On Friday, the Democrat-controlled Business Affairs & Labor Committee summarily rejected House Bill 1118, the so-called “Fair Workweek Employment Standards Act.” With eight bipartisan votes to kill the bill and just two in favor, this was a resounding defeat for legislation that would have crushed the restaurant industry. But is it also encouraging sign that common sense can prevail in a left wing-dominated legislature?

HB1118 would have required all restaurants – as well as other service-sector companies with more than 250 employees worldwide – to notify employees of their work schedules two full weeks in advance, as well as provide expensive “predictability pay” in the event of any deviation from their advanced schedule.

The impact on already-struggling restaurants would have been devastating – and the public blowback was fierce. I don’t think I’ve seen more op-eds on any single subject than opposing HB1118. With good reason: everybody enjoys going out to a restaurant or a bar – meaning, we want to get onto a restaurant’s guest list (a harder task if they ended up short-staffed due to the law) and afford an outing (which would have been more expensive with “predictability pay”).

Strikingly, Colorado’s restaurant industry wasn’t even consulted first. “A bill of this magnitude and size would normally see a one-year stakeholder process with all interest parties, where you can go through section-by-section,” Sonia Riggs, CEO of the Colorado Restaurant Association, recently explained on my 710KNUS radio show. “That never happened.”

The industry first saw the bill on Jan. 3 and was given 24 hours’ notice to give initial feedback to its sponsors. Who was awarded advanced notice? “We heard directly from the proponents that they have been working with union groups to put this thing together for two to three years,” Riggs said.

When you have a bill that is so transparently bad that the outpouring of negativity is broad and deep – especially from industry folks who were never consulted and were even brushed aside – there comes a point when you have no choice but to shut it down. That’s exactly what happened here. Did Democrats actually want to risk being blamed for forcing even more restaurants to close their doors? It appears not.

The fact that they would buck Denver Rep. Emily Sirota, the bill’s sponsor and chair of the appropriations committee, suggests a willingness to disregard the party’s far-left progressive flank, of which Sirota is a prominent member. With so many radical bills in the session this year, Democrats would be right to keep pushing back.

Gun control is a particular hot-button this session, with several bills introduced to advance that objective. In the case of House Bill 1230, a ban on so-called “assault weapons,” it looks like Democrats may rightly thwart that effort. Cosponsored by another far-left member, Rep. Elisabeth Epps, the legislation is so broad and so extreme that already one of the original Democratic prime sponsors – Rep. Andrew Boesenecker – has withdrawn his name. As reported this week, “the measure may not have enough support from Democrats, including by some leaders on this issue.”

While it’s a relief to see an openness to kill HB1230 similarly to HB1118, there are other bills that they may not handle so wisely.

Senate Bill 169 would ban firearms sales to anyone under age 21, rather than 18 as current law states. The exceptions to this are narrow. For example, it appears someone who is active duty military or active duty police can only possess a firearm related to their job. So, we can trust them with a firearm to serve their country or community, but not to protect their own family? Likewise, a 20-year-old single woman living alone cannot purchase or possess a firearm for her own self-defense. This seems primed for passage, but it will only hamper law-abiding adults.

On Monday night, a different committee sent House Bill 1219 to the House floor in a 7-4 vote. If signed into law, HB1219 will mandate a 3-day waiting period prior to the delivery of a purchased firearm. Such a law would, for example, deprive a female domestic violence victim from being able to purchase a firearm in a timely fashion for self-defense against an ex-boyfriend, who is subject to a restraining order after being threatening or violent. This is a very real scenario.

Democrats have also introduced House Bill 1169, which would prohibit law enforcement from making arrests for a laundry list of misdemeanor offenses, instead calling for them to simply be ticketed. Moreover, if a suspect escapes police custody, the offender is not subject to arrest, either. Some of the petty offenses might make sense, but fundamentally, this will only perpetuate a culture of permissiveness and recidivism.

As I’ve written before, when there are few or no consequences for actual crimes, criminal activity will increase. I recall being told by an officer during the 2020 COVID-19 jail limitations that a suspect literally shouted, waving his arms, “COVID! COVID! You can’t do anything!” When the bad guys know there are few consequences, they will keep committing crimes. We’ve seen the consequences already in skyrocketing violent and property crimes.

Let’s be real: Common sense prevailed on the restaurant bill, and it might triumph on the assault weapons ban. But now, the question is, will Democrats choose the path of common sense on more of their far-left bills – or will they give the progressives what they want?

Jimmy Sengenberger is an investigative journalist, public speaker, and host of “The Jimmy Sengenberger Show” Saturdays from 6 a.m. to 9 a.m. on News/Talk 710 KNUS. Reach Jimmy online at JimmySengenberger.com or on Twitter @SengCenter.