Coloradans will decide this fall whether to require lifetime prison sentences for child sex trafficking convictions, even though tougher penalties may not be the best way to address the issue.
Popular portrayals of child sex trafficking have reinforced stereotypes of victims as young girls kidnapped at random by strangers, but in reality traffickers often have close relationships with their victims, like family members or significant others. Many traffickers use social media to recruit and groom their targets.
Child sex trafficking and human trafficking may have increased in Colorado since the COVID-19 pandemic, according to data from the Colorado-based Laboratory to Combat Human Trafficking, the National Human Trafficking Hotline and law enforcement statistics reported to the FBI.
Sex trafficking accounts for the majority of human trafficking cases, and over three-quarters of sex trafficking victims in Colorado in the last ten years have been under the age of 20, according to the FBI data. Women and girls accounted for roughly nine out of ten victims.
A lot of human trafficking goes unreported, meaning the numbers are likely an undercount. On the other hand, an increase in reports might reflect greater public awareness or increased attention from law enforcement, rather than an actual increase in these crimes. Organizations also track data in different ways, which can make comparisons across data sets unreliable.
While it’s difficult to know whether child sex trafficking in Colorado is getting worse, a conservative activist group called Protect Kids Colorado argues that the state’s current laws are too lax. The group is promoting ballot measure 108, which would mandate life sentences for anyone convicted of child sex trafficking.
“Really the goal here is to be a deterrent – to make sure people know, perpetrators know that, you know, this is not a child trafficking friendly state,” the group’s co-founder, Erin Lee, said.
Watch the full interview with Lee 👇
What would the ballot measure do?
Ballot initiative 108 would require a life sentence without the possibility of parole for people convicted of child sex trafficking. The measure does not change the penalties for any other human trafficking crimes, including child labor trafficking.
The change would apply to only about three convictions per year, according to estimates by non-partisan analysts who work for the state legislature. Because of that small scale, the measure wouldn’t generate a significant cost to the state budget – an estimated $100,000 over the next 15 years.
Current law provides for sentences between eight and 24 years for child sex trafficking, though the actual time people spend in prison can be longer due to sentencing enhancements and multi-count convictions.
Boulder District Attorney Michael Dougherty emphasized his belief that human trafficking crimes deserve harsh punishments, and he said current laws already allow for sending perpetrators to prison for long stretches that are sometimes effectively life sentences.
“We’ve never had – not once – a human trafficking case where we’re able to secure conviction where we’re left thinking, this person, we wish we could have sent this person to prison for longer,” Dougherty said.
Lee and other supporters of the measure say the requirement for life sentences without parole would more strongly deter child sex trafficking. But research shows the perceived likelihood of getting caught and prosecuted for a crime plays a bigger role in deterrence than the severity of the eventual penalty.
“Merely upping criminal penalties to the maximum level like this bill does, doesn’t by itself effectively deter,” Denver District Attorney John Walsh said. “I’d rather prosecute a hundred 10-year-penalty cases in this world than two life-without-parole cases, because we’re going to have a bigger impact if we do.”
Concerns about the ballot initiative
Experts who work with victims and study human trafficking say measure 108’s severe penalties could be applied to victims who are forced or coerced into helping their traffickers recruit other people.
Current law says victims can use their victimization as a defense in court. Prosecutors also have the discretion to avoid bringing charges against victims, and the governor has the power to issue pardons.
But even if victims aren’t actually charged or convicted, traffickers may misrepresent the law to dissuade them from coming forward.
Amanda Finger, the co-founder of the Laboratory to Combat Human Trafficking, said her organization already deals with this issue.
“We’re hearing people’s experiences of exploitation but fear to report,” she said.
Watch the full interview with Finger 👇
Another concern is that measure 108 could face legal obstacles in its implementation based on the argument that it is unfair to treat child sex trafficking so much more harshly than other human trafficking crimes.
“That will get a challenge on equal protection grounds that, you know, we’re going to have to be litigating probably for years and will only throw further uncertainty into our ability to prosecute these cases,” Denver District Attorney Walsh said.
What works to fight human trafficking
Many traffickers take advantage of people with unmet economic and social needs, so reducing vulnerabilities like financial precarity, housing insecurity and family instability can help with prevention.
Expanding victim services and using trauma-informed practices can foster the conditions for people to feel safe coming forward and asking for help.
Finger and other advocates have been working to train healthcare workers, educators, law enforcement officers and prosecutors in Colorado on how to work together to help victims heal and seek justice while minimizing the chances of retraumatizing them.
Education can also help victims and their loved ones recognize trafficking and learn where they can get help.
“Every training we’ve done with youth, there’s been some disclosure of an attempt – of someone they knew or of themselves – who experienced exploitation that would rise to the level of labor or sex trafficking,” Finger said.
She said conversations like those can help people recognize exploitation and connect with support.
“That makes a difference when you can have the conversations and just know where to turn,” she said.
NEED TO KNOW
💸 Republican candidate Victor Marx’s campaign for governor is facing a potentially historic fine for alleged fundraising violations. State officials are seeking to fine the campaign over $50,000 for allegedly collecting contributions above legal limits. The campaign could also have to return the excess money or donate it to an unaffiliated charity. Marx has denied intentional wrongdoing and said he will fight the charges, which will be decided at a hearing this month. (9News, August 7 newsletter)
🏳️⚧️ Colorado and 20 other states are suing the federal government over a new rule meant to block federal funding for gender-affirming care. The states argue the feds don’t actually have the authority to enforce the rule and that it conflicts with laws requiring states to cover medically necessary treatments. (Erin in the Morning / Erin Reed, Colorado Attorney General’s Office, July 3 newsletter)
🤡 The most powerful conservative activist group in the state, Advance Colorado, dodged my attempts to interview them about a ballot measure they’re supporting, then stole a graphic from the article I published about it. I lay out the full story in this video.
🤓 I attended the Local News Solutions conference in the Denver area last week, and these are my biggest takeaways:
1.) High-quality journalism is not enough; local reporting has to be relevant and actionable in addition to being accurate and timely.
2.) Local reporting has to meet audiences where they’re at, in multimedia formats and styles that they prefer.
3.) There’s still a lot of resistance in Colorado local media to adapting to changes in audience preferences. Many recognize the need to try new things, but few seem to be willing to invest in bold experiments.
I explain my thoughts more fully in this video.
COMING UP
🗳️ Colorado voters will decide 13 ballot measures this fall, covering issues ranging from tax policy and public safety to transgender rights and conservation. Here’s a breakdown of what each measure proposes and who supports it.
The conservative activist group Advance Colorado is backing six of the measures.
Measure 85 would increase penalties for low-level fentanyl offenses. I reported last week on why it likely would not reduce overdose deaths in Colorado.
Measure 95 would require Colorado law enforcement agencies to notify federal immigration authorities when they charge an undocumented person with a crime. Some agencies, including the Gunnison County Sheriff’s Office, have said they do not want to cooperate with ICE, but this measure would leave them no choice.
Measure 177 would amend the state constitution to establish a right to buy and sell natural gas. Opponents say the initiative could undermine health and safety protections. I’m actively reporting on this one and will have more information soon.
Measure 234 would prohibit ballot measures from using language above an eighth-grade reading level. And measure 256 would prevent state officials from redrawing congressional districts to favor a particular political party. I’m still looking into these.
The sixth measure backed by Advance Colorado is measure 232, which would maintain Colorado’s income tax rate at 4.4% for all taxpayers. The initiative is intended to counter measure 195, which would create a graduated income tax system. Under initiative 195, taxes would decrease for Coloradans earning less than $500,000 per year and increase for individuals and businesses earning more than that. I covered measure 195, which is sponsored by the progressive group Protect Colorado’s Future, in a previous post.
Three other ballot measures are backed by the conservative activist group Protect Kids Colorado.
Measure 108, discussed in this newsletter above, would require judges to impose life sentences on anyone convicted of trafficking a minor.
Measure 109 would bar transgender girls from playing on girls’ sports teams, while Measure 110 would ban gender-affirming surgeries for minors. I’ll have a report on those measures in the coming weeks.
Coloradans for Responsible Wildlife Management is backing measure 302, which would amend the state constitution to establish a right to hunt and fish using “traditional methods.” Hunting and fishing are already legal in Colorado, and opponents say the measure could interfere with wildlife management.
Keep It Colorado is supporting measure 308, which would direct taxes from sports-equipment sales toward conservation. I don’t know much about these conservation issues, but I’ll see if I can squeeze in some reporting on them before the election.
The final initiative is measure 362, which is backed by conservative activists and would require Coloradans to verify their identities in order to vote by mail. Opponents say the measure would make voting more difficult without improving election security.
Stay tuned for more on these initiatives as we head toward the election.