WASHINGTON – During his first six months, Rep. Jeff Hurd has sponsored six bills – and cosponsored dozens more, has built a consistent voting record following Republican leadership, and has offered mixed messaging about President Donald Trump.
Sworn in on Jan. 3, Hurd told The Durango Herald at the time: “I’m cautiously optimistic that there’s a lot of good that we can do in this next Congress, with the help of President Trump and our Republican Senate.”
In the time since, Hurd has voted with Republicans to plan for and pass a reconciliation megabill with cuts to Medicaid and SNAP, a full-year continuing resolution to fund the government, a rescissions package with cuts to public broadcasting and USAID, the SAVE Act, the Laken Riley Act, the Fix Our Forests Act and others. The latter three passed with varying levels of bipartisan support.
Though some of his criticism toward Trump earned him a brief national spotlight, the freshman attorney from Grand Junction has taken a markedly quieter approach than his predecessor, avid Trump supporter and firebrand conservative Rep. Lauren Boebert.
Instead of frequently commenting on national events, Hurd’s social media typically features pictures of him visiting with constituents and local leaders, videos of him talking about his legislation or his recent votes, and occasional written statements or quotes on other issues. But his lack of comments on some of Trump’s actions – particularly early in his term – upset some constituents, prompting local protests asking him to speak out.
Hurd’s response to Trump and his policies has been varied. After Trump’s joint address to Congress, Hurd put on social media: “As the president said, America is back.” Later, he introduced legislation aiming to block Trump’s tariff authority.
Hurd has directly and indirectly criticized Trump, including the president’s Ukraine rhetoric, his decision to accept a Qatari jet and federal layoffs that impact CD-3. All the while, he has generally supported the president’s tax, energy and immigration plans.
In addition to trips across CD-3, Hurd also attended a trip with other Republicans to the U.S.-Mexico border, chaired a subcommittee field hearing in Oklahoma and was part of the U.S. delegation to the Vatican to attend the pope’s inaugural mass.
Hurd’s office declined interview requests for this story.
Hurd joined most House Republicans in backing the Republican mega-bill that includes steep cuts to Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program or SNAP.
Both programs will have new work requirements, and states must contribute more to SNAP. The bill extends the Trump 2017 tax credits, temporarily expands the child tax credit, and includes temporary provisions for no tax on tips and on overtime. It also includes expanded funding for the Department of Defense and for border security.
The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said the bill will add $2.4 trillion to the federal deficit and leave nearly 11 million people without health insurance. The Office also said average households will “see an increase in the resources available to them over the 2026-2034 period,” but that these would not be evenly distributed. Households toward the top would see more improvements than those at the bottom of the income range.
“This bill blocks a 25% tax hike on CO-03, unleashes American energy and secures our Southern border,” Hurd wrote in a statement on social media. Hurd has voiced support for making the Trump 2017 tax credits, set to expire at the end of 2025, permanent since early in his term.
In a May 28 interview with Grand Junction’s The Daily Sentinel, Hurd expanded on his support for the bill and criticized CBO estimates as unreliable.
“If we continue with the current cost trajectory, I worry that it would be unsustainable and that we would essentially bankrupt the system and rural hospitals would be in an even worse spot,” he said to a question about how Medicaid cuts could impact rural hospitals. “What this bill does is it strikes the right balance when it comes to reforms, it preserves the core function of Medicaid which is protecting the most vulnerable.”
The bill is almost certain to change in the Senate, where it requires a simple majority to pass.
The process began months ago when Republicans in each chamber adopted budget resolutions instructing committees to change certain mandatory spending levels. Medicaid and SNAP became early targets, and, after voting in support of the resolutions, Hurd said he would fight to protect Medicaid and SNAP for those who rely on it. In his March tele-town hall, Hurd also said he would support adding work requirements for some Medicaid recipients.
Hurd isn’t on either of the committees dealing with those programs. In the following weeks, he signed onto letters urging Republican leadership to preserve Medicaid and Biden-era clean energy tax credits.
“Balancing the federal budget must not come at the expense of those who depend on these benefits for their health and economic security,” read a letter from a dozen House Republicans, including Hurd. “... We cannot and will not support a final reconciliation bill that includes any reduction in Medicaid coverage for vulnerable populations.”
Just over a quarter of Hurd’s district relies on Medicaid, according to New York University Langone Health’s dashboard.
Hurd and fellow Colorado Republican Rep. Gabe Evans also signed a letter arguing against cutting clean energy tax credits. Preserving these credits, they wrote, would support an “all-of-the-above” energy policy and prevent disruptions – which they said could lead to rate hikes – in an energy industry that had already made plans with the credits in mind.
Leadership didn’t heed the request, as the final bill dramatically rolls back the credits. Hurd did not initially sign onto a more recent letter from some House Republicans urging the Senate to reinstate the clean energy tax credits as it considers the bill.
Hurd’s office did not respond to questions about what other issues he advocated for in reconciliation.
Almost immediately after Trump pardoned those convicted of participating in the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol, Hurd said he was “deeply disappointed” with the president’s decision, which he called “disturbing.” That first week, he was hesitant to comment specifically on many of Trump’s executive orders, telling the Herald that he hadn’t yet reviewed many of them.
In the following weeks, the Trump administration would slash the federal workforce, including cutting jobs in public lands agencies in Southwest Colorado.
In the following weeks, protests and rallies broke out in his district. But Hurd was still reluctant to speak out against the administration.
It wasn’t until Feb. 27, in an interview with Colorado Public Radio, that he agreed with the goal of reducing “bloat” in agencies but wished some of the cuts had been more targeted.
About two weeks later, he hosted his first, and so far only, tele-town hall. His office said about 7,500 people tuned in.
On the call, he answered questions from constituents and reiterated his concerns about cuts to the Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management in Colorado. He also responded to a question about Trump’s Oval Office scuffle with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelinski. He indirectly criticized Trump’s pause on aid to Ukraine – which has since been lifted – saying it is “dishonorable and wrong not to stand up against the tyranny of Putin” and that “pausing military aid to Ukraine weakens our hand, it emboldens Russia.”
A week later, after Trump’s joint address to Congress, Hurd posted a video statement on X saying it was an “amazing and historic experience” and that he appreciated hearing the president explain his border, energy and other policy issues that “we campaigned on.”
“I am excited to deliver on that agenda in this next Congress,” he said. “As the president said, America is back.”
Less than a week after Trump’s steep “Liberation Day” tariffs took effect, Hurd told the Herald that he didn’t think Trump had the authority to levy them, becoming the second House Republican – after Don Bacon, R-Neb. – to publicly question Trump’s tariff authority. The next day, he joined Bacon as an original co-sponsor of the Trade Review Act of 2025, which would require Congress to approve of tariffs within 60 days of a president enforcing them.
Hurd said his concern was primarily that the Constitution gives Congress tariff authority, not the president. Asked why tariff authority was the constitutional issue that stuck out to him – as opposed to other issues with existing constitutional challenges like Trump ordering the end or birthright citizenship and the administration’s freezes on congressionally appropriated funds – Hurd said he was being strategic in what connected to his campaign issues.
”I think I am doing the things that are most effective for the 3rd Congressional District and identifying where strategically it makes the most sense to further the agenda that I campaigned on,” he said. “(That) is something that I'm doing every day, and how that looks depends.”
In late April, he became the only Republican of the Colorado delegation to initially sign onto a letter to Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins asking her to reinstate terminated Forest Service red cardholders – USFS workers who are qualified to work on wildfire response but hold other full-time positions – before peak wildfire season begins.
He’s also voiced support for Trump’s energy and natural resources approach several times, telling C-SPAN “I think it’s a great approach” on May 1.
“Energy dominance means not only making sure that we are not just (doing) the most compared to others but also making sure that we’re using it in a way that strategically advantages our country,” Hurd said. “I think the president’s bought in on that agenda, and I’m with him 100%. … Let’s get more natural gas out of our country, helping our allies overseas so that they don’t have to rely on countries like China and Iran and Russia for their energy resources.”
He also told C-SPAN that he wants to do more mineral development in North America and in the U.S. and said he believes American energy production can balance environmental concerns.
“If you genuinely care about reducing global greenhouse gas emissions, you ought to support getting as much energy out of Colorado and out of America as possible because we do it better and more responsibly than anyone else,” he said in the C-SPAN interview.
He cited Western Colorado’s “high quality” natural gas reserves and high-BTU, low mercury and low-sulfur coal as good energy sources.
Soon after Trump announced he would be accepting a used plane from Qatar, Hurd quickly shared his “serious concerns” about the gift. Citing security and ethical questions, he told CNN on May 14, “Certainly it’s something that I cannot support.”
Hurd has sponsored six bills on his own, but only one has passed out of committee, which is typically the first step a bill takes toward passage. That bill – The ASCEND Act which aims to make it easier for NASA to use commercial satellite imagery for research – is cosponsored by fellow Colorado Republican Jeff Crank and has bipartisan support.
In February, Hurd joined Colorado’s senators in introducing a bill allocating $3.3 million to compensate those impacted by the 2015 Gold King Mine spill.
Hurd’s first bill – The LOCAL Act – would relocate the Bureau of Land Management’s headquarters back to Grand Junction, where they resided from late 2020 through 2021. Proponents argue that the agency should be headquartered closer to where most of the nation’s public lands are located – in the West – while opponents point to the talent drain that resulted from moving the office the first time and worry about the agency losing influence in Washington.
Hurd has introduced two public lands-related bills, including a bill seeking changes to a number of resource plans which his office called “Biden Administration Land Lockups” for public lands in Colorado and a bill that would protect 730,000 acres of public lands around the Gunnison Basin.
Hurd has not introduced companion legislation nor voiced support for the senators’ bill seeking to establish a national conservation area around the Dolores River or the senators’ Colorado Outdoor Recreation Act which would establish similar protections on public lands within CD-3 and CD-2. The CORE Act groups four previously separate bills, including the San Juan Mountains Wilderness Act, which would establish wilderness and special management areas around the San Juan Mountains.
“I'm just concerned about some of the restrictions in that legislation and how it would lock up land and how fundamentally it doesn't advance thoughtful public policy when it comes to federal lands,” Hurd told the Herald of the CORE Act in late March.
His office did not respond to questions about his positions on the Dolores bill or overall stance on public lands legislation.
Hurd also introduced the bipartisan Wetlands Conservation and Access Act of 2025 which aims to increase funding for the North American Wetlands Conservation Act and better preserve wetlands.
Kathryn Squyres is an intern for The Durango Herald and The Journal in Cortez and a student at American University in Washington, D.C. She can be reached at ksquyres@durangoherald.com.
