly cost-effective service for Komen. Its Front Range clinics were responsible for 19 percent of all the breast cancer detected through Denver Komen funding last year and it received only $125,000 or 4.3 percent of the $3 million Denver Komen awarded to nonprofits spread across the region, from Douglas County just south of Denver north to the Wyoming border.

Komen also notes that the state budget this year was slashed for the Breast and Cervical Cancer Screening Program provided by the Women’s Wellness Connection Program, leaving nearly 5,500 women in Colorado without access to services and opening the door to nearly 90 cases of cancer. In such an environment, Komen suggested, cutting off Planned Parenthood funding would be irresponsible.

There is no word yet on whether members of the U.S. House will weigh in formally on the Komen funding question. Calls to members of Colorado’s delegation were not immediately returned.

Colorado Congresswoman Diana DeGette is the head of the Pro-Choice Caucus and has been a lead critic of the often specious attacks on Planned Parenthood launched on Capitol Hill this year.

Indeed, although Komen has said its decision to pull funding from Planned Parenthood was not motivated by abortion politics, it cited as the cause a controversial congressional investigation launched by Florida Republican Rep. Cliff Stearns into twenty years of Planned Parenthood finances. Komen said that its new grantee criteria preclude funding any organizations under investigation.

Yet the Stearns audit of Planned Parenthood was spurred mainly by anti-abortion activists working off of a largely discredited Americans United for Life report brimming with lurid accusations that, for example, Planned Parenthood abetted human trafficking and child prostitution operations.

DeGette, together with California Rep. Henry Waxman, denounced the congressional investigation as “unwarranted” and as a legalistic cover to “harass and shut down an organization simply because Republicans disagree with the work that it does.”

“We are aware of no predicate that would justify this sweeping and invasive request to Planned Parenthood,” Waxman and DeGette wrote in a letter to Stearns last September as the investigation was being proposed. “It would be an abuse of the oversight process if you are now using the Committee’s investigative powers to harass Planned Parenthood again. Your fervent ideological opposition to Planned Parenthood does not justify launching this intrusive investigation.”

In a Thursday call with reporters, Komen CEO Nancy Brinker walked back reference to the Stearns investigation. The Washington Post reports Brinker said the decision not to continue funding Planned Parenthood “had very little to do with the ongoing congressional probe” but was based primarily on the fact that some Planned Parenthood clinics do not provide mammograms.

“We have decided not to fund, wherever possible, pass-through grants. We were giving them money, they were sending women out for mammograms. What we would like to have are clinics where we can directly fund mammograms.”

Northern Colorado Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains clinics will continue to draw funds, as will clinics in Texas and Southern California, Binker said, because “they are the only provider” of breast health services in the areas they serve.

News outlets and blogs have pointed to the fact that national Komen leadership has been tilted recently by a growing number of hardcore pro-life executives and board members, such as Senior Vice President Karen Handel, who came on last April after running as an anti-Planned Parenthood candidate for governor in Georgia’s Republican primary, and prominent Komen Advocacy Alliance board member Jane Abraham, who is also general chairman of the anti-abortion lobbying organization Susan B. Anthony List.

Leadership at Susan B. Anthony includes former arch-social conservative Colorado Congresswoman Marilyn Musgrave. The group has played a key role in the effort to “defund” Planned Parenthood nationwide. This year it kept a running state-by-state scorecard tracking the roughly $60,399,000 in federal and state funding stripped from Planned Parenthood affiliates in eight states.

“Our efforts during the federal budget fight gave Planned Parenthood a black eye,” the organization boasted.

The Atlantic reported today that sources inside Komen are beginning to confirm that the new policy cited to cut off funding to Planned Parenthood– whether ultimately tied to on-site mammogram services, congressional investigations or something else– was adopted specifically to cut off Planned Parenthood and that that effort was spearheaded by anti-abortion personnel led by Handel.

Ties among Komen executives and Congressional Republicans are sure to be scrutinized in the coming days.

Komen board member Jane Abraham’s husband, Spencer Abraham, for example, may draw looks. He was Energy Secretary under George W. Bush and last year joined Republicans in the House, including House Energy Committee member and Planned Parenthood investigator Cliff Stearns, in denouncing the government program that guaranteed loans to Solyndra solar panel company. Abraham’s law firm recently teamed with Florida law firm Roetzel & Andress to form DC-based lobby shop Abraham & Roetzel, which has offices in Columbus, Ohio and Tallahassee, Florida.

Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains told the Colorado Independent this week that the Denver Komen affiliate has been a “strong advocate” for the work Planned Parenthood does in Colorado.

More than 80 percent of PPRM patients have no health insurance and 62 percent live at or below the federal poverty line.

Got a tip? Story pitch? Send us an e-mail. Follow The Colorado Independent on Twitter.

Extracting fuel from oil shale can require anywhere between three and five barrels of water for every barrel of oil — one of the many reasons why it is more costly than producing conventional crude oil. Experts say commercial oil shale production is potentially a decade away, if it ever happens at all. Yet H.R. 3408, the “Pioneers Act,” would revive a 2008 plan by the Bureau of Land Management to open about 2 million acres of public lands in Utah, Wyoming and western Colorado to oil shale drilling.

“We already face a water shortage in the West that threatens farmers and ranchers,” said Bill Midcap of the Rocky Mountain Farmers Union. “We simply cannot gamble away our water on oil shale speculation at the risk of losing our farming and ranching economy that we depend upon for our food and fiber. A farm economy that is crucial for our State and that is helping our State out of the recession. We should use existing research and development projects to determine how much water will be needed before we consider commercial leasing of oil shale.”

Conservation groups challenged the plan on grounds that the analysis of impacts and the process were flawed and a new proposal re-evaluating the plan is due out soon. Lamborn’s bill (pdf) would mandate commercial leasing on 125,000 acres of public lands by 2016 even though the technology isn’t in place.

“Lamborn’s approach to oil shale is ‘Ready or not here it comes,’ and we are not ready,’’ the National Wildlife Federation’s Kate Zimmerman said. “There are still very important questions to be answered about the impacts of extracting oil shale on Colorado communities, on water quantity and quality and on fish and wildlife. Let’s wait for the results of the existing research into oil shale technology that is already taking place on public lands in Colorado and Utah before we give away more public resources.”

Oil shale was behind the huge western Colorado bust of the 1980s, when Exxon shut down a massive project that threw communities and families into economic and social turmoil. Nonetheless House Speaker John Boehner recently pointed to new oil shale legislation as a way to pay for transportation projects in the next five years — a check that may be hard to cash.

“Republicans on the House Natural Resources Committee botched Rep. Lamborn’s oil shale legislation hearing, which showed just how ridiculous the bill is,” said Matt Garrington, co-director of the Checks and Balances Project. “In two hours, the committee majority voted down guaranteeing oil shale technology to be American-made, ensuring that oil shale extraction won’t harm water supplies for municipalities and agriculture, and requiring commercial oil shale to be a proven revenue generator before handing over 2 million acres of public land for speculation. House Republicans did manage to preserve taxpayer handouts for oil companies by giving away oil shale at bargain-basement rates, undermining Speaker Boehner’s goal of raising transportation funds.”

The Lamborn bill would set royalty rates for oil shale starting at 5 percent for five years – compared to about 12.5 percent for extracted offshore oil and gas – and gradually raise the rate over several years. If they were ever paid, Garrington added, the lower royalties would mean less revenue for local governments, which would then shoulder the burden of costs associated with energy development such as new schools, hospitals, emergency services, roads, and other utilities.

The Pioneers Act is one of three bills concerning domestic energy that the committee approved. The GOP also voted to jump start offshore oil production and open up the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to drilling. Republicans plan to attach the bills to a $260 billion transportation package.

“Instead of legislating seriously,” said David Goldston, director of government affairs for the Natural Resources Defense Council, what the Republicans have done is put out “an inventory of all the worst ideas they’ve had for the last two decades.”

Lamborn’s bill still must pass the House and if it does, like the other measures the House Committee on Natural Resources passed Wednesday, it will face opposition in the Democrat-controlled Senate.

Got a tip? Story pitch? Send us an e-mail. Follow The Colorado Independent on Twitter.