Bennet and Hurd team up to shield Glenwood Springs Hot Springs from quarry expansion 58%

By Sage Kelley56%

7/23/2026, 11:43:57 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 25 faulty reasoning types, including Biased Writer Voice, Negativity Bias, and Confirmation Bias, with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 20.3% saturation with 150 hits. Analysis detected 1,169 faulty-reasoning hits from 740 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 54.5% and a BS Rank of 58% (9,324 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 57.40% of the article peer group.

Sen. 
Michael Bennet and U.S. 
Rep. 
Jeff Hurd don’t agree on much, but when it comes to keeping bulldozers away from Glenwood Springs' hot springs, the senator and the congressman are of one mind. 
“Glenwood Hot Springs are part of who we are as Coloradans,” Bennet said to a collection of reporters via Zoom on July 23, officially announcing bipartisan legislation that would ban the U.S. 
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) from expanding the Mid-Continent Limestone Quarry in the small mountain town. 
The companion bill, aptly titled the Glenwood Hot Springs Protection Act, was already introduced to the House and will be introduced to the Senate on Thursday. 
The House is currently on break for five weeks, with the Senate following shortly, but the duo hope the companion aspect will set a precedent, pressing the importance of protecting the area and halting the development. 
“I am pro-mining. 
I am pro-energy. 
I am pro-resource development,” Hurd said. 
“But responsible resource development means recognizing that not every location is the right place for every project.” 
A long battle 
The mine, which sits near the Glenwood Caverns Adventure Park, is on a parcel of BLM land and has been in operation since 1982. 
It was initially owned by the Mid-Continent Coal and Coke company, helping make limestone dust used in the company’s coal mines to prevent “coal dust explosions.” 
Rocky Mountain Industrials (RMI), a Beverly Hills-based mining investment company, purchased the quarry in 2016. 
Local group Glenwood Springs Citizens Alliance has fought against the mine since 2018, but RMI has continued to push for expansion, initially asking for over 400 acres. 
The United States Department of the Interior ultimately halted the mine's operations in 2024 after a slew of legal controversies, including RMI mining and selling common gravel rather than a high-quality limestone product that could be permitted under the General Mining Law. 
But that hasn’t stopped the investment company from churning. 
Initially reported by Aspen Daily News, BLM deemed an application to expand the quarry from 16 to 56 acres complete at the end of June, and BLM natural resource experts are now in the process of reviewing the proposed mining plans. 
Hurd and Bennet want that stopped ASAP. 
The act, if passed, would legally bar the Interior Secretary from approving any expansion of the Mid-Continent Limestone Quarry, closing off the company's paths to growth under both federal mining law and common-variety mineral sales statutes. 
Still, the two echoed the importance of the land to both locals and tourists. 
Glenwood Springs brings in around two million tourists every year, acting as a main engine for the city's economy. 
A lot of that traffic is to the city's hot springs. 
In 2019, BLM acknowledged that the expansion could “negatively impact” the hot springs aquifer, according to Mayor Pro Tem Erin Zalinski. 
“It makes no sense to allow anything to negatively impact that precious, precious resource. 
It’s irreplaceable,” she said. 
“This is a place where people want to come to visit public lands and enjoy vast landscapes… And now a private company is proposing to triple the size of its gravel quarry outside Glenwood. 
This will put our one-of-a-kind resource at risk for just some gravel,” Bennet said, calling the idea “incredibly shortsighted.” 
Why now? 
Both Hurd and Bennet noted that the legislation likely wouldn’t pass until after the elections in November, but considered it important to get the ball rolling. 
“We both feel a very serious sense of urgency because, again, once this is damaged, there’s no going back and fixing it,” Bennet said. 
But why now, especially if this fight has been ongoing since 2018? 
“Our understanding is there is a movement within the BLM to change the status of this mine and allow it to move forward with this expansion,” Hurd said. 
“We think it’s important to let the administration know our viewpoint on this.” 
Bennet said they have been working on a solution for a very long time, and as time has gone on, support from locals has grown vastly, helping bolster the punch back. 
“There is a value that is coming from publicly introducing this legislation and advancing it even if it doesn’t move as quickly as Senator Bennet and I would like,” Hurd said, adding that it shows that Colorado Democrats and Republicans are together on opposing the expansion. 
He called it common sense. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 11.9%Sage Kelley: 2.4%Denver Westword: 1.6%Confirmation Bias11.9%This article: 0.0%Sage Kelley: 0.2%Denver Westword: 0.2%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 8.1%Sage Kelley: 2.7%Denver Westword: 2.2%Availability Heuristic8.1%This article: 0.0%Sage Kelley: 0.4%Denver Westword: 0.6%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Sage Kelley: 1.0%Denver Westword: 0.5%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sage Kelley: 1.5%Denver Westword: 1.2%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 2.6%Sage Kelley: 4.6%Denver Westword: 3.2%Framing Effect2.6%This article: 10.7%Sage Kelley: 1.8%Denver Westword: 0.9%Loss Aversion10.7%This article: 4.9%Sage Kelley: 0.8%Denver Westword: 0.5%Status Quo Bias4.9%This article: 4.2%Sage Kelley: 0.4%Denver Westword: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect4.2%This article: 3.2%Sage Kelley: 3.0%Denver Westword: 3.0%Optimism Bias3.2%This article: 3.1%Sage Kelley: 0.8%Denver Westword: 0.5%Pessimism Bias3.1%This article: 14.7%Sage Kelley: 7.1%Denver Westword: 4.1%Negativity Bias14.7%This article: 0.0%Sage Kelley: 1.0%Denver Westword: 0.9%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sage Kelley: 2.1%Denver Westword: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Sage Kelley: 0.0%Denver Westword: 0.0%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 8.4%Sage Kelley: 2.4%Denver Westword: 0.9%In-Group Bias8.4%This article: 0.0%Sage Kelley: 0.0%Denver Westword: 0.0%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 1.9%Sage Kelley: 4.2%Denver Westword: 3.8%Halo Effect1.9%This article: 0.0%Sage Kelley: 0.0%Denver Westword: 0.0%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Sage Kelley: 0.0%Denver Westword: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.9%Sage Kelley: 0.6%Denver Westword: 0.4%Recency Bias0.9%This article: 3.5%Sage Kelley: 0.3%Denver Westword: 0.1%Primacy Effect3.5%This article: 0.0%Sage Kelley: 0.1%Denver Westword: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sage Kelley: 3.1%Denver Westword: 1.1%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Sage Kelley: 0.0%Denver Westword: 0.0%Straw Man0.0%This article: 2.8%Sage Kelley: 0.9%Denver Westword: 2.9%Appeal to Authority2.8%This article: 0.0%Sage Kelley: 0.7%Denver Westword: 0.4%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 4.6%Sage Kelley: 0.4%Denver Westword: 0.6%Slippery Slope4.6%This article: 0.0%Sage Kelley: 0.0%Denver Westword: 0.0%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 9.5%Sage Kelley: 2.1%Denver Westword: 2.4%Hasty Generalization9.5%This article: 3.5%Sage Kelley: 0.7%Denver Westword: 0.3%Red Herring3.5%This article: 0.7%Sage Kelley: 1.0%Denver Westword: 0.7%Bandwagon0.7%This article: 20.3%Sage Kelley: 9.4%Denver Westword: 4.5%Appeal to Emotion20.3%This article: 5.1%Sage Kelley: 1.1%Denver Westword: 0.5%Begging the Question5.1%This article: 9.1%Sage Kelley: 1.9%Denver Westword: 1.1%Post Hoc (False Cause)9.1%This article: 0.0%Sage Kelley: 0.7%Denver Westword: 0.2%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Sage Kelley: 1.3%Denver Westword: 0.5%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 3.5%Sage Kelley: 0.3%Denver Westword: 0.1%Appeal to Nature3.5%This article: 0.0%Sage Kelley: 0.2%Denver Westword: 0.1%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Sage Kelley: 2.1%Denver Westword: 2.2%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Sage Kelley: 0.0%Denver Westword: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 2.6%Sage Kelley: 1.8%Denver Westword: 1.0%Ambiguity (Equivocation)2.6%This article: 0.0%Sage Kelley: 0.0%Denver Westword: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Sage Kelley: 0.0%Denver Westword: 0.0%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Sage Kelley: 0.0%Denver Westword: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Sage Kelley: 0.0%Denver Westword: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Sage Kelley: 0.0%Denver Westword: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Sage Kelley: 0.6%Denver Westword: 0.9%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Sage Kelley: 0.4%Denver Westword: 0.7%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 15.5%Sage Kelley: 3.8%Denver Westword: 3.0%Biased Writer Voice15.5%This article: 2.7%Sage Kelley: 0.9%Denver Westword: 0.7%Indoctrination2.7%This article: 0.0%Sage Kelley: 0.0%Denver Westword: 0.0%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sage Kelley: 0.0%Denver Westword: 0.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sage Kelley: 0.0%Denver Westword: 1.7%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

740 words analyzed.

Speakers

3speakers38%attributed speech461writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 100.0% coverageMichael Bennet • 32 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 36 words • 100.0% coverageJeff Hurd • 3 words • 0.0% coverageJeff Hurd • 3 words • 0.0% coverageJeff Hurd • 6 words • 0.0% coverageJeff Hurd • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 42 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 41 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 36 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageErin Zalinski • 14 words • 0.0% coverageErin Zalinski • 4 words • 0.0% coverageErin Zalinski • 34 words • 0.0% coverageMichael Bennet • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageMichael Bennet • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageJeff Hurd • 28 words • 0.0% coverageJeff Hurd • 13 words • 100.0% coverageMichael Bennet • 31 words • 0.0% coverageJeff Hurd • 46 words • 0.0% coverageJeff Hurd • 5 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Erin Zalinski

100%flagged-word coverage
52 attributed words19% of attributed speech73% writer coverage
0%12.5%25.0%Biased Writer Voice-24.9 ptsWriter: 24.9%Erin Zalinski: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination-1.5 ptsWriter: 1.5%Erin Zalinski: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.