A proposal that sought to put more regulatory structure around a federally legal substance detected in hundreds of deaths in Colorado and limit a synthetic version won preliminary approval from the Colorado date House on Tuesday evening.
The proposal was watered down to remove the provisions surrounding the regulatory structure of the drug called “kratom,” though the amended version still placed limitations on access and required disclaimers on packaging, among other requirements.
The measure, which died just 24 hours ago, had been revived by a rarely-used procedural move early Tuesday morning.
Kratom is a herbal substance that can produce opioid- and stimulant-like effects, according to the National Institutes of Health. As usage in Colorado increased, the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration labeled it a “drug of concern.”
Kratom is legal and accessible in grocery stores and convenience stores, though the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has not approved its use. The NIH has cited anecdotal reports that it can help with drug withdrawal systems, especially related to opioid use, as well as pain management. However, the NIH also said there are other medications and treatments better suited for those purposes.
Colorado has been looking at kratom regulation for several years, but legislation has failed to cross the finish line.
The only successful legislative effort occurred in 2022, when lawmakers tasked the Department of Revenue with a study on the feasibility of its regulation, those who manufacture it, and those who sell it.
Currently, the state bars the sale or production of a kratom product that contains fentanyl or any other controlled substance, as well as its sale to those under 21 years of age. It’s also illegal to display kratom products in a retail location that could make it accessible to someone under the age of 21. Finally, it requires labels that identify the manufacturer and a complete list of ingredients.
As introduced, Senate Bill 72 would have largely implemented the recommendations of a 2023 Department of Revenue study on kratom regulation. The regulatory structure was to be paid for money from the state’s tobacco litigation settlement fund, but the Department of Revenue testified against using that fund and against the bill, arguing it didn’t go far enough in the areas of licensing and enforcement.
The legislative study recommended stricter labeling requirements, testing, adherence to manufacturing standards like dietary supplements, and assessing a fee for the regulatory program.
Meanwhile, kratom products are becoming a bigger problem in Colorado, particularly with the advent of what’s known as 7oH, a semi-synthetic form, marketed as a standalone ingredient but not considered to be kratom.
Experts, including those who authored a letter to the editor of the medical journal, Addiction, last year, said, “Apart from toxicity risks from acute exposure, chronic 7-hydroxymitragynine product use could result in opioid-like physical dependence and possibly addiction.”
SB 72 had been stuck in the House Appropriations Committee and its chair, Rep. Emily Sirota, D-Denver, told the bill’s sponsors she would not allow it to come up for a hearing.
But that changed on Tuesday morning, when the committee needed to meet to hear another bill.
That gave Rep. Scott Bottoms, R-Colorado Springs, an opportunity to make a “super motion,” based on House rules, to send SB 72 directly to the House floor without a hearing.
That motion, over Sirota’s objections, passed on a 6-4 vote.
In the House, the sponsors, Reps. Mandy Lindsay, D-Aurora, and Matt Soper, R-Delta, agreed to an amendment to remove the entire regulatory structure and penalties.
Addressing the decision of the appropriations committee, Bottoms told his House colleagues he didn’t think the process was proper in denying the bill a hearing.
And he said he’s a “no” on the bill.
What’s left after the amendments?
Soper told Colorado Politics it’s still a big change, as it treats kratom like tobacco. It would have to be located behind the store counter and must include full disclaimers on packaging. That would include dosage information, including how much is safe to consume in a 24-hour period and a warning label that it should not be consumed by pregnant women and the other kinds of drugs it should not be taken with.
The bill also prohibits sale of any kratom product that contains 7oH greater than 2%.
A kratom industry company pushed back against the claims around 7oH.
In a statement to Colorado Politics, Holistic Alternative Recovery Trust, which advocates for herbal remedies to treat opioid addiction, said the 2% cap is arbitrary, not evidence based, and it would wipe out “nearly all effective products, while allowing high-dose, mislabeled ones to stay on shelves.”
“That’s not public health policy — it’s regulatory theater. Real safety comes from milligram-based dosage caps, accurate labeling, and enforcement mechanisms that actually work,” the group said.
Holistic Alternative Recovery Trust also disputed that 7oH is dangerous and said that it is not a cause of death.
“We laid out a good first step,” Soper said. “We have a duty to protect the public” but in an incremental way, given the newness of the substance.
“This is a first step in the regulation and licensing of a product that is fairly new,” Lindsay said.
The bill is up for a final vote on Wednesday. If approved, it will go back to the Senate, which must review the changes.
