Consumer Rights Wiki - User contributions [en]

Colorado SB26-090 critical infrastructure exemption

2026-04-21T17:05:02Z

JT1198: Reworded slightly

{{#seo:
|title=Colorado SB26-090 Critical Infrastructure Exemption - Consumer Rights Wiki
|description=Colorado SB26-090 exempts "critical infrastructure" IT equipment from the state's right to repair law, letting manufacturers self-classify products.
}}

'''Colorado SB26-090''' is a 2026 bill that would exempt "information technology equipment intended for use in critical infrastructure" from Colorado's [[Right to Repair|Consumer Right to Repair Digital Electronic Equipment Act]] law (HB24-1121), which is a broad peice of right to repair legislation that implemented right to repair without the business-to-business exemptions found in other states' repair laws.<ref name="fighttorepair">{{Cite web |url=https://fighttorepair.substack.com/p/colorados-right-to-repair-law-is |title=Colorado's Right to Repair Law Is The Strongest Yet. Here's Why. |publisher=Fight to Repair (Repair Association) |date=2024}}</ref>

Danny Katz, executive director of CoPIRG, described the existing Colorado law as giving Colorado residents "the broadest repair rights in the country", and noted the potential for bill SB26-090 to roll back these rights.<ref name="wired">{{Cite web |url=https://www.wired.com/story/tech-companies-are-trying-to-neuter-colorados-landmark-right-to-repair-law/ |title=Tech Companies Are Trying to Neuter Colorado's Landmark Right-to-Repair Law |author=Boone Ashworth |publisher=Wired |date=April 2, 2026}}</ref> Bill SB26-090 borrows its definition of "critical infrastructure" from the USA PATRIOT Act (42 U.S.C. 5195c(e)), a definition that covers 16 federal sectors including communications, healthcare, food & agriculture, financial services, and information technology.<ref name="cisa">{{Cite web |url=https://www.cisa.gov/topics/critical-infrastructure-security-and-resilience/critical-infrastructure-sectors |title=Critical Infrastructure Sectors |publisher=Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA)}}</ref> The primary contention around the adoption of this definition relates to its scope, as the bill does not define "information technology equipment", which Katz said "leaves it up to the manufacturers to determine which items they will need to provide repair tools and parts to owners and independent repairers and which ones they don't".<ref name="wired" />

==Colorado's existing right to repair laws==

Colorado has passed three right to repair laws in four years, making it one of the most active states in the wider right to repair movement.

In 2022, Colorado passed '''HB22-1031''', protecting the right to repair powered wheelchairs.<ref name="leg-hb22">{{Cite web |url=https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/hb22-1031 |title=HB22-1031: Wheelchair Right to Repair |publisher=Colorado General Assembly}}</ref> The following year, '''HB23-1011''' made Colorado the first state to pass an agricultural equipment right to repair law.<ref name="leg-hb23">{{Cite web |url=https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/hb23-1011 |title=HB23-1011: Agricultural Equipment Right to Repair |publisher=Colorado General Assembly}}</ref><ref name="ifixit-sb090" />

The most consequential was '''HB24-1121''', the Consumer Right to Repair Digital Electronic Equipment Act. The act requires the manufacturers of digital electronic equipment manufactured after July 1, 2021 to provide independent repair providers and owners with parts, tools, documentation, and schematics on fair and reasonable terms.<ref name="proskauer">{{Cite web |url=https://www.proskauer.com/blog/colorado-expands-right-to-repair-law |title=Colorado Expands "Right-to-Repair" Law |publisher=Proskauer Rose LLP |date=2024}}</ref> "Fair and reasonable" is defined as costs "equivalent to the most favorable costs and terms that the manufacturer offers to an authorized repair provider." The law also bans the use of [[parts pairing]] in ways which would reduce repairability or functionality.<ref name="proskauer" />

The act was sponsored by Representatives Brianna Titone and Steven Woodrow, as well as Senators Jeff Bridges and Nick Hinrichsen, passing the Colorado House by a vote of 39-18, and the Senate by a vote of 21-13.<ref name="leg-hb24">{{Cite web |url=https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/hb24-1121 |title=HB24-1121: Consumer Right to Repair Digital Electronic Equipment |publisher=Colorado General Assembly}}</ref> Governor Polis signed it on May 28, 2024, with an effective date of January 1, 2026.<ref name="proskauer" />

HB24-1121 exempts motor vehicles, medical devices (except powered wheelchairs), construction and energy-related equipment, fire alarm systems, safety communications equipment, and internet/video/voice routers from its right to repair provisions,<ref name="proskauer" /> and treats violations as deceptive trade practices.<ref name="leg-hb24" />

What set HB24-1121 apart from every other state repair law was its scope. By way of comparison to other states, Oregon, New York, California, and Minnesota's right to repair laws all contained exemptions for business-to-business equipment from the start, whereas HB24-1121 contained no such exemptions.<ref name="fighttorepair" /> This meant that enterprise networking hardware, servers, and business infrastructure were all subject to the same repair mandates as consumer phones and laptops, unless they independently fell within another exemption.<ref name="fighttorepair" /> Minnesota's law specifically included a "critical infrastructure" exemption; Colorado deliberately excluded one.<ref name="fighttorepair" /> SB26-090 would add back the same type of critical infrastructure carve-out that Colorado excluded when writing HB24-1121.<ref name="fighttorepair" /><ref name="wired" />

iFixit CEO Kyle Wiens described HB24-1121 as Colorado "taking a search-and-destroy approach to repair monopolies."<ref name="fighttorepair" />

==SB26-090: the bill==

SB26-090, titled "Exempt Critical Infrastructure from Right to Repair," was introduced on February 10, 2026.<ref name="leg-sb090">{{Cite web |url=https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/SB26-090 |title=SB26-090: Exempt Critical Infrastructure from Right to Repair |publisher=Colorado General Assembly}}</ref> Its sponsors are Senator John Carson (R-30), Senator Marc Snyder (D-12), and Representative Tony Hartsook (R-44), the House Minority Caucus Chair.<ref name="leg-sb090" />

The bill adds a single sentence to Colorado Revised Statutes sections 6-1-1502 and 6-1-1504: "Nothing in this part 15 applies to information technology equipment that is intended for use in critical infrastructure."<ref name="leg-sb090" />

On April 2, 2026, the Senate Business, Labor, and Technology Committee voted 5-0 to advance the bill to the Committee of the Whole.<ref name="leg-sb090" /><ref name="wired" /> Second reading was scheduled for April 7, 2026.<ref name="leg-sb090" /> The bill still needs full Senate and House floor votes before taking effect.<ref name="wired" />

==Defining critical infrastructure==

The bill defines critical infrastructure as "systems and assets, whether physical or virtual, so vital to the United States that the incapacity or destruction of such systems and assets would have a debilitating impact on security, national economic security, national public health or safety, or any combination of those matters."<ref name="patriot-act">{{Cite web |url=https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/5195c |title=42 U.S.C. 5195c - Critical infrastructures protection |publisher=Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School |access-date=2026-04-03}} Subsection (e) defines "critical infrastructure." Originally enacted as Section 1016 of the USA PATRIOT Act of 2001.</ref> This language comes directly from the USA PATRIOT Act of 2001, and was later incorporated into Presidential Policy Directive 21 (PPD-21), issued in 2013.<ref name="ppd21">{{Cite web |url=https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2013/02/12/presidential-policy-directive-critical-infrastructure-security-and-resil |title=Presidential Policy Directive -- Critical Infrastructure Security and Resilience |publisher=The White House |date=February 12, 2013}}</ref>

Under PPD-21, CISA designates 16 critical infrastructure sectors: Chemical, Commercial Facilities, Communications, Critical Manufacturing, Dams, Defense Industrial Base, Emergency Services, Energy, Financial Services, Food & Agriculture, Government Facilities, Healthcare & Public Health, Information Technology, Nuclear Reactors/Materials/Waste, Transportation Systems, and Water & Wastewater Systems.<ref name="cisa" />

The breadth of CISA's "essential critical infrastructure workers" guidance expanded during the COVID-19 pandemic to include automotive repair, retail groceries, call centers, and logistics, despite no formal change in definition.<ref name="cisa-covid">{{Cite web |url=https://www.cisa.gov/sites/default/files/publications/essential_critical_infrastructure_workforce-guidance_v4.1_508.pdf |title=Guidance on the Essential Critical Infrastructure Workforce |publisher=CISA |date=August 2020}}</ref> Consumer advocate Louis Rossmann noted that using similar logic, it would be easy for manufacturers to greatly expand the range of devices classified as critical infrastructure <ref name="Rossmann">{{cite web |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iwc5HKnOmGg |title=Colorado senators destroyed right to repair; please contact them and ask them not to |last=Rossmann |first=Louis |date=2026-04-04 |website=YouTube |publisher=Google LLC |access-date=2026-04-16}}</ref>.

The bill also does not provide an explicit definition of "information technology equipment." Gay Gordon-Byrne, executive director of the [[Repair Association]], testified at the committee hearing: "I can point out at least five problems with the bill as drafted. The definition of critical infrastructure is completely inadequate. The definition that has been proposed in this bill is not even a definition."<ref name="wired" />

===Manufacturer self-classification===

The bill uses the phrase "intended for use in critical infrastructure" but doesn't specify who decides whether a product meets that threshold and does not define "information technology equipment."<ref name="wired" />

Nathan Proctor, leader of PIRG's national right to repair campaign, called the framing cynical: "The 'information technology' and 'critical infrastructure' thing is as cynical as you can possibly be about it. It sounds scary to lawmakers, but it just means the internet."<ref name="wired" />

==Industry lobbying on behalf of SB26-090==

===Cisco===

[[Cisco]] is the primary corporate backer of SB26-090. iFixit described the company as "the biggest voice in support" of the exemption.<ref name="ifixit-sb090" /> Consumer-grade internet/video/voice routers are already exempt from HB24-1121.<ref name="proskauer" /> SB26-090 would create an additional, broader exemption covering enterprise networking equipment.<ref name="ifixit-sb090" />

Cisco's Non-Entitlement Policy states that "unauthorized repair voids the Cisco Warranty Entitlement" & that the company "does not offer or provide any replacement or spare parts to third-party service repair businesses."<ref name="cisco-nep">{{Cite web |url=https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/warranties/warranty-doc-c99-740959.html |title=Non-Entitlement Policy v2.0 |publisher=Cisco Systems}}</ref> Third-party repairs are listed as "grounds for Cisco to cancel service or warranty support",<ref name="cisco-nep" /> despite the [[Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act]] (15 U.S.C. Section 2302(c)) prohibiting manufacturers from conditioning warranty coverage on the use of a specific service provider or brand of replacement part.<ref name="mmwa-statute">{{Cite web |url=https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/2302 |title=15 U.S.C. 2302 - Rules governing contents of warranties |publisher=Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School |access-date=2026-04-03}}</ref>

At the committee hearing, a Cisco representative stated: "Cisco supports SB-90. While it appreciates the arguments offered in favor of the right to repair, not all digital technology devices are equal."<ref name="wired" />

===IBM===

IBM is also supporting the SB26-060, and has a general stance against the extension of right to repair to enterprise devices. An IBM spokesperson told Wired: "IBM supports right-to-repair policies that empower consumers while protecting cybersecurity, intellectual property, and critical infrastructure. Given the critical and often sensitive nature of enterprise-level products, any legislation should be clearly scoped to consumer devices."<ref name="wired" />

===Lobbying registrations===

The Colorado Secretary of State's Online Lobby System lists 68 lobbying registrations on SB26-090: 40 supporting, 11 opposing, 15 monitoring, and 2 other.<ref name="sos-lobby-system">Colorado Secretary of State, Online Lobby System. 68 lobbying registrations on SB26-090. To verify: go to the Colorado Secretary of State lobby registration search at https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby, click "Bill Search," enter "SB26-090" as the bill number, and select the 2025-2026 session. The search returns all registered lobbyists, their clients, and their positions (Supporting, Opposing, Monitoring, etc.). Accessed April 3, 2026.</ref>

[[File:sos-sb26090-all-registrations-p1.png|thumb|300px|Colorado Secretary of State Online Lobby System search results for SB26-090, page 1 of 4, showing 68 lobbying registrations.]]

Of the 40 supporting registrations, 20 come from lobbyists registered under two different clients on the same bill. <ref name="sos-lobby-system" /> HB Strategies registered eight lobbyists for IBM on February 11, 2026: Erin Goff, Micki Hackenberger, HB Strategies (the firm itself), Carrie Hackenberger, J. Andrew Green & Assoc., Lisa LaBriola, Elizabeth Lo, and Kevin Neimond.<ref name="sos-lobby-system" /> Nineteen days later, on March 2, the same eight registered for the Colorado Springs Chamber of Commerce & Economic Development Corporation (Colorado Springs Chamber & EDC).<ref name="sos-lobby-system" /> That produced 16 registrations from one firm.

[[File:sos-ibm-lobbyists.png|thumb|300px|Colorado Secretary of State lobbying registrations for IBM on SB26-090, showing eight lobbyists from HB Strategies registered February 11, 2026.]]

[[File:sos-cospr-chamber-lobbyists.png|thumb|300px|Colorado Secretary of State lobbying registrations for the Colorado Springs Chamber and EDC on SB26-090, showing the same eight HB Strategies lobbyists registered March 2, 2026.]]

Josh Hanfling and Sewald Hanfling Public Affairs registered themselves as lobbyists for both Cisco and the Colorado Technology Association, adding four more duplicate registrations.<ref name="sos-lobby-system" /> Jeffrey Weist & Weist Capitol Group, Inc. registered on the same day (February 18) for two separate cable industry trade groups with nearly identical names: the Colorado Cable Telecommunications Association, and the Colorado Cable Television Association.<ref name="sos-lobby-system" /> Three clusters of double-dipping: HB Strategies (16 registrations from 8 names across two clients), Sewald Hanfling (4 registrations from 2 names across two clients), & Weist (2 clients with almost the same name on the same day).

Cisco's in-house lobbyist Joseph Lee registered on February 10, the same day the bill was introduced, and IBM's eight HB Strategies lobbyists registered the next morning.<ref name="sos-lobby-system" /> Since a lobbyist can't file a position on a bill that hasn't been introduced, consumer advocate Louis Rossmann noted that same-day and next-day registrations from two separate companies could indicate that they both had advance knowledge of the bill before it was publicly filed<ref name="Rossmann" />. Cisco's outside firm (Sewald Hanfling), the cable associations, and the Denver Metro Chamber registered between February 16 and 18. The Colorado Springs Chamber added its matching HB Strategies team on March 2. The Colorado Technology Association added Sewald Hanfling on March 5-6. TechNet registered five lobbyists on March 12. The Colorado Chamber of Commerce was last, 44 days after introduction, on March 26.<ref name="sos-lobby-system" />

===Lobbying spending===

At least $362,735 in known lobbying spending backs this exemption.<ref name="soda-dataset">{{Cite web |url=https://data.colorado.gov/Legislative/Professional-Lobbyist-Income-in-Colorado/dxfk-9ifj |title=Professional Lobbyist Income in Colorado (browsable dataset) |publisher=Colorado Secretary of State |access-date=2026-04-03}} To reproduce this total: query the SODA API at https://data.colorado.gov/resource/dxfk-9ifj.json using <code>$select=sum(incomeamount)&$where=upper(clientname) like '%CISCO%' AND fiscalyear in('2024-2025','2025-2026')</code> for each client (Cisco, IBM, Colorado Technology Association, Colorado Springs Chamber), then add the four results. The dataset ID is dxfk-9ifj. The individual queries and their results are cited in the table below.</ref> Four of the ten supporting organizations have spending data on file with the Colorado Secretary of State. The other six (TechNet, Denver Metro Chamber, Colorado Chamber, both cable associations, and FGR Hub) don't appear in the database during this period, & March & April 2026 filings are not yet available.

{| class="wikitable"
|+Lobbying payments from SB26-090 supporting organizations, October 2024 through February 2026
|-
!Organization!!Total paid to Colorado lobbyists!!Lobbying firm
|-
|Cisco||$127,854<ref name="soda-cisco">{{Cite web |url=https://data.colorado.gov/Legislative/Professional-Lobbyist-Income-in-Colorado/dxfk-9ifj |title=Professional Lobbyist Income in Colorado: Cisco Systems |publisher=Colorado Secretary of State |access-date=2026-04-03}} To verify via the SODA API, query: <code>https://data.colorado.gov/resource/dxfk-9ifj.json?$select=sum(incomeamount)&$where=upper(clientname) like '%25CISCO%25' AND fiscalyear in('2024-2025','2025-2026')</code></ref>||Sewald Hanfling Public Affairs
|-
|Colorado Technology Association||$116,000<ref name="soda-cta">{{Cite web |url=https://data.colorado.gov/Legislative/Professional-Lobbyist-Income-in-Colorado/dxfk-9ifj |title=Professional Lobbyist Income in Colorado: Colorado Technology Association via Sewald Hanfling |publisher=Colorado Secretary of State |access-date=2026-04-03}} To verify via the SODA API, query: <code>https://data.colorado.gov/resource/dxfk-9ifj.json?$select=sum(incomeamount)&$where=upper(lobbyistname) like '%25SEWALD HANFLING%25' AND upper(clientname) like '%25COLORADO TECHNOLOGY%25' AND fiscalyear in('2024-2025','2025-2026')</code></ref>||Sewald Hanfling Public Affairs
|-
|IBM||$74,570<ref name="soda-ibm">{{Cite web |url=https://data.colorado.gov/Legislative/Professional-Lobbyist-Income-in-Colorado/dxfk-9ifj |title=Professional Lobbyist Income in Colorado: IBM |publisher=Colorado Secretary of State |access-date=2026-04-03}} To verify via the SODA API, query: <code>https://data.colorado.gov/resource/dxfk-9ifj.json?$select=sum(incomeamount)&$where=upper(clientname) like '%25IBM%25' AND fiscalyear in('2024-2025','2025-2026')</code></ref>||HB Strategies + in-house
|-
|Colorado Springs Chamber and EDC||$44,311<ref name="soda-cospr-hb">{{Cite web |url=https://data.colorado.gov/Legislative/Professional-Lobbyist-Income-in-Colorado/dxfk-9ifj |title=Professional Lobbyist Income in Colorado: Colorado Springs Chamber via HB Strategies |publisher=Colorado Secretary of State |access-date=2026-04-03}} To verify via the SODA API, query: <code>https://data.colorado.gov/resource/dxfk-9ifj.json?$select=sum(incomeamount)&$where=upper(lobbyistname) like '%25HB STRATEGIES%25' AND upper(clientname) like '%25COLORADO SPRINGS CHAMBER%25' AND fiscalyear in('2024-2025','2025-2026')</code></ref><ref name="soda-cospr-weaver">{{Cite web |url=https://data.colorado.gov/Legislative/Professional-Lobbyist-Income-in-Colorado/dxfk-9ifj |title=Professional Lobbyist Income in Colorado: Colorado Springs Chamber via Weaver Strategies |publisher=Colorado Secretary of State |access-date=2026-04-03}} To verify via the SODA API, query: <code>https://data.colorado.gov/resource/dxfk-9ifj.json?$select=sum(incomeamount)&$where=upper(lobbyistname) like '%25WEAVER%25' AND upper(clientname) like '%25COLORADO SPRINGS%25' AND fiscalyear='2025-2026'</code></ref>||HB Strategies + Weaver Strategies
|-
|'''Total'''||'''$362,735'''||
|}

Cisco paid Sewald Hanfling $6,500 per month for at least 14 of the 15 months between October 2024 and December 2025. In January 2026, the payment increased to $7,500.<ref name="soda-cisco" /><ref name="leg-sb090" />

[[File:soda-cisco-retainer-raise.png|thumb|300px|SODA API response showing Cisco's monthly payments to Sewald Hanfling Public Affairs, $6,500 per month through December 2025, rising to $7,500 in January 2026.]]

IBM paid HB Strategies $72,500 in 13 payments between October 2024 and February 2026. IBM's in-house lobbyist Alexi Madon reported another $2,069.76 over three months.<ref name="soda-ibm" />

The Colorado Technology Association paid $116,000 to Sewald Hanfling, the same firm Cisco pays.<ref name="soda-cta" /> The Colorado Springs Chamber and EDC paid $44,311 split between HB Strategies and Weaver Strategies.<ref name="soda-cospr-hb" /><ref name="soda-cospr-weaver" />

Micki Hackenberger, who runs HB Strategies, reported $510,922.50 in personal lobbying income for the year ending June 2025.<ref name="sos-hackenberger">Colorado Secretary of State, Online Lobby System, cumulative disclosure statement for Micki M. Hackenberger, FY 2024-2025, filed July 14, 2025. To verify: go to https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby, click "Lobbyist Search," enter "Hackenberger" as last name, open her profile, and view the cumulative disclosure statement for FY 2024-2025. Accessed April 3, 2026.</ref>

[[File:hackenberger.png|thumb|300px|Colorado Secretary of State cumulative disclosure statement showing Micki Hackenberger reported $510,922.50 in lobbying income for the year ending June 2025, filed July 14, 2025.]]

Hackenberger also personally donated to four of the five SB26-090 sponsors and committee members who received lobbying network money: $400 to Catlin, $450 to Hartsook, $225 to Snyder, & $450 to Carson.<ref name="tracer-hackenberger-donations">Colorado TRACER, RecordIDs 6851545, 6856570, 6911305, 7060021: donations from Micki Hackenberger to Catlin ($400, Sep 6 2024), Hartsook ($450, Sep 18 2024), Snyder ($225, Nov 17 2024), and Carson ($450, Sep 25 2025). To verify: go to https://tracer.sos.colorado.gov, click "Contribution Search," enter "Hackenberger" as Contributor Last Name, and search within 2024-01-01 to 2025-12-31. Accessed April 3, 2026.</ref> The only recipient she didn't donate to was Danielson, who received $3,800 from Sewald Hanfling instead.<ref name="tracer-sewald-hanfling-danielson" />

J. Andrew Green & Assoc. is registered as IBM's lobbyist on SB26-090, but the state income database shows zero payments from IBM to Green.<ref name="soda-green-ibm">{{Cite web |url=https://data.colorado.gov/Legislative/Professional-Lobbyist-Income-in-Colorado/dxfk-9ifj |title=Professional Lobbyist Income in Colorado: J. Andrew Green from IBM (no records) |publisher=Colorado Secretary of State |access-date=2026-04-03}} To verify via the SODA API, query: <code>https://data.colorado.gov/resource/dxfk-9ifj.json?$where=upper(lobbyistname) like '%25GREEN%25' AND upper(lobbyistname) like '%25ANDREW%25' AND upper(clientname) like '%25IBM%25'</code> This returns an empty array, confirming zero payments.</ref> Green reports $14,840 from HB Strategies in January 2026.<ref name="soda-green-hb">{{Cite web |url=https://data.colorado.gov/Legislative/Professional-Lobbyist-Income-in-Colorado/dxfk-9ifj |title=Professional Lobbyist Income in Colorado: J. Andrew Green from HB Strategies |publisher=Colorado Secretary of State |access-date=2026-04-03}} To verify via the SODA API, query: <code>https://data.colorado.gov/resource/dxfk-9ifj.json?$where=upper(lobbyistname) like '%25GREEN%25' AND upper(lobbyistname) like '%25ANDREW%25' AND upper(clientname) like '%25HB STRAT%25'</code></ref> HB Strategies collects from both IBM and the Colorado Springs Chamber, then subcontracts Green from that pool.

The five organizations opposing the bill (CoPIRG, Eco-Cycle, Repair.org, the Digital Right to Repair Coalition, and NFIB) have zero disclosed lobbying spending in the same database during 2024-2026.<ref name="soda-dataset" />

===Campaign donations===

Lobbyists and firms registered to support SB26-090 donated a total of $15,725 to the bill's three sponsors and five committee members between 2024 and early 2026.<ref name="tracer-sewald-to-legislators">Colorado TRACER contribution search: donations from Sewald Hanfling employees to SB26-090 sponsors and committee members, 2024-2026. To verify: go to https://tracer.sos.colorado.gov, click "Contribution Search," enter "Sewald" or "Hanfling" as Contributor Last Name, and search within the date range 2024-01-01 to 2026-12-31. Then filter results by recipient for each SB26-090 sponsor and committee member. TRACER bulk data is also available for download at https://tracer.sos.colorado.gov/PublicSite/DataDownload.aspx. Accessed April 3, 2026.</ref><ref name="tracer-brandeberry-to-legislators">Colorado TRACER contribution search: donations from Brandeberry McKenna employees to SB26-090 sponsors and committee members, 2024-2026. To verify: go to https://tracer.sos.colorado.gov, click "Contribution Search," enter "Brandeberry" or "McKenna" as Contributor Last Name, and search within 2024-01-01 to 2026-12-31. Accessed April 3, 2026.</ref><ref name="tracer-hackenberger-to-legislators">Colorado TRACER contribution search: donations from Micki Hackenberger to SB26-090 sponsors and committee members, 2024-2026. To verify: go to https://tracer.sos.colorado.gov, click "Contribution Search," enter "Hackenberger" as Contributor Last Name, and search within 2024-01-01 to 2026-12-31. Accessed April 3, 2026.</ref>

On December 19, 2025, Josh Hanfling of Sewald Hanfling Public Affairs donated $450 to the Committee to Elect Marc Snyder.<ref name="tracer-hanfling-snyder">Colorado TRACER, RecordID 7171526: $450 donation from Joshua Hanfling to Committee to Elect Marc Snyder, December 19, 2025. To verify: go to https://tracer.sos.colorado.gov, click "Contribution Search," enter "Hanfling" as Contributor Last Name and "Snyder" as Committee Name, and search within 2025-01-01 to 2026-12-31. Accessed April 3, 2026.</ref> Snyder sponsored SB26-090 53 days later. Cisco pays Hanfling's firm $7,500 per month, and Hanfling is registered as Cisco's lobbyist on the bill.<ref name="soda-cisco" /><ref name="sos-lobby-system" /> The donation amount is small; the timeline connecting Cisco's lobbyist to a bill sponsor weeks before introduction is the pattern.

[[File:marcsnyder.png|thumb|300px|Colorado TRACER filing showing a $450 donation from Joshua Hanfling (Sewald Hanfling Public Affairs) to the Committee to Elect Marc Snyder, dated December 19, 2025.]]

{| class="wikitable"
|+Donations from SB26-090 lobbying network to sponsors and committee members
|-
!Firm!!SB26-090 client(s)!!Total!!Recipients
|-
|Sewald Hanfling Public Affairs||Cisco, CO Tech Assn||$6,225<ref name="tracer-sewald-to-legislators" />||Danielson, Carson, Snyder, Hartsook, Liston
|-
|Brandeberry McKenna Public Affairs||CO Springs Chamber||$3,650<ref name="tracer-brandeberry-to-legislators" />||Danielson, Carson, Snyder, Liston, Catlin
|-
|HB Strategies / Husch Blackwell||IBM, CO Springs Chamber||$3,575<ref name="tracer-hackenberger-to-legislators" /><ref name="tracer-hbs-employees">Colorado TRACER contribution search: donations from Goff, Neimond, Lo (Husch Blackwell Strategies) to SB26-090 legislators, 2024-2026. To verify: go to https://tracer.sos.colorado.gov, click "Contribution Search," and search each name individually: "Goff" + "Erin", "Neimond" + "Kevin", "Lo" + "Elizabeth" as Contributor Last/First Name, within 2024-01-01 to 2026-12-31. Accessed April 3, 2026.</ref>||Carson, Snyder, Hartsook, Catlin, Liston
|-
|Colorado Chamber PAC||(self)||$1,800<ref name="tracer-co-chamber-pac">Colorado TRACER contribution search: Colorado Chamber PAC donations to SB26-090 sponsors and committee members, 2023-2024. To verify: go to https://tracer.sos.colorado.gov, click "Contribution Search," enter "Colorado Chamber" as Committee Name under the "Committee Giving" tab, and search within 2023-01-01 to 2024-12-31. Accessed April 3, 2026.</ref>||Snyder, Hartsook, Liston, Catlin
|-
|J. Andrew Green & Assoc.||IBM (via HB subcontract)||$450<ref name="tracer-bulk-download">{{Cite web |url=https://tracer.sos.colorado.gov/PublicSite/DataDownload.aspx |title=TRACER Public Site: Data Download |publisher=Colorado Secretary of State, TRACER |access-date=2026-04-03}}</ref>||Carson
|-
|Weaver Strategies||CO Cable Television Assn||$450<ref name="tracer-weaver-morton">Colorado TRACER contribution search: Kachina Morton (Weaver Strategies) donations to SB26-090 sponsors, 2025. To verify: go to https://tracer.sos.colorado.gov, click "Contribution Search," enter "Morton" as Contributor Last Name and "Kachina" as First Name, and search within 2025-01-01 to 2025-12-31. Accessed April 3, 2026.</ref>||Carson, Liston
|}

R.D. Sewald and Josh Hanfling of Sewald Hanfling Public Affairs donated a combined $3,800 to committee chair Jessie Danielson across four transactions:<ref name="tracer-sewald-hanfling-danielson">Colorado TRACER contributions: R.D. Sewald and Joshua Hanfling to Jessie Danielson campaign, RecordIDs 6858173, 6858175, 7092122, 7186003. To verify: go to https://tracer.sos.colorado.gov, click "Contribution Search," enter "Danielson" as Committee Name, then search separately for "Sewald" and "Hanfling" as Contributor Last Name, within 2024-01-01 to 2025-12-31. Accessed April 3, 2026.</ref>

[[File:tracer-sewald-hanfling-to-danielson.png|thumb|300px|TRACER contribution search showing four donations from R.D. Sewald and Joshua Hanfling to the Jessie Danielson campaign committee, September 2024 through November 2025.]]

{| class="wikitable"
|-
!Date!!Donor!!Amount!!TRACER RecordID
|-
|September 24, 2024||R.D. Sewald||$450||6858173
|-
|September 24, 2024||Joshua Hanfling||$450||6858175
|-
|July 15, 2025||Joshua Hanfling||$1,450||7092122
|-
|November 4, 2025||R.D. Sewald||$1,450||7186003
|}

Danielson chairs the Senate Business, Labor, & Technology Committee. She voted to advance SB26-090 on April 2, 2026.<ref name="leg-sb090" />

On September 4, 2024, Jenifer Brandeberry and Julie McKenna of Brandeberry McKenna Public Affairs each donated $450 to committee member Senator Marc Catlin (RecordIDs 6851546, 6851547).<ref name="tracer-six-lobbyists-catlin">Colorado TRACER contributions: six lobbyists from HB Strategies and Brandeberry McKenna to Marc Catlin campaign, RecordIDs 6851545, 6851542, 6851535, 6851531, 6851546, 6851547. September 4-6, 2024. To verify: go to https://tracer.sos.colorado.gov, click "Contribution Search," enter "Catlin" as Committee Name, and search within 2024-09-01 to 2024-09-30. Then search each donor name: Hackenberger, Lo, Goff, Neimond, Brandeberry, McKenna. Accessed April 3, 2026.</ref> Two days later, on September 6, four employees of Husch Blackwell Strategies (the parent company behind HB Strategies) donated to Catlin on the same day: Micki Hackenberger ($400, RecordID 6851545), Elizabeth Lo ($250, RecordID 6851542), Erin Goff ($200, RecordID 6851535), and Kevin Neimond ($100, RecordID 6851531).<ref name="tracer-six-lobbyists-catlin" /> Six lobbyists from two firms, all later registered on SB26-090, donated $1,850 to the same senator within 48 hours. Catlin voted to advance the bill.<ref name="leg-sb090" />

[[File:tracer-six-lobbyists-to-catlin.png|thumb|300px|TRACER contribution search showing six lobbyists from HB Strategies and Brandeberry McKenna donated a combined $1,850 to the Marc Catlin campaign committee between September 4-6, 2024.]]

{| class="wikitable"
|+Donations from SB26-090 lobbying network by recipient
|-
!Legislator!!Role!!Total received!!Number of donors
|-
|Jessie Danielson||Committee Chair (D)||$4,300<ref name="tracer-bulk-download" />||4
|-
|Larry Liston||Committee Member (R)||$2,850||7
|-
|Marc Snyder||Bill Sponsor (D)||$2,525||7
|-
|Marc Catlin||Committee Member (R)||$2,300||7
|-
|John Carson||Bill Sponsor (R)||$1,900||7
|-
|Anthony Hartsook||Bill Sponsor (R)||$1,850||5
|-
|Nick Hinrichsen||Committee Vice Chair (D)||$0||0
|-
|Iman Jodeh||Committee Member (D)||$0||0
|}

Senators Nick Hinrichsen and Iman Jodeh received no donations from any SB26-090 lobbying firm, PAC, or corporate employee in the 2024-2026 TRACER data.<ref name="tracer-hinrichsen-zero">Colorado TRACER contribution search: no results for SB26-090 lobbying firms to Nick Hinrichsen, 2024-2026. To verify: go to https://tracer.sos.colorado.gov, click "Contribution Search," enter "Hinrichsen" as Committee Name, and search for each lobbying firm (Sewald, Hanfling, Hackenberger, Brandeberry, McKenna, Goff, Neimond, Lo) as Contributor Last Name within 2024-01-01 to 2026-12-31. All searches return zero results. Accessed April 3, 2026.</ref><ref name="tracer-jodeh-zero">Colorado TRACER contribution search: no results for SB26-090 lobbying firms to Iman Jodeh, 2024-2026. To verify: go to https://tracer.sos.colorado.gov, click "Contribution Search," enter "Jodeh" as Committee Name, and search for each lobbying firm (Sewald, Hanfling, Hackenberger, Brandeberry, McKenna, Goff, Neimond, Lo) as Contributor Last Name within 2024-01-01 to 2026-12-31. All searches return zero results. Accessed April 3, 2026.</ref> Both sit on the committee. Both voted to advance the bill.<ref name="leg-sb090" />

[[File:tracer-hinrichsen-zero-sewald.png|thumb|300px|TRACER search showing zero donations from Sewald Hanfling to the Hinrichsen campaign, 2024-2026.]]

===Colorado's lobbying disclosure system===

Colorado law doesn't require lobbyists to break down spending by bill.<ref name="crs-24-6-302">{{Cite web |url=https://law.justia.com/codes/colorado/title-24/article-6/part-3/section-24-6-302/ |title=Colorado Revised Statutes Section 24-6-302: Disclosure |publisher=Justia (mirror of Colorado Revised Statutes, 2023 edition) |access-date=2026-04-03}}</ref> The $362,735 figure is total client payments to their lobbyists during this period; the connection to SB26-090 comes from separate position filings where those same lobbyists registered as supporting the bill.<ref name="sos-lobby-system" /><ref name="soda-dataset" />

Three separate systems hold the data: the Secretary of State's Online Lobby System (lobbying registrations and bill positions), the Professional Lobbyist Income dataset on Colorado's open data portal (monthly payments from clients to lobbyists), and TRACER (campaign donations).<ref name="crs-24-6-302" /> Connecting a corporation's lobbying money to a specific vote requires pulling data from all three and matching records by hand.

[[File:crs-1-45-105-5-lobbyist-contributions.png|thumb|300px|C.R.S. 1-45-105.5, the Colorado statute restricting lobbyist campaign contributions during legislative sessions.]]

Colorado law allows lobbyists to donate to legislators they lobby, as long as the donation falls outside the regular legislative session (C.R.S. 1-45-105.5).<ref name="crs-1-45-105-5">{{Cite web |url=https://law.justia.com/codes/colorado/title-1/article-45/section-1-45-105-5/ |title=Colorado Revised Statutes Section 1-45-105.5: Contributions from Lobbyists |publisher=Justia (mirror of Colorado Revised Statutes, 2023 edition) |access-date=2026-04-03}}</ref> SB25-148, a bill to ban lobbyist donations to legislators year-round, was killed by the Senate Committee on State, Veterans, and Military Affairs in March 2025.<ref name="leg-sb25148">{{Cite web |url=https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/sb25-148 |title=SB25-148: Concerning Lobbyist Contributions to Candidates |publisher=Colorado General Assembly}}</ref> Twelve months later, SB26-090's lobbyists had donated $15,725 to the bill's sponsors & committee members.<ref name="tracer-sewald-to-legislators" /><ref name="tracer-brandeberry-to-legislators" /><ref name="tracer-hackenberger-to-legislators" />

==Cybersecurity implications==

Manufacturers backing SB26-090 argue that sharing diagnostic tools, firmware, and schematics for enterprise infrastructure could enable bad actors to exploit vulnerabilities.<ref name="wired" /> iFixit CEO Kyle Wiens testified at the bill's hearing: "There's a general principle in cybersecurity that obscurity is not security. The money that's behind the scenes, that's what's driving the bill."<ref name="wired" />

Some cybersecurity researchers have directly disputed the manufacturer framing. Security researcher Billy Rios, and threat researcher Andrew Brandt, spoke against the exemption on the Securepairs podcast.<ref name="ifixit-sb090">{{Cite web |url=https://www.ifixit.com/News/116447/a-new-colorado-bill-could-blow-a-hole-in-the-nations-strongest-right-to-repair-law |title=A New Colorado Bill Could Blow a Hole in the Nation's Strongest Right to Repair Law |author=Elizabeth Chamberlain |publisher=iFixit |date=April 1, 2026}}</ref> Paul Roberts, chief of The Security Ledger and founder of Securepairs.org, stated: "A vibrant and healthy market for repair isn't a cybersecurity risk. In fact, it should be considered a cybersecurity imperative!"<ref name="ifixit-sb090" />

Repair advocates have also made the argument that restricting independent repair can have the unintended consequence of making critical infrastructure less secure, due to the need for timely repairs which may not be available through manufacturer-approved technicians.<ref name="wired" />

==Committee hearing testimony==

The April 2, 2026 hearing before the Senate Business, Labor, & Technology Committee drew over a dozen repair advocates who testified against the bill.<ref name="wired" /> Organizations represented included [[iFixit]], CoPIRG, the Repair Association, and PIRG's national campaign. Repair advocate Louis Rossmann was also present.<ref name="wired" />

Katz, who described Colorado as having "the broadest repair rights in the country," warned that the bill "is a bad policy and would be a big step back for Coloradans' repair rights."<ref name="wired" /> Gordon-Byrne pointed to at least five drafting problems.<ref name="wired" />

===Misleading claim from bill sponsor about the Governor's stance===

During the hearing, bill sponsor Senator John Carson stated the following: <blockquote>"And I want to note that when Governor Polis signed House Bill 24-1121, when he signed it into law, he issued a directive in his signing statement that the law should be fixed before its implementation date of January 1, 2026. He noted that Colorado is the only state in the nation that requires devices used for critical infrastructure be included in their repair law. So we're running this bill to fix a critical mistake made in the original law and protect our devices from malicious attacks."<ref name="sb090-hearing">Colorado General Assembly, Senate Business, Labor, and Technology Committee hearing on SB26-090, April 2, 2026. Audio/video archived at the Colorado General Assembly Harmony system: https://sg001-harmony.sliq.net/00327/harmony/en/PowerBrowser/PowerBrowserV2/20260402/-1/27982</ref></blockquote>

However, Governor Polis's official press release on signing HB24-1121, dated May 28, 2024, contains no mention of critical infrastructure, no directive to "fix" the law, and no statement that Colorado is an outlier.<ref name="polis-signing">{{Cite web |url=https://www.colorado.gov/governor/news/governor-polis-signs-right-repair-law-legislation-strengthen-colorados-economy-create-jobs |title=Governor Polis Signs Right to Repair Law, Legislation to Strengthen Colorado's Economy, Create Jobs & Support Creative Industries |publisher=Office of Governor Jared Polis |date=May 28, 2024 |access-date=2026-04-04}}</ref> While the website for the Governor of Colorado's press release concerning House Bill 24-1121 originally stated " View the Governor’s signing statement" which would have customarily had a hyperlink to the signing statement, no hyperlink was included. Upon emailing the Governor's staff on 4-21-2026, the website was updated and the link corrected. The signing statement reads, in part: <blockquote>This bill takes effect on January 1, 2026, and I encourage stakeholders to continue conversations in the interim to ensure that the full list of exclusions is appropriate and exhaustive, and take into consideration concerns that were raised during the process. <ref>{{Cite web |title=HB24-1121 Signing Statement |url=https://drive.google.com/file/d/1fftPj_EH5chO5Nh9huHz04M8D3YEyVP-/view}}</ref><ref name="polis-signing" /> </blockquote>

==Similar attempts in other states==
In 2025, the Texas legislature passed '''HB2963''', a right to repair bill signed on June 20, 2025 and effective September 1, 2026. The bill used the identical USA PATRIOT Act critical infrastructure exemption (42 U.S.C. 5195c(e)) as SB26-090, along with additional exemptions for medical devices and heavy equipment.<ref name="texas">{{Cite web |url=https://capitol.texas.gov/BillLookup/History.aspx?LegSess=89R&Bill=HB2963 |title=HB 2963 Bill History |publisher=Texas Legislature Online |date=2025}}</ref>

Several states that have passed repair laws, including Oregon, New York, California, and Minnesota, exempted business-to-business equipment from the start.<ref name="fighttorepair" />

As of 2026, right to repair bills have been introduced in every U.S. state and passed in eight.<ref name="wired" />

==See also==

*[[Right to Repair]]
*[[Parts pairing]]
*[[Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act]]
*[[Cisco Systems, Inc.]]

==References==

{{reflist}}

[[Category:Right to repair]]
[[Category:Legislation]]
[[Category:Colorado]]

Colorado SB26-090 critical infrastructure exemption

2026-04-21T17:02:33Z

JT1198: /* Committee hearing testimony */ Updating based upon email received from Governor's press secretary and updated website link to signing statement

{{#seo:
|title=Colorado SB26-090 Critical Infrastructure Exemption - Consumer Rights Wiki
|description=Colorado SB26-090 exempts "critical infrastructure" IT equipment from the state's right to repair law, letting manufacturers self-classify products.
}}

'''Colorado SB26-090''' is a 2026 bill that would exempt "information technology equipment intended for use in critical infrastructure" from Colorado's [[Right to Repair|Consumer Right to Repair Digital Electronic Equipment Act]] law (HB24-1121), which is a broad peice of right to repair legislation that implemented right to repair without the business-to-business exemptions found in other states' repair laws.<ref name="fighttorepair">{{Cite web |url=https://fighttorepair.substack.com/p/colorados-right-to-repair-law-is |title=Colorado's Right to Repair Law Is The Strongest Yet. Here's Why. |publisher=Fight to Repair (Repair Association) |date=2024}}</ref>

Danny Katz, executive director of CoPIRG, described the existing Colorado law as giving Colorado residents "the broadest repair rights in the country", and noted the potential for bill SB26-090 to roll back these rights.<ref name="wired">{{Cite web |url=https://www.wired.com/story/tech-companies-are-trying-to-neuter-colorados-landmark-right-to-repair-law/ |title=Tech Companies Are Trying to Neuter Colorado's Landmark Right-to-Repair Law |author=Boone Ashworth |publisher=Wired |date=April 2, 2026}}</ref> Bill SB26-090 borrows its definition of "critical infrastructure" from the USA PATRIOT Act (42 U.S.C. 5195c(e)), a definition that covers 16 federal sectors including communications, healthcare, food & agriculture, financial services, and information technology.<ref name="cisa">{{Cite web |url=https://www.cisa.gov/topics/critical-infrastructure-security-and-resilience/critical-infrastructure-sectors |title=Critical Infrastructure Sectors |publisher=Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA)}}</ref> The primary contention around the adoption of this definition relates to its scope, as the bill does not define "information technology equipment", which Katz said "leaves it up to the manufacturers to determine which items they will need to provide repair tools and parts to owners and independent repairers and which ones they don't".<ref name="wired" />

==Colorado's existing right to repair laws==

Colorado has passed three right to repair laws in four years, making it one of the most active states in the wider right to repair movement.

In 2022, Colorado passed '''HB22-1031''', protecting the right to repair powered wheelchairs.<ref name="leg-hb22">{{Cite web |url=https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/hb22-1031 |title=HB22-1031: Wheelchair Right to Repair |publisher=Colorado General Assembly}}</ref> The following year, '''HB23-1011''' made Colorado the first state to pass an agricultural equipment right to repair law.<ref name="leg-hb23">{{Cite web |url=https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/hb23-1011 |title=HB23-1011: Agricultural Equipment Right to Repair |publisher=Colorado General Assembly}}</ref><ref name="ifixit-sb090" />

The most consequential was '''HB24-1121''', the Consumer Right to Repair Digital Electronic Equipment Act. The act requires the manufacturers of digital electronic equipment manufactured after July 1, 2021 to provide independent repair providers and owners with parts, tools, documentation, and schematics on fair and reasonable terms.<ref name="proskauer">{{Cite web |url=https://www.proskauer.com/blog/colorado-expands-right-to-repair-law |title=Colorado Expands "Right-to-Repair" Law |publisher=Proskauer Rose LLP |date=2024}}</ref> "Fair and reasonable" is defined as costs "equivalent to the most favorable costs and terms that the manufacturer offers to an authorized repair provider." The law also bans the use of [[parts pairing]] in ways which would reduce repairability or functionality.<ref name="proskauer" />

The act was sponsored by Representatives Brianna Titone and Steven Woodrow, as well as Senators Jeff Bridges and Nick Hinrichsen, passing the Colorado House by a vote of 39-18, and the Senate by a vote of 21-13.<ref name="leg-hb24">{{Cite web |url=https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/hb24-1121 |title=HB24-1121: Consumer Right to Repair Digital Electronic Equipment |publisher=Colorado General Assembly}}</ref> Governor Polis signed it on May 28, 2024, with an effective date of January 1, 2026.<ref name="proskauer" />

HB24-1121 exempts motor vehicles, medical devices (except powered wheelchairs), construction and energy-related equipment, fire alarm systems, safety communications equipment, and internet/video/voice routers from its right to repair provisions,<ref name="proskauer" /> and treats violations as deceptive trade practices.<ref name="leg-hb24" />

What set HB24-1121 apart from every other state repair law was its scope. By way of comparison to other states, Oregon, New York, California, and Minnesota's right to repair laws all contained exemptions for business-to-business equipment from the start, whereas HB24-1121 contained no such exemptions.<ref name="fighttorepair" /> This meant that enterprise networking hardware, servers, and business infrastructure were all subject to the same repair mandates as consumer phones and laptops, unless they independently fell within another exemption.<ref name="fighttorepair" /> Minnesota's law specifically included a "critical infrastructure" exemption; Colorado deliberately excluded one.<ref name="fighttorepair" /> SB26-090 would add back the same type of critical infrastructure carve-out that Colorado excluded when writing HB24-1121.<ref name="fighttorepair" /><ref name="wired" />

iFixit CEO Kyle Wiens described HB24-1121 as Colorado "taking a search-and-destroy approach to repair monopolies."<ref name="fighttorepair" />

==SB26-090: the bill==

SB26-090, titled "Exempt Critical Infrastructure from Right to Repair," was introduced on February 10, 2026.<ref name="leg-sb090">{{Cite web |url=https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/SB26-090 |title=SB26-090: Exempt Critical Infrastructure from Right to Repair |publisher=Colorado General Assembly}}</ref> Its sponsors are Senator John Carson (R-30), Senator Marc Snyder (D-12), and Representative Tony Hartsook (R-44), the House Minority Caucus Chair.<ref name="leg-sb090" />

The bill adds a single sentence to Colorado Revised Statutes sections 6-1-1502 and 6-1-1504: "Nothing in this part 15 applies to information technology equipment that is intended for use in critical infrastructure."<ref name="leg-sb090" />

On April 2, 2026, the Senate Business, Labor, and Technology Committee voted 5-0 to advance the bill to the Committee of the Whole.<ref name="leg-sb090" /><ref name="wired" /> Second reading was scheduled for April 7, 2026.<ref name="leg-sb090" /> The bill still needs full Senate and House floor votes before taking effect.<ref name="wired" />

==Defining critical infrastructure==

The bill defines critical infrastructure as "systems and assets, whether physical or virtual, so vital to the United States that the incapacity or destruction of such systems and assets would have a debilitating impact on security, national economic security, national public health or safety, or any combination of those matters."<ref name="patriot-act">{{Cite web |url=https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/5195c |title=42 U.S.C. 5195c - Critical infrastructures protection |publisher=Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School |access-date=2026-04-03}} Subsection (e) defines "critical infrastructure." Originally enacted as Section 1016 of the USA PATRIOT Act of 2001.</ref> This language comes directly from the USA PATRIOT Act of 2001, and was later incorporated into Presidential Policy Directive 21 (PPD-21), issued in 2013.<ref name="ppd21">{{Cite web |url=https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2013/02/12/presidential-policy-directive-critical-infrastructure-security-and-resil |title=Presidential Policy Directive -- Critical Infrastructure Security and Resilience |publisher=The White House |date=February 12, 2013}}</ref>

Under PPD-21, CISA designates 16 critical infrastructure sectors: Chemical, Commercial Facilities, Communications, Critical Manufacturing, Dams, Defense Industrial Base, Emergency Services, Energy, Financial Services, Food & Agriculture, Government Facilities, Healthcare & Public Health, Information Technology, Nuclear Reactors/Materials/Waste, Transportation Systems, and Water & Wastewater Systems.<ref name="cisa" />

The breadth of CISA's "essential critical infrastructure workers" guidance expanded during the COVID-19 pandemic to include automotive repair, retail groceries, call centers, and logistics, despite no formal change in definition.<ref name="cisa-covid">{{Cite web |url=https://www.cisa.gov/sites/default/files/publications/essential_critical_infrastructure_workforce-guidance_v4.1_508.pdf |title=Guidance on the Essential Critical Infrastructure Workforce |publisher=CISA |date=August 2020}}</ref> Consumer advocate Louis Rossmann noted that using similar logic, it would be easy for manufacturers to greatly expand the range of devices classified as critical infrastructure <ref name="Rossmann">{{cite web |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iwc5HKnOmGg |title=Colorado senators destroyed right to repair; please contact them and ask them not to |last=Rossmann |first=Louis |date=2026-04-04 |website=YouTube |publisher=Google LLC |access-date=2026-04-16}}</ref>.

The bill also does not provide an explicit definition of "information technology equipment." Gay Gordon-Byrne, executive director of the [[Repair Association]], testified at the committee hearing: "I can point out at least five problems with the bill as drafted. The definition of critical infrastructure is completely inadequate. The definition that has been proposed in this bill is not even a definition."<ref name="wired" />

===Manufacturer self-classification===

The bill uses the phrase "intended for use in critical infrastructure" but doesn't specify who decides whether a product meets that threshold and does not define "information technology equipment."<ref name="wired" />

Nathan Proctor, leader of PIRG's national right to repair campaign, called the framing cynical: "The 'information technology' and 'critical infrastructure' thing is as cynical as you can possibly be about it. It sounds scary to lawmakers, but it just means the internet."<ref name="wired" />

==Industry lobbying on behalf of SB26-090==

===Cisco===

[[Cisco]] is the primary corporate backer of SB26-090. iFixit described the company as "the biggest voice in support" of the exemption.<ref name="ifixit-sb090" /> Consumer-grade internet/video/voice routers are already exempt from HB24-1121.<ref name="proskauer" /> SB26-090 would create an additional, broader exemption covering enterprise networking equipment.<ref name="ifixit-sb090" />

Cisco's Non-Entitlement Policy states that "unauthorized repair voids the Cisco Warranty Entitlement" & that the company "does not offer or provide any replacement or spare parts to third-party service repair businesses."<ref name="cisco-nep">{{Cite web |url=https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/warranties/warranty-doc-c99-740959.html |title=Non-Entitlement Policy v2.0 |publisher=Cisco Systems}}</ref> Third-party repairs are listed as "grounds for Cisco to cancel service or warranty support",<ref name="cisco-nep" /> despite the [[Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act]] (15 U.S.C. Section 2302(c)) prohibiting manufacturers from conditioning warranty coverage on the use of a specific service provider or brand of replacement part.<ref name="mmwa-statute">{{Cite web |url=https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/2302 |title=15 U.S.C. 2302 - Rules governing contents of warranties |publisher=Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School |access-date=2026-04-03}}</ref>

At the committee hearing, a Cisco representative stated: "Cisco supports SB-90. While it appreciates the arguments offered in favor of the right to repair, not all digital technology devices are equal."<ref name="wired" />

===IBM===

IBM is also supporting the SB26-060, and has a general stance against the extension of right to repair to enterprise devices. An IBM spokesperson told Wired: "IBM supports right-to-repair policies that empower consumers while protecting cybersecurity, intellectual property, and critical infrastructure. Given the critical and often sensitive nature of enterprise-level products, any legislation should be clearly scoped to consumer devices."<ref name="wired" />

===Lobbying registrations===

The Colorado Secretary of State's Online Lobby System lists 68 lobbying registrations on SB26-090: 40 supporting, 11 opposing, 15 monitoring, and 2 other.<ref name="sos-lobby-system">Colorado Secretary of State, Online Lobby System. 68 lobbying registrations on SB26-090. To verify: go to the Colorado Secretary of State lobby registration search at https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby, click "Bill Search," enter "SB26-090" as the bill number, and select the 2025-2026 session. The search returns all registered lobbyists, their clients, and their positions (Supporting, Opposing, Monitoring, etc.). Accessed April 3, 2026.</ref>

[[File:sos-sb26090-all-registrations-p1.png|thumb|300px|Colorado Secretary of State Online Lobby System search results for SB26-090, page 1 of 4, showing 68 lobbying registrations.]]

Of the 40 supporting registrations, 20 come from lobbyists registered under two different clients on the same bill. <ref name="sos-lobby-system" /> HB Strategies registered eight lobbyists for IBM on February 11, 2026: Erin Goff, Micki Hackenberger, HB Strategies (the firm itself), Carrie Hackenberger, J. Andrew Green & Assoc., Lisa LaBriola, Elizabeth Lo, and Kevin Neimond.<ref name="sos-lobby-system" /> Nineteen days later, on March 2, the same eight registered for the Colorado Springs Chamber of Commerce & Economic Development Corporation (Colorado Springs Chamber & EDC).<ref name="sos-lobby-system" /> That produced 16 registrations from one firm.

[[File:sos-ibm-lobbyists.png|thumb|300px|Colorado Secretary of State lobbying registrations for IBM on SB26-090, showing eight lobbyists from HB Strategies registered February 11, 2026.]]

[[File:sos-cospr-chamber-lobbyists.png|thumb|300px|Colorado Secretary of State lobbying registrations for the Colorado Springs Chamber and EDC on SB26-090, showing the same eight HB Strategies lobbyists registered March 2, 2026.]]

Josh Hanfling and Sewald Hanfling Public Affairs registered themselves as lobbyists for both Cisco and the Colorado Technology Association, adding four more duplicate registrations.<ref name="sos-lobby-system" /> Jeffrey Weist & Weist Capitol Group, Inc. registered on the same day (February 18) for two separate cable industry trade groups with nearly identical names: the Colorado Cable Telecommunications Association, and the Colorado Cable Television Association.<ref name="sos-lobby-system" /> Three clusters of double-dipping: HB Strategies (16 registrations from 8 names across two clients), Sewald Hanfling (4 registrations from 2 names across two clients), & Weist (2 clients with almost the same name on the same day).

Cisco's in-house lobbyist Joseph Lee registered on February 10, the same day the bill was introduced, and IBM's eight HB Strategies lobbyists registered the next morning.<ref name="sos-lobby-system" /> Since a lobbyist can't file a position on a bill that hasn't been introduced, consumer advocate Louis Rossmann noted that same-day and next-day registrations from two separate companies could indicate that they both had advance knowledge of the bill before it was publicly filed<ref name="Rossmann" />. Cisco's outside firm (Sewald Hanfling), the cable associations, and the Denver Metro Chamber registered between February 16 and 18. The Colorado Springs Chamber added its matching HB Strategies team on March 2. The Colorado Technology Association added Sewald Hanfling on March 5-6. TechNet registered five lobbyists on March 12. The Colorado Chamber of Commerce was last, 44 days after introduction, on March 26.<ref name="sos-lobby-system" />

===Lobbying spending===

At least $362,735 in known lobbying spending backs this exemption.<ref name="soda-dataset">{{Cite web |url=https://data.colorado.gov/Legislative/Professional-Lobbyist-Income-in-Colorado/dxfk-9ifj |title=Professional Lobbyist Income in Colorado (browsable dataset) |publisher=Colorado Secretary of State |access-date=2026-04-03}} To reproduce this total: query the SODA API at https://data.colorado.gov/resource/dxfk-9ifj.json using <code>$select=sum(incomeamount)&$where=upper(clientname) like '%CISCO%' AND fiscalyear in('2024-2025','2025-2026')</code> for each client (Cisco, IBM, Colorado Technology Association, Colorado Springs Chamber), then add the four results. The dataset ID is dxfk-9ifj. The individual queries and their results are cited in the table below.</ref> Four of the ten supporting organizations have spending data on file with the Colorado Secretary of State. The other six (TechNet, Denver Metro Chamber, Colorado Chamber, both cable associations, and FGR Hub) don't appear in the database during this period, & March & April 2026 filings are not yet available.

{| class="wikitable"
|+Lobbying payments from SB26-090 supporting organizations, October 2024 through February 2026
|-
!Organization!!Total paid to Colorado lobbyists!!Lobbying firm
|-
|Cisco||$127,854<ref name="soda-cisco">{{Cite web |url=https://data.colorado.gov/Legislative/Professional-Lobbyist-Income-in-Colorado/dxfk-9ifj |title=Professional Lobbyist Income in Colorado: Cisco Systems |publisher=Colorado Secretary of State |access-date=2026-04-03}} To verify via the SODA API, query: <code>https://data.colorado.gov/resource/dxfk-9ifj.json?$select=sum(incomeamount)&$where=upper(clientname) like '%25CISCO%25' AND fiscalyear in('2024-2025','2025-2026')</code></ref>||Sewald Hanfling Public Affairs
|-
|Colorado Technology Association||$116,000<ref name="soda-cta">{{Cite web |url=https://data.colorado.gov/Legislative/Professional-Lobbyist-Income-in-Colorado/dxfk-9ifj |title=Professional Lobbyist Income in Colorado: Colorado Technology Association via Sewald Hanfling |publisher=Colorado Secretary of State |access-date=2026-04-03}} To verify via the SODA API, query: <code>https://data.colorado.gov/resource/dxfk-9ifj.json?$select=sum(incomeamount)&$where=upper(lobbyistname) like '%25SEWALD HANFLING%25' AND upper(clientname) like '%25COLORADO TECHNOLOGY%25' AND fiscalyear in('2024-2025','2025-2026')</code></ref>||Sewald Hanfling Public Affairs
|-
|IBM||$74,570<ref name="soda-ibm">{{Cite web |url=https://data.colorado.gov/Legislative/Professional-Lobbyist-Income-in-Colorado/dxfk-9ifj |title=Professional Lobbyist Income in Colorado: IBM |publisher=Colorado Secretary of State |access-date=2026-04-03}} To verify via the SODA API, query: <code>https://data.colorado.gov/resource/dxfk-9ifj.json?$select=sum(incomeamount)&$where=upper(clientname) like '%25IBM%25' AND fiscalyear in('2024-2025','2025-2026')</code></ref>||HB Strategies + in-house
|-
|Colorado Springs Chamber and EDC||$44,311<ref name="soda-cospr-hb">{{Cite web |url=https://data.colorado.gov/Legislative/Professional-Lobbyist-Income-in-Colorado/dxfk-9ifj |title=Professional Lobbyist Income in Colorado: Colorado Springs Chamber via HB Strategies |publisher=Colorado Secretary of State |access-date=2026-04-03}} To verify via the SODA API, query: <code>https://data.colorado.gov/resource/dxfk-9ifj.json?$select=sum(incomeamount)&$where=upper(lobbyistname) like '%25HB STRATEGIES%25' AND upper(clientname) like '%25COLORADO SPRINGS CHAMBER%25' AND fiscalyear in('2024-2025','2025-2026')</code></ref><ref name="soda-cospr-weaver">{{Cite web |url=https://data.colorado.gov/Legislative/Professional-Lobbyist-Income-in-Colorado/dxfk-9ifj |title=Professional Lobbyist Income in Colorado: Colorado Springs Chamber via Weaver Strategies |publisher=Colorado Secretary of State |access-date=2026-04-03}} To verify via the SODA API, query: <code>https://data.colorado.gov/resource/dxfk-9ifj.json?$select=sum(incomeamount)&$where=upper(lobbyistname) like '%25WEAVER%25' AND upper(clientname) like '%25COLORADO SPRINGS%25' AND fiscalyear='2025-2026'</code></ref>||HB Strategies + Weaver Strategies
|-
|'''Total'''||'''$362,735'''||
|}

Cisco paid Sewald Hanfling $6,500 per month for at least 14 of the 15 months between October 2024 and December 2025. In January 2026, the payment increased to $7,500.<ref name="soda-cisco" /><ref name="leg-sb090" />

[[File:soda-cisco-retainer-raise.png|thumb|300px|SODA API response showing Cisco's monthly payments to Sewald Hanfling Public Affairs, $6,500 per month through December 2025, rising to $7,500 in January 2026.]]

IBM paid HB Strategies $72,500 in 13 payments between October 2024 and February 2026. IBM's in-house lobbyist Alexi Madon reported another $2,069.76 over three months.<ref name="soda-ibm" />

The Colorado Technology Association paid $116,000 to Sewald Hanfling, the same firm Cisco pays.<ref name="soda-cta" /> The Colorado Springs Chamber and EDC paid $44,311 split between HB Strategies and Weaver Strategies.<ref name="soda-cospr-hb" /><ref name="soda-cospr-weaver" />

Micki Hackenberger, who runs HB Strategies, reported $510,922.50 in personal lobbying income for the year ending June 2025.<ref name="sos-hackenberger">Colorado Secretary of State, Online Lobby System, cumulative disclosure statement for Micki M. Hackenberger, FY 2024-2025, filed July 14, 2025. To verify: go to https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby, click "Lobbyist Search," enter "Hackenberger" as last name, open her profile, and view the cumulative disclosure statement for FY 2024-2025. Accessed April 3, 2026.</ref>

[[File:hackenberger.png|thumb|300px|Colorado Secretary of State cumulative disclosure statement showing Micki Hackenberger reported $510,922.50 in lobbying income for the year ending June 2025, filed July 14, 2025.]]

Hackenberger also personally donated to four of the five SB26-090 sponsors and committee members who received lobbying network money: $400 to Catlin, $450 to Hartsook, $225 to Snyder, & $450 to Carson.<ref name="tracer-hackenberger-donations">Colorado TRACER, RecordIDs 6851545, 6856570, 6911305, 7060021: donations from Micki Hackenberger to Catlin ($400, Sep 6 2024), Hartsook ($450, Sep 18 2024), Snyder ($225, Nov 17 2024), and Carson ($450, Sep 25 2025). To verify: go to https://tracer.sos.colorado.gov, click "Contribution Search," enter "Hackenberger" as Contributor Last Name, and search within 2024-01-01 to 2025-12-31. Accessed April 3, 2026.</ref> The only recipient she didn't donate to was Danielson, who received $3,800 from Sewald Hanfling instead.<ref name="tracer-sewald-hanfling-danielson" />

J. Andrew Green & Assoc. is registered as IBM's lobbyist on SB26-090, but the state income database shows zero payments from IBM to Green.<ref name="soda-green-ibm">{{Cite web |url=https://data.colorado.gov/Legislative/Professional-Lobbyist-Income-in-Colorado/dxfk-9ifj |title=Professional Lobbyist Income in Colorado: J. Andrew Green from IBM (no records) |publisher=Colorado Secretary of State |access-date=2026-04-03}} To verify via the SODA API, query: <code>https://data.colorado.gov/resource/dxfk-9ifj.json?$where=upper(lobbyistname) like '%25GREEN%25' AND upper(lobbyistname) like '%25ANDREW%25' AND upper(clientname) like '%25IBM%25'</code> This returns an empty array, confirming zero payments.</ref> Green reports $14,840 from HB Strategies in January 2026.<ref name="soda-green-hb">{{Cite web |url=https://data.colorado.gov/Legislative/Professional-Lobbyist-Income-in-Colorado/dxfk-9ifj |title=Professional Lobbyist Income in Colorado: J. Andrew Green from HB Strategies |publisher=Colorado Secretary of State |access-date=2026-04-03}} To verify via the SODA API, query: <code>https://data.colorado.gov/resource/dxfk-9ifj.json?$where=upper(lobbyistname) like '%25GREEN%25' AND upper(lobbyistname) like '%25ANDREW%25' AND upper(clientname) like '%25HB STRAT%25'</code></ref> HB Strategies collects from both IBM and the Colorado Springs Chamber, then subcontracts Green from that pool.

The five organizations opposing the bill (CoPIRG, Eco-Cycle, Repair.org, the Digital Right to Repair Coalition, and NFIB) have zero disclosed lobbying spending in the same database during 2024-2026.<ref name="soda-dataset" />

===Campaign donations===

Lobbyists and firms registered to support SB26-090 donated a total of $15,725 to the bill's three sponsors and five committee members between 2024 and early 2026.<ref name="tracer-sewald-to-legislators">Colorado TRACER contribution search: donations from Sewald Hanfling employees to SB26-090 sponsors and committee members, 2024-2026. To verify: go to https://tracer.sos.colorado.gov, click "Contribution Search," enter "Sewald" or "Hanfling" as Contributor Last Name, and search within the date range 2024-01-01 to 2026-12-31. Then filter results by recipient for each SB26-090 sponsor and committee member. TRACER bulk data is also available for download at https://tracer.sos.colorado.gov/PublicSite/DataDownload.aspx. Accessed April 3, 2026.</ref><ref name="tracer-brandeberry-to-legislators">Colorado TRACER contribution search: donations from Brandeberry McKenna employees to SB26-090 sponsors and committee members, 2024-2026. To verify: go to https://tracer.sos.colorado.gov, click "Contribution Search," enter "Brandeberry" or "McKenna" as Contributor Last Name, and search within 2024-01-01 to 2026-12-31. Accessed April 3, 2026.</ref><ref name="tracer-hackenberger-to-legislators">Colorado TRACER contribution search: donations from Micki Hackenberger to SB26-090 sponsors and committee members, 2024-2026. To verify: go to https://tracer.sos.colorado.gov, click "Contribution Search," enter "Hackenberger" as Contributor Last Name, and search within 2024-01-01 to 2026-12-31. Accessed April 3, 2026.</ref>

On December 19, 2025, Josh Hanfling of Sewald Hanfling Public Affairs donated $450 to the Committee to Elect Marc Snyder.<ref name="tracer-hanfling-snyder">Colorado TRACER, RecordID 7171526: $450 donation from Joshua Hanfling to Committee to Elect Marc Snyder, December 19, 2025. To verify: go to https://tracer.sos.colorado.gov, click "Contribution Search," enter "Hanfling" as Contributor Last Name and "Snyder" as Committee Name, and search within 2025-01-01 to 2026-12-31. Accessed April 3, 2026.</ref> Snyder sponsored SB26-090 53 days later. Cisco pays Hanfling's firm $7,500 per month, and Hanfling is registered as Cisco's lobbyist on the bill.<ref name="soda-cisco" /><ref name="sos-lobby-system" /> The donation amount is small; the timeline connecting Cisco's lobbyist to a bill sponsor weeks before introduction is the pattern.

[[File:marcsnyder.png|thumb|300px|Colorado TRACER filing showing a $450 donation from Joshua Hanfling (Sewald Hanfling Public Affairs) to the Committee to Elect Marc Snyder, dated December 19, 2025.]]

{| class="wikitable"
|+Donations from SB26-090 lobbying network to sponsors and committee members
|-
!Firm!!SB26-090 client(s)!!Total!!Recipients
|-
|Sewald Hanfling Public Affairs||Cisco, CO Tech Assn||$6,225<ref name="tracer-sewald-to-legislators" />||Danielson, Carson, Snyder, Hartsook, Liston
|-
|Brandeberry McKenna Public Affairs||CO Springs Chamber||$3,650<ref name="tracer-brandeberry-to-legislators" />||Danielson, Carson, Snyder, Liston, Catlin
|-
|HB Strategies / Husch Blackwell||IBM, CO Springs Chamber||$3,575<ref name="tracer-hackenberger-to-legislators" /><ref name="tracer-hbs-employees">Colorado TRACER contribution search: donations from Goff, Neimond, Lo (Husch Blackwell Strategies) to SB26-090 legislators, 2024-2026. To verify: go to https://tracer.sos.colorado.gov, click "Contribution Search," and search each name individually: "Goff" + "Erin", "Neimond" + "Kevin", "Lo" + "Elizabeth" as Contributor Last/First Name, within 2024-01-01 to 2026-12-31. Accessed April 3, 2026.</ref>||Carson, Snyder, Hartsook, Catlin, Liston
|-
|Colorado Chamber PAC||(self)||$1,800<ref name="tracer-co-chamber-pac">Colorado TRACER contribution search: Colorado Chamber PAC donations to SB26-090 sponsors and committee members, 2023-2024. To verify: go to https://tracer.sos.colorado.gov, click "Contribution Search," enter "Colorado Chamber" as Committee Name under the "Committee Giving" tab, and search within 2023-01-01 to 2024-12-31. Accessed April 3, 2026.</ref>||Snyder, Hartsook, Liston, Catlin
|-
|J. Andrew Green & Assoc.||IBM (via HB subcontract)||$450<ref name="tracer-bulk-download">{{Cite web |url=https://tracer.sos.colorado.gov/PublicSite/DataDownload.aspx |title=TRACER Public Site: Data Download |publisher=Colorado Secretary of State, TRACER |access-date=2026-04-03}}</ref>||Carson
|-
|Weaver Strategies||CO Cable Television Assn||$450<ref name="tracer-weaver-morton">Colorado TRACER contribution search: Kachina Morton (Weaver Strategies) donations to SB26-090 sponsors, 2025. To verify: go to https://tracer.sos.colorado.gov, click "Contribution Search," enter "Morton" as Contributor Last Name and "Kachina" as First Name, and search within 2025-01-01 to 2025-12-31. Accessed April 3, 2026.</ref>||Carson, Liston
|}

R.D. Sewald and Josh Hanfling of Sewald Hanfling Public Affairs donated a combined $3,800 to committee chair Jessie Danielson across four transactions:<ref name="tracer-sewald-hanfling-danielson">Colorado TRACER contributions: R.D. Sewald and Joshua Hanfling to Jessie Danielson campaign, RecordIDs 6858173, 6858175, 7092122, 7186003. To verify: go to https://tracer.sos.colorado.gov, click "Contribution Search," enter "Danielson" as Committee Name, then search separately for "Sewald" and "Hanfling" as Contributor Last Name, within 2024-01-01 to 2025-12-31. Accessed April 3, 2026.</ref>

[[File:tracer-sewald-hanfling-to-danielson.png|thumb|300px|TRACER contribution search showing four donations from R.D. Sewald and Joshua Hanfling to the Jessie Danielson campaign committee, September 2024 through November 2025.]]

{| class="wikitable"
|-
!Date!!Donor!!Amount!!TRACER RecordID
|-
|September 24, 2024||R.D. Sewald||$450||6858173
|-
|September 24, 2024||Joshua Hanfling||$450||6858175
|-
|July 15, 2025||Joshua Hanfling||$1,450||7092122
|-
|November 4, 2025||R.D. Sewald||$1,450||7186003
|}

Danielson chairs the Senate Business, Labor, & Technology Committee. She voted to advance SB26-090 on April 2, 2026.<ref name="leg-sb090" />

On September 4, 2024, Jenifer Brandeberry and Julie McKenna of Brandeberry McKenna Public Affairs each donated $450 to committee member Senator Marc Catlin (RecordIDs 6851546, 6851547).<ref name="tracer-six-lobbyists-catlin">Colorado TRACER contributions: six lobbyists from HB Strategies and Brandeberry McKenna to Marc Catlin campaign, RecordIDs 6851545, 6851542, 6851535, 6851531, 6851546, 6851547. September 4-6, 2024. To verify: go to https://tracer.sos.colorado.gov, click "Contribution Search," enter "Catlin" as Committee Name, and search within 2024-09-01 to 2024-09-30. Then search each donor name: Hackenberger, Lo, Goff, Neimond, Brandeberry, McKenna. Accessed April 3, 2026.</ref> Two days later, on September 6, four employees of Husch Blackwell Strategies (the parent company behind HB Strategies) donated to Catlin on the same day: Micki Hackenberger ($400, RecordID 6851545), Elizabeth Lo ($250, RecordID 6851542), Erin Goff ($200, RecordID 6851535), and Kevin Neimond ($100, RecordID 6851531).<ref name="tracer-six-lobbyists-catlin" /> Six lobbyists from two firms, all later registered on SB26-090, donated $1,850 to the same senator within 48 hours. Catlin voted to advance the bill.<ref name="leg-sb090" />

[[File:tracer-six-lobbyists-to-catlin.png|thumb|300px|TRACER contribution search showing six lobbyists from HB Strategies and Brandeberry McKenna donated a combined $1,850 to the Marc Catlin campaign committee between September 4-6, 2024.]]

{| class="wikitable"
|+Donations from SB26-090 lobbying network by recipient
|-
!Legislator!!Role!!Total received!!Number of donors
|-
|Jessie Danielson||Committee Chair (D)||$4,300<ref name="tracer-bulk-download" />||4
|-
|Larry Liston||Committee Member (R)||$2,850||7
|-
|Marc Snyder||Bill Sponsor (D)||$2,525||7
|-
|Marc Catlin||Committee Member (R)||$2,300||7
|-
|John Carson||Bill Sponsor (R)||$1,900||7
|-
|Anthony Hartsook||Bill Sponsor (R)||$1,850||5
|-
|Nick Hinrichsen||Committee Vice Chair (D)||$0||0
|-
|Iman Jodeh||Committee Member (D)||$0||0
|}

Senators Nick Hinrichsen and Iman Jodeh received no donations from any SB26-090 lobbying firm, PAC, or corporate employee in the 2024-2026 TRACER data.<ref name="tracer-hinrichsen-zero">Colorado TRACER contribution search: no results for SB26-090 lobbying firms to Nick Hinrichsen, 2024-2026. To verify: go to https://tracer.sos.colorado.gov, click "Contribution Search," enter "Hinrichsen" as Committee Name, and search for each lobbying firm (Sewald, Hanfling, Hackenberger, Brandeberry, McKenna, Goff, Neimond, Lo) as Contributor Last Name within 2024-01-01 to 2026-12-31. All searches return zero results. Accessed April 3, 2026.</ref><ref name="tracer-jodeh-zero">Colorado TRACER contribution search: no results for SB26-090 lobbying firms to Iman Jodeh, 2024-2026. To verify: go to https://tracer.sos.colorado.gov, click "Contribution Search," enter "Jodeh" as Committee Name, and search for each lobbying firm (Sewald, Hanfling, Hackenberger, Brandeberry, McKenna, Goff, Neimond, Lo) as Contributor Last Name within 2024-01-01 to 2026-12-31. All searches return zero results. Accessed April 3, 2026.</ref> Both sit on the committee. Both voted to advance the bill.<ref name="leg-sb090" />

[[File:tracer-hinrichsen-zero-sewald.png|thumb|300px|TRACER search showing zero donations from Sewald Hanfling to the Hinrichsen campaign, 2024-2026.]]

===Colorado's lobbying disclosure system===

Colorado law doesn't require lobbyists to break down spending by bill.<ref name="crs-24-6-302">{{Cite web |url=https://law.justia.com/codes/colorado/title-24/article-6/part-3/section-24-6-302/ |title=Colorado Revised Statutes Section 24-6-302: Disclosure |publisher=Justia (mirror of Colorado Revised Statutes, 2023 edition) |access-date=2026-04-03}}</ref> The $362,735 figure is total client payments to their lobbyists during this period; the connection to SB26-090 comes from separate position filings where those same lobbyists registered as supporting the bill.<ref name="sos-lobby-system" /><ref name="soda-dataset" />

Three separate systems hold the data: the Secretary of State's Online Lobby System (lobbying registrations and bill positions), the Professional Lobbyist Income dataset on Colorado's open data portal (monthly payments from clients to lobbyists), and TRACER (campaign donations).<ref name="crs-24-6-302" /> Connecting a corporation's lobbying money to a specific vote requires pulling data from all three and matching records by hand.

[[File:crs-1-45-105-5-lobbyist-contributions.png|thumb|300px|C.R.S. 1-45-105.5, the Colorado statute restricting lobbyist campaign contributions during legislative sessions.]]

Colorado law allows lobbyists to donate to legislators they lobby, as long as the donation falls outside the regular legislative session (C.R.S. 1-45-105.5).<ref name="crs-1-45-105-5">{{Cite web |url=https://law.justia.com/codes/colorado/title-1/article-45/section-1-45-105-5/ |title=Colorado Revised Statutes Section 1-45-105.5: Contributions from Lobbyists |publisher=Justia (mirror of Colorado Revised Statutes, 2023 edition) |access-date=2026-04-03}}</ref> SB25-148, a bill to ban lobbyist donations to legislators year-round, was killed by the Senate Committee on State, Veterans, and Military Affairs in March 2025.<ref name="leg-sb25148">{{Cite web |url=https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/sb25-148 |title=SB25-148: Concerning Lobbyist Contributions to Candidates |publisher=Colorado General Assembly}}</ref> Twelve months later, SB26-090's lobbyists had donated $15,725 to the bill's sponsors & committee members.<ref name="tracer-sewald-to-legislators" /><ref name="tracer-brandeberry-to-legislators" /><ref name="tracer-hackenberger-to-legislators" />

==Cybersecurity implications==

Manufacturers backing SB26-090 argue that sharing diagnostic tools, firmware, and schematics for enterprise infrastructure could enable bad actors to exploit vulnerabilities.<ref name="wired" /> iFixit CEO Kyle Wiens testified at the bill's hearing: "There's a general principle in cybersecurity that obscurity is not security. The money that's behind the scenes, that's what's driving the bill."<ref name="wired" />

Some cybersecurity researchers have directly disputed the manufacturer framing. Security researcher Billy Rios, and threat researcher Andrew Brandt, spoke against the exemption on the Securepairs podcast.<ref name="ifixit-sb090">{{Cite web |url=https://www.ifixit.com/News/116447/a-new-colorado-bill-could-blow-a-hole-in-the-nations-strongest-right-to-repair-law |title=A New Colorado Bill Could Blow a Hole in the Nation's Strongest Right to Repair Law |author=Elizabeth Chamberlain |publisher=iFixit |date=April 1, 2026}}</ref> Paul Roberts, chief of The Security Ledger and founder of Securepairs.org, stated: "A vibrant and healthy market for repair isn't a cybersecurity risk. In fact, it should be considered a cybersecurity imperative!"<ref name="ifixit-sb090" />

Repair advocates have also made the argument that restricting independent repair can have the unintended consequence of making critical infrastructure less secure, due to the need for timely repairs which may not be available through manufacturer-approved technicians.<ref name="wired" />

==Committee hearing testimony==

The April 2, 2026 hearing before the Senate Business, Labor, & Technology Committee drew over a dozen repair advocates who testified against the bill.<ref name="wired" /> Organizations represented included [[iFixit]], CoPIRG, the Repair Association, and PIRG's national campaign. Repair advocate Louis Rossmann was also present.<ref name="wired" />

Katz, who described Colorado as having "the broadest repair rights in the country," warned that the bill "is a bad policy and would be a big step back for Coloradans' repair rights."<ref name="wired" /> Gordon-Byrne pointed to at least five drafting problems.<ref name="wired" />

===Misleading claim from bill sponsor about the Governor's stance===

During the hearing, bill sponsor Senator John Carson stated the following: <blockquote>"And I want to note that when Governor Polis signed House Bill 24-1121, when he signed it into law, he issued a directive in his signing statement that the law should be fixed before its implementation date of January 1, 2026. He noted that Colorado is the only state in the nation that requires devices used for critical infrastructure be included in their repair law. So we're running this bill to fix a critical mistake made in the original law and protect our devices from malicious attacks."<ref name="sb090-hearing">Colorado General Assembly, Senate Business, Labor, and Technology Committee hearing on SB26-090, April 2, 2026. Audio/video archived at the Colorado General Assembly Harmony system: https://sg001-harmony.sliq.net/00327/harmony/en/PowerBrowser/PowerBrowserV2/20260402/-1/27982</ref></blockquote>

However, Governor Polis's official press release on signing HB24-1121, dated May 28, 2024, contains no mention of critical infrastructure, no directive to "fix" the law, and no statement that Colorado is an outlier.<ref name="polis-signing">{{Cite web |url=https://www.colorado.gov/governor/news/governor-polis-signs-right-repair-law-legislation-strengthen-colorados-economy-create-jobs |title=Governor Polis Signs Right to Repair Law, Legislation to Strengthen Colorado's Economy, Create Jobs & Support Creative Industries |publisher=Office of Governor Jared Polis |date=May 28, 2024 |access-date=2026-04-04}}</ref> While the website for the Governor of Colorado's press release concerning House Bill 24-1121 originally referenced a "signing statement," the link did not work. Upon emailing the Governor's staff on 4-21-2026, the website was updated and the link corrected. The signing statement reads, in part: <blockquote>This bill takes effect on January 1, 2026, and I encourage stakeholders to continue conversations in the interim to ensure that the full list of exclusions is appropriate and exhaustive, and take into consideration concerns that were raised during the process. <ref>{{Cite web |title=HB24-1121 Signing Statement |url=https://drive.google.com/file/d/1fftPj_EH5chO5Nh9huHz04M8D3YEyVP-/view}}</ref><ref name="polis-signing" /> </blockquote>

==Similar attempts in other states==
In 2025, the Texas legislature passed '''HB2963''', a right to repair bill signed on June 20, 2025 and effective September 1, 2026. The bill used the identical USA PATRIOT Act critical infrastructure exemption (42 U.S.C. 5195c(e)) as SB26-090, along with additional exemptions for medical devices and heavy equipment.<ref name="texas">{{Cite web |url=https://capitol.texas.gov/BillLookup/History.aspx?LegSess=89R&Bill=HB2963 |title=HB 2963 Bill History |publisher=Texas Legislature Online |date=2025}}</ref>

Several states that have passed repair laws, including Oregon, New York, California, and Minnesota, exempted business-to-business equipment from the start.<ref name="fighttorepair" />

As of 2026, right to repair bills have been introduced in every U.S. state and passed in eight.<ref name="wired" />

==See also==

*[[Right to Repair]]
*[[Parts pairing]]
*[[Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act]]
*[[Cisco Systems, Inc.]]

==References==

{{reflist}}

[[Category:Right to repair]]
[[Category:Legislation]]
[[Category:Colorado]]