Among the most absurd bills currently under consideration by the Colorado legislature is House Bill 1012, deceptively titled “Concerning Consumer Protections to Promote Fair Market Pricing.”

The first absurdity is the claim this legislation and promoting free-market pricing have anything in common whatsoever. Rather than promote competition, the bill sponsored by Reps. Kyle Brown (D-Louisville) and Yara Zokaie (D-Fort Collins) promotes regulation through litigation by making two amendments to the Colorado Consumer Protection Act.

One portion of the bill requires a “delivery service platform” (essentially, any online shopping app) to show both the on-app price and the in-store price when a consumer selects an item for purchase.

Why it is necessary to add this to our already voluminous Colorado Revised Statutes is anybody’s guess. If consumers want to compare online prices to in-store prices, that’s not difficult in today’s information economy. Businesses and app developers respond slavishly to consumer demand, so if customers want on-screen comparison, they will flock to apps which offer the convenience.

Placing this in the CCPA where it can be enforced by litigation benefits only class-action lawyers who may collect millions in attorney fees while consumers are “rewarded” with coupons or a few dollars.

The remainder of the bill attempts to prohibit price gouging of “captive consumers,” defined as a consumer located at an airport, hospital or emergency room, an event venue with a capacity or expected attendance of 2,000 more (which covers everything from local fairs and festivals to concerts and sporting events), or a correctional facility.

If a vendor at one of these locations “does not have competitors” and charges a price for goods or services “that is more than the average price offered for a comparable good or service sold in the county,” that vendor is presumed to have committed an “unfair or deceptive trade practice.”

Under Colorado law, someone who commits a deceptive trade practice can be sued for up to $20,000 per violation or for three times actual damages, plus attorney fees and costs.

The bill leaves too much to the imagination of the private attorneys who will file lawsuits to enforce it. For example, how is the average price in a county determined and who determines it? If a 4-H club sells Coke or Pepsi for $2 a can at the county fair, but the average price for a six-pack at area grocery stores is $7.99, then is the 4-H club breaking the law?

What constitutes a “competitor” or a “comparable good or service” at such an event? If Chipotle and Famous Dave’s BBQ both sell concessions at a concert, are they competitors because they are both selling food? Or are they not competitors because their menus are not “comparable”? If they are competitors, they can’t be sued, but if they are not competitors, they’d better lawyer up.

Consider the concessionaire that finds itself unexpectedly served with a lawsuit. The bill says a vendor can prove its price “was not unreasonably excessive,” but doing so demands it pay a lawyer thousands to prove its innocence. If they win, they are not entitled to recover their own legal costs, but if they lose, they’re on the hook for the plaintiff’s legal costs. How is that fair?

This bill frustratingly defies common sense and is entirely unnecessary.

First, there’s nothing “deceptive” about charging a higher price at a concert, sporting event or street fair than the price charged at the local convenience store. So long as the price charged is the same price listed on the menu, no deception is involved.

Next, from the list of locations, the only consumers that conceivably meet the definition of “captive” are those in a correctional facility. Everyone else on the list is, more or less, there by choice.

The real deception here is the bill’s claim to “promote fair market pricing.” If proponents really wanted to do that, they could simply require these locations to allow anyone attending to bring their own food and drink. But that wouldn’t enrich billboard lawyers, who are the only beneficiaries of this proposed law.

Mark Hillman served as Senate majority leader and state treasurer.  He is now executive director of Colorado Civil Justice League (www.CCJL.org).