Listen to the article
Trump’s Colorado Claims Contradict Census Data Following Water Project Veto
President Donald Trump’s recent decision to veto a Colorado water infrastructure bill has sparked controversy, with the president claiming residents are leaving the state “in droves” – an assertion that contradicts available demographic data.
The veto blocks funding for the Arkansas Valley Conduit, a project designed to pipe reservoir water for 130 miles to approximately 50,000 people living in an area with naturally occurring radionuclides in the groundwater. Despite supporting the project during his first term, Trump cited concerns about federal taxpayers bearing “massive costs of a local water project” in his veto memorandum to Congress.
In a subsequent interview with Politico, Trump expanded on his reasoning, stating: “They’re wasting a lot of money and people are leaving the state. They’re leaving the state in droves. Bad governor.” He reinforced this claim on Truth Social, writing that “California and Colorado are two of the TOP OUTBOUND STATES IN 2025,” and that people are leaving Colorado “in record numbers.”
The president’s population claims appear to stem from a United Van Lines report showing that 55% of its Colorado moves in 2025 were outbound. However, this single data point presents an incomplete picture. Several other major moving companies – including U-Haul, Atlas Van Lines, North American Moving Services and Allied Van Lines – reported either neutral patterns or slight inflows for Colorado.
More significantly, official Census Bureau data tracked by USAFacts shows Colorado’s population has maintained a moderate upward trend since Governor Jared Polis took office in 2019. The State Demography Office projects growth from 5.7 million residents in 2019 to nearly 6 million by 2025. Colorado State Demographer Kate Watkins noted in July that “Colorado has, and is projected to continue to, grow faster than the rest of the United States.”
The $1.4 billion water project at the center of the dispute has decades of history as part of the larger Fryingpan-Arkansas Project approved in 1962. Though costs have roughly doubled since 2016 estimates, the Bureau of Reclamation maintains that the pipeline’s expenses remain “comparable to construction costs of similar pipelines currently under construction.”
Political observers have speculated that Trump’s veto may represent retaliation against Rep. Lauren Boebert, a former ally whose district would benefit from the project, but who broke with Trump over the release of Jeffrey Epstein files. Others suggest it targets Governor Polis, a Democrat who has clashed with Trump over the incarceration of Tina Peters, a former county clerk convicted on state charges related to election equipment tampering.
The controversy intensified when Trump called Polis a “scumbag” on social media while advocating for Peters’ release. Despite Trump signing an executive grant of clemency for Peters on December 5, Polis noted that presidential pardon power extends only to federal charges, not state convictions like those against Peters.
The House is scheduled to vote on January 8 regarding a potential override of Trump’s veto. Given the broad bipartisan support the bill initially received – passing both chambers by uncontroversial voice votes – the override may succeed.
As the political drama unfolds, the factual record appears clear: despite Trump’s claims of a Colorado exodus, demographic data shows the state continues to experience population growth rather than decline.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
12 Comments
The potential impact of the Trump administration’s policies on Colorado’s population is an intriguing area of inquiry. I’m curious to see how this story develops and whether further analysis can shed light on the underlying dynamics at play.
Agreed. This is a nuanced issue that deserves a deeper dive. I look forward to seeing more reporting that delves into the various factors influencing population trends in Colorado and other states.
The veto of the Arkansas Valley Conduit project is an interesting angle to this story. I wonder how the lack of federal funding for this water infrastructure could impact population trends in the affected areas. It’s a complex issue that deserves further investigation.
That’s a great observation. The availability and quality of water resources can definitely influence where people choose to live, so the federal government’s role in funding such projects is an important factor to consider.
It’s concerning to see the president making claims about population trends that don’t seem to align with the census data. I hope this story leads to a more thorough examination of the actual demographic factors at play in Colorado.
I agree. Fact-based policymaking and public discourse are essential, especially on issues that can have significant impacts on people’s lives and communities.
This article highlights the importance of scrutinizing political statements and cross-checking them against reliable data sources. It’s a good reminder to be cautious about accepting claims at face value, particularly on complex topics like population trends.
Well said. Critical thinking and a commitment to factual accuracy are vital in today’s information landscape, where misinformation can spread quickly. This article sets a good example of responsible journalism.
This seems like a complex issue with political factors at play. I appreciate the fact-checking approach to verify the president’s statements against the demographic data. It’s important to have a balanced, evidence-based discussion on these topics.
Absolutely. Fact-checking and objective analysis are crucial, especially when it comes to issues that can be politicized. This helps ensure we have an informed, productive dialogue.
Interesting to see the president’s claims about Colorado’s population trends contradicting the available census data. I’m curious to learn more about the specifics of the water infrastructure project and how it may be impacting the state’s population dynamics.
You raise a good point. It’s always important to look at the full context and data when assessing population trends, rather than relying on anecdotal claims.