Blog Mirror: Science in Pre-school

A really interesting article by Trib Columnists Joan Barron that demonstrates the more intellectual nature of the old Conservative wing of the Wyoming GOP, vs. the anti-scientific wing of the Populists, which also shows the rift in the party, and the closet nature of a lot of home schooling.

It also demonstrates the Populist use of the word "elite" as a slur, which in fact, it is not.

Science in Pre-school

Blog Mirror: Before legislating, political newcomers should try something else: listening

 Before legislating, political newcomers should try something else: listening

Blog Mirror: Before legislating, political newcomers should try something else: listening

 

Before legislating, political newcomers should try something else: listening

A Primer, Part I. Populists ain't Conservatives, and LIberals ain't Progressives. How inaccurate terminology is warping our political perceptions.

Conservatives are not Populists.

Far from it.

Liberals aren't Progressives.

Liberals and Conservatives have more in common, than they do to the other categories noted above

Populists and Progressives share many common traits.

Confused?

We hope to clear that up.  But let's start with this. A lot of commentary, particularly of an uneducated type, keeps referring to Donald Trump as "a conservative", and sadly, a lot of true conservatives fall right into line with that fallacy.  Populists right now continually refer to themselves as conservatives, which is because they don't know what conservatives actually are.

They'd likely be horrified if they did.  And indeed, occasionally they are.

Donald Trump is not a conservative.  He's a populist, or is appealing to them. There's a world of difference. People who figure he stands for conservative values are deeply misguided on this point.  He doesn't.  But in the right/left thin gruel political world we live in, it's slightly understandable how people could be misguided on this linguistic point.

But it's wrong.

Let's take a look at it.  More particularly, what are conservatives, liberals, populists and progressives, the four main branches of what we have around in terms of political philosophies right now.

Let's start with this. What is a conservative?

What is a conservative?

Logo of the British Conservative Party.

At the core of their Weltanschauung, conservatives believe that human nature is essentially fixed, and that it's been fixed by an existential external.  Religious conservatives believe that the existential external is God, but not all conservatives are religious conservatives.¹   Those who aren't, like George F. Will for example, would hold that the existential external is essentially our evolution.²

Because this is the core belief of conservatives, conservatives are strong advocates for the application of Chesterton's Fence, which holds:

Chesterton's Fence:

There exists in such a case a certain institution or law; let us say, for the sake of simplicity, a fence or gate erected across a road. The more modern type of reformer goes gaily up to it and says, “I don’t see the use of this; let us clear it away.” To which the more intelligent type of reformer will do well to answer: “If you don’t see the use of it, I certainly won’t let you clear it away. Go away and think. Then, when you can come back and tell me that you do see the use of it, I may allow you to destroy it."

Chesterton, The Thing. 

This is why people tend to think that what conservatives stand for is not changing anything. This isn't really true, but they are very cautious about it.  Conservatives do not have any real faith that human nature is set to improve, and therefore have a large degree of caution regarding the changing of anything that's substantial until it can be determined why that thing came into existence in the first place.

And they believe that certain things, human nature, as noted, is essentially unchanging. Given this, they hope we all do as well as we can, but they don't have any view of remaking humanity or creating Heaven on Earth.

I'll note, I am, on most things, a conservative.

In most societies overall, except in cultures that are deeply conservative, conservatives are a minority.  They may be a large minority, but they are usually a minority.  The reason for this is that conservatism is, by its nature, somewhat pessimistic.  Conservatives hope things get better, but more than that hope they don't get worse, and often hope that the better is a return to some status quo ante that was less messed up.

Conservatives are nearly always a minority, which is one of their weaknesses, but they are also generally intellectual by nature, which is part of the reason that they are a minority and are comfortable being one.  Conservatives suspect most people instinctively agree with them, but don't know why, and they're comfortable with that as a rule.

A strength and weakness of conservatives is that they are reluctant to change things until its proven they need to be.  Conservatives believe that Chesterton's fence should have a pretty strong latch, or maybe even a keyed lock on it.  That's also a strength, however, as they're much less prone than others to whims of any kind.

Because conservatives do not feel that humans are in control of their natures, conservatives tend to be somewhat pessimistic as a rule, but they also don't except a lot of humankind in general. They generally feel that people are left best to their own devices, but they are not anarchists or libertarians, as they believe that order is necessary and a good.

To give a few examples of recent, more or less, conservatives, we have the following.  Probably, William F. Buckley is the supreme example of a post World War Two conservatives.  George F. Will would be a close second. George Weigel, must less well known, would be a third.

In terms of politicians, we have, currently, Mitt Romney.  Ronald Reagan was a conservative, but imperfectly so.  Margaret Thatcher was another.  Herbert Hoover, who was a much better President than he is credited as being, was a conservative.  Winston Churchill was a conservative, as was his nemesis Éamon de Valera.

To look at some illustrative issues, in the abstract, as politicians and individuals both vary and compromise, we'll take some more or less contemporary examples, and carry them through.

Abortion.  Conservatives oppose abortion as they believe in an external, and therefore don't have the right to destroy a human life without just cause.  This view, I'd note, is not limited to religious conservatives.

Death Penalty.  As a rule, conservatives have tended to support the death penalty, as it's always existed. They are clearly capable of having their minds changed on the topic, slowly.

Gender issues.  I'm lumping this all into one category, but conservatives as a rule feel that homosexuality is a person's own business, but it shouldn't change institutions like marriage.  They don't believe transgenderism is real, as the science isn't there.

Climate Change.  Early on a lot of conservatives were skeptical on climate change, but few would outright dismiss it.  Many were cautious in accepting it, however, consistent with their general reluctance to immediately accept something new.

Economics.  As a rule, conservatives tend to be in favor of a free market, with as little government interference in the economy as possible, basically taking the view that the best economy is one in which people get to decide things for themselves and that overall, the economy is really too complicated for human micromanaging.

Immigration.  Conservatives have been for restricted immigration, believing that excessive rates damage the economy, impact national culture too rapidly, and impact sovereignty.

Defense.  Conservatives are for a strong national defense, as they support sovereignty.  Prior to World War Two they were opposed to that extending overseas, but since the war they've applied the lessons of history and are very much in favor of extending defense beyond the seas, if not necessarily always intervening in foreign wars.  Two give to contemporary examples of this:

• The Russo Ukrainian War.  Conservatives are for supplying aid, and a lot of it, to Ukraine as Russia is a demonstrated enemy of the West and if not addressed will have to be at some point.
• Hamas Israeli War.  While conservatives were actually very reluctant to support Israel in 1948 when it became independent, they've come around to it as it's the only substantial democracy in the Middle East and, accordingly, they feel it should be given the ability to defend itself.

William F. Buckley, who intellectually defined the modern conservative movement.

What, then, are liberals?

What is a liberal?

Logo of the former British Liberal Party, with its color expressing its middle of the road nature.

We don't hear much about liberals anymore.  Progressives, which we will deal with below, have sort of taken over the political "left" in recent years, and liberalism, in a modern context, has weakened, which is a tragedy.

Liberals actually hold the essential core value that conservatives do, that being that there is an existential external that has set human nature. They believe, however, that human nature can be improved, and that it requires collective effort to do that.  Unlike conservatives, who hope we all do as well as we can, liberals feel that we can all be made better.  That's the real difference between traditional conservatives and traditional liberals.

Liberals see the world much the way that conservatives do, but have a very optimistic view of human nature and are certain that it can be improved. The early GOP was a liberal party and therefore, when you consider that, Lincoln appealing to "the better angels of our mercy" makes a lot of sense.  Conservatives would appeal to angels as well, but not "ours", and for help.

Because liberals believe that human nature can be improved, they see government, and the organs of government, as vehicles that can do it.  Therefore, liberals have a lot of faith in the organs of government to basically drag the mass along into an improved state, as they see it.

Right now, however, real liberals and real conservatives are few and far between. That's because we have populists and progressives dominating the field.

In most societies, liberals are the majority.  To some extent, that's because they are optimistic, and tend to believe they can make everything better than it currently is.

Looking at our issues, we have the following.

Abortion.  Liberals generally support allowing abortion up to a certain number of weeks, although this isn't universally true. The intellectual underpinning of this is weak, but is based on the concept that by doing this they're supporting the rights of women.

Death Penalty.  Liberals are pretty uniformly opposed to the death penalty, believing that it achieves no real purpose and is inherently barbaric.

Gender issues.  Liberals, like conservatives, generally used to hold that homosexuality was a person's own matter, if they were subject to it.  They've come to support regarding homosexuality as equating with heterosexuality in recent years on the belief that this improves the living standards of everyone.

Transgenderism is a new thing, but generally liberals lean towards supporting transgender "rights" on the concept that as it seems to occur, it must be natural, and society shouldn't hurt people who express it.

Climate Change.  Liberals fully accept that this is occurring and is a grave crisis, and they want governmental action on it.

Economics.  Contrary to what people like to imagine, conservatives and liberals really have very similar views of the economy.  The difference is really at the margin in how much governmental action there should be in the economy, and what the tax rates are.  If viewed from the abstract, however, tehir views are essentially the same.

Immigration.  Liberals generally believe that all people are the same or can be the same, so they dismiss cultural issues regarding immigration.  They are for controls, but having a desire to improve things for everyone, they're generally in support of a much higher immigration rate than conservatives.

Defense.  Traditionally, contrary to what people like to imagine, liberals have been in favor of a strong defense and also have been quite interventionist.  There are exceptions, but the "improve things for everyone" viewpoint resulted, throughout the 20th Century, in a much higher inclination by liberals to intervene in foreign wars than conservatives have had.  Since Vietnam, this has been much less the case, however.

• The Russo Ukrainian War.  Liberals are very much in favor of aiding Ukraine for the same reason that conservatives are, and also as Ukraine leans towards the west in culture and values.
• Hamas Israeli War.  Most real liberals support aiding Israel, as they've always had a strong desire to support the Jewish state since the end of World War Two.

In terms, again, of recent examples, Robert Reich, who teeters on the edge of progressivism, is one.  Bill Clinton was another.  Nancy Pelosi is another example, as is Chuck Schumer.  Going back a bit further, both John F. Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson were liberals.  Frankly, Richard Nixon was as well.

A controversial example would be Theodore Roosevelt.  While his breakaway political party was The Progressives, he was a pretty far left political liberal, as was his cousin Franklin Roosevelt.

Franklin Roosevelt, arguably the most clearly Liberal of American Presidents.

What is a populist?

Emblem of the former Populist, or People's Party.

This has certainly been the Age of Populism.

Populists believe that the good is determined by the collective wisdom of the masses.  So unlike conservatism and liberalism which believe that an existential external had defined what human nature is, populists believe that the collective common sense of the people defines that, and that's an existential collective internal.

Because populists believe that, it's a particularly shallow political theory and particularly subject to the storms of the time.  Populist can be, and have been, on the radical "left" and the radical "right".  Indeed, when Trump was coming up in 2016 so was Bernie Sanders, and they both appealed equally to populists.  A lot of the same people who now worship Trump, worshiped Sanders.

Right now, people confuse populism with conservatism as populism in the US stands, as it often has in the past, for an Evangelical variant of the American Civil Religion.  Protestant in its view, it basically holds a very shallow version of Christianity which is mostly focused on sex, and mostly focused on homosexual sex being bad.  Beyond that, it longs, just as it had in the mid to late 20th Century in the South, for a mythic version of American history in which everyone supposedly did really well economically and there were no problems (no drugs, no alcoholics, no mentally ill, no violence, etc.).

Populism has been an occasionally strong current in the American political stream from time to time.  There was, at the turn of the prior century, a Populist Party that existed from 1892 until 1909, and which we should note did very well in Wyoming's elections of the period.  It was, we might note, regarded as a left wing party.

Populism is only popular in a society during times of extreme economic or social distress.  Massively pessimistic in its outlook, Populist always have the belief that they are under siege and are therefore extremely given to conspiracy theories of all type.  They are, accordingly, very easy to manipulate.  They also tend to be given to ignorance, which plays into this, as they believe folk wisdom is the ultimate source of knowledge on everything.  And what it says, is that they're swimming in the shallow end of the pool, quite frankly.

The strength of populists is mass.  They tend to be numerous, when conditions give rise to them.  They also tend to be extremely strong-willed in their beliefs, even fanatically so.

Indeed, that's a weakness.

More than any other group, populists are prone to raging hatred.  As their beliefs arise from a collective mass, anyone contesting them is regarded as a lunatic enemy of the people.  Populists are, therefore, highly prone to tribalism and fanaticism

An additional weakness is that they're highly prone to being led by others.  In Weimar Germany, for example, populists sentiments were heavily reflected in the German Communist Party and the Nazi Party, with some people whipping back and forth between the two.  Rank and file Nazis were essentially populists, even if the leaders were not. The same is true of rank and file Reds during the Russian Revolution and Russian Civil War, as well as with the Greens.  Communism and Anarchy were mass movements as they were shallow, and made up of "common sense".

As this demonstrates, populists generally actually lack a philosophy, but don't realize it.  They "sense" or "feel" rather than think, and therefore are easily led by those who can tap into that.

A good example of how populist can be easily manipulated into something extreme.  We never "treated" viruses with soup, and we aren't treating them now with "communism".  But the anti-scientific anti-vax movement has attracted populist with the concept of a pass that looked like this, that never existed.

Because of this populists are very easily led by other movements, when a savvy leader comes along and can manipulate them.  And often, but not always, those leaders are quasi populists themselves. Both Lenin and Hitler were.  Franco was not.  Nor was Mussolini.  All were able to lead the masses.

Turning to our set of issues, we have the following.

Abortion.  This is actually hard to say as Populists vary on this to a fair degree.  They all, right now, oppose abortion, but are prepared to compromise on some vague number of weeks if for no other reason that makes it easy.

Death Penalty.  Populists are for it, as its always existed, and for its extension, as the people who get executed seem to be part of an evil "them".

Gender issues.  Populists are very much opposed to homosexuality and transgenderism as they sense its not party of the collective norm.  They share this view with Conservatives, but tend to be nasty and virulent about it, rather than thoughtful.

Climate Change.  Populists just don't believe its real.  The collective group of them doesn't, and therefore individual ones don't, evidence to the contrary aside.  As populists engage in a sort of group think, that's what they think.

Economics.  Populists say they are for a free market economy but have no real understanding of economic issues. They're for protectionism as that protects us against a foreign them.

Immigration.  Populists are radically opposed to immigration as the people who come in are part of a foreign them, and are not part of us. They believe that immigration problems are the result, in some instances, of a conspiracy.

Defense.  Populists support our troops, but appear to have the old William Jennings Bryan view of things, and he was a populist, that troops shouldn't leave our shores.  They are radically opposed to intervention in any war overseas in the belief that none of them matter to us, almost.

• The Russo Ukrainian War.  Populist oppose aiding Ukraine.  Being prone to be led around, some of them oppose the war as Donald Trump is a fan of Putin, and therefore they are too.  Others oppose it as its overseas and they don't think it matters.
• Hamas Israeli War.  Populist are oddly in favor of Israel, which is contrary to their general political alignment. This is for an odd reason, which is that a lot of populists are Evangelical Christians who have an apocalyptic view of the Jewish state, so they tend to believe that God has commanded us to support Israel.

Giving really outstanding example of populists is a bit hard to do, to some extent, as they tend to fail over time, and then be forgotten.  But there are some notable examples.  Louisiana's Huey Long was a populist.  Fr. Charles Coughlin was as well.  George Wallace was for much of his life, but he became a conservative in his final years.  

Huey P. Long, Depression Era populist.

What is a progressive.

Poster of the Russian Socialist Revolutionary Party.

Like populism, progressivism has existed in the United States for a long time, and perhaps just about as long as populism.

Progressives believe, like populists, that human nature is controlled by an internal existential, but in their case they radically believe that it's controlled by an internal individual existential.  So, unlike progressives who believe in a sort of mystical will of the people, progressives believe that each and every individual has a radically individual reality that's a supreme existential good.  

Progressives are convinced of radical individualism while at the same time having very low faith in people in general.

Because of their world outlook, progressives tend to share some odd traits with populists, and indeed historically they are both left wing in their political, and they tend to exist at the same time.  Progressives tend to be radically opposed to human nature, and therefore given to conspiracy theories of a type.  They tend to be anarchic in their expressed views, just as populists tend to be, but they favor autocracy in reality, just as populists ultimately tend to be.  Societies that essentially degrade to a struggle between populism and progressivism, usually spectacularly fail, with late Republican Spain and late Weimar Germany being distressing examples.

In terms of Progressives, for reasons that we'll explain below, popular examples are often associated with other movements.  Having said that, figures like Noam Chomsky, AoC, Henry Wallace, are good examples.  Much of current academia, for peculiar reasons, is made up of Progressives.  There aren't, however, any countries current governed by them, unlike Populists.  

Progressives in recent decades have tended to lurk under the surface of liberals, so they don't erupt into existence the way Populists do.  Being opportunistic, however, they've done so very much since the Obergefell decision, and then in reaction to Trump.

On our issues, we find the following:

Abortion.  Progressives are radically in favor of abortion as they are radically in favor of any one human deciding their own fate, and the fate of an unborn person doesn't matter, as they are not yet born.

Death Penalty.  Progressives are opposed to it, but mostly on a knee-jerk level. This is borrowed from the Liberals, and it's been adopted without much thinking.  Having said that, termination of a life does radically end that person's ability to decide anything, so this is overall consistent with their views.

Gender issues.  Progressives believe that this can and should be radically determined by the individuals, so basically they don't really believe that genders, science notwithstanding, really exist.

Climate Change.  Climate Change impacts everyone, so Progressives are for immediate government action to address it.

Economics.  Progressives lean towards radical economics, so concepts like Universal Basic Income and whatnot, that seem to be capable of individual use, are heavily favored. They like state intervention in the economy and society, to the extent it seems to free up anyone individual.

Immigration.  Progressives, like liberals, don't believe that culture really matters, so they're heavily opposed to restrictions of significance.

Defense.  Prior to the recent wars it would have been hard to say what a Progressive position was on defense, other than that Progressives like to use the Armed Forces as a petrie dish for social change.  Given the various world crises right now, however, things have become clearer.

• The Russo Ukrainian War.  Progressives favor aiding Ukraine as Ukraine is a western nation in culture, and Russia is not.
• Hamas Israeli War.  Progressives want the war to end, as probably everybody does, but have an odd belief that we can decree this to be so.  Younger Progressives tend to support Hamas as it seems like it involves the rights of more people than the Israeli cause does.  Not really believing in anything externally existential, the rapes and murders committed by Hamas don't really matter to them.

Robert LaFollette, Progressive of the early 20th Century.

How these categories bleed into each other, creating confusion.

In no small part due to the adoption of the French Revolution "right wing/left wing" political map, we tend to think of all political categories as existing as a scaled line, when in fact their world more closely resembles a box, or perhaps intersecting circles. This confuses people in general, including those who fit any one category.  For example, a lot of populists right now genuinely believe that they are conservatives, when in fact they are anything but.  Put another way, a lot of members of the Freedom Caucus would actually feel a lot more comfortable at a Bernie Sanders Coffee Klatch than they would at a William F. Buckley Society cocktail party, and by leagues.

To start with conservatives again, as conservatives apply Chesterton's Fence to all sorts of things as a philosophical principle, they may see populists who arise due to social stress as members of the same group.  To give an example, conservatives are rightly horrified by the gender nonsense that's going on right now, and more than that look back to male/female social roles that seem more solidly grounded in an existential other.  Populists take the same outward approach, but that's because the collective mass of them tells them that what is going on is weird.  Conservatives tend to support strong border and immigration policies as they believe in the principal of sovereignty, which has long existed, and they fear they value national culture and fear that uncontrolled immigration can damage it.  Populists tend to support the same, but because the people coming across the border are part of some mysterious other, who are almost not real people, or at least not equal people.

On other issues, however the differences begin to become more apparent.  Conservatives have always tended to support a strong national defense on sovereignty grounds, although that doesn't always take the same expression. Therefore, while conservatives of the 1930s were isolationist, they were also more than willing to build a strong Navy that projected power well beyond the United States.  In recent years, they've been strong proponents of collective security, often aggravating liberals by being willing to see authoritarian regimes as potential defense partners.  Populists are universally strict isolationist, as they feel anything beyond our borders doesn't matter.

Economically, conservatives generally tend to be fiscally restrained, but not unwilling to apply the American system where it will seem to work.  They believe in balanced finances.  Populists believe in balanced finances, but take a hyper stingy view of expenditures, virtually never seeing any expenditure as benefiting the populist mass. Therefore, funding for schools, something conservatives have long supported, becomes sort of an anathema to some populists.  Strong education in science, math and history as a conservative position degrades into limited education on the populist end, as they have watched populist raised children evolve into conservatives, liberals or progressives.

Western conservatives (but not European conservatives) had tended to be in favor of limiting government, as they basically feel, in a pessimistic sort of way, that people are generally better off figuring out things for themselves rather than having the government do it, or do things for them.  Populists are for a limited government as they hate the government, seeing it as the conspiratorial "they" that's out to destroy them and the culture they believe in.

For this reason, conservatives and populists confuse each other as being part of their ranks.  Populists continually claim they are conservatives, when in fact they are not.  Populists have been told that the Republican Party is the home of conservatives, which after 1912 it came to be, and as they believe that they are conservative, they believe anyone in the GOP who doesn't think the way they do is a Republican In Name Only.  Ironically, populists were in the Populist Party at the turn of the last century in the US, and then in the Democratic Party for decades.  What they are complaining about is the traditional positions of the Republican Party.

The same is true of liberals and progressives.

Liberals tend to be basically in favor of social liberty for the same reason that conservatives are in favor of limited government, they feel that people are best left to figure those things out for themselves and will ultimately figure the right thing out.  Progressives want to force a brave new social world view on everyone.  Liberals are more willing to use the government and government money for what they think the common good is than conservatives are, but progressives are willing to use both to force their view on what the good is on people who disagree with it.  Liberals (like many conservatives) are supportive of preservation of the common good, through public and environmental policies.  Progressives are as well, but they're more much willing to dictate an extra view on how people should generally behave.  Liberals, like conservatives, have traditionally been in favor of a strong national defense, but have been, since the Vietnam War, very careful about using it beyond our shores unless absolutely necessary.  Progressives, like populists, never see it as necessary as a rule.

Because liberals and progressives overlap, they confuse each other as being on the same scale on the left, which in fact, they're in different circles or boxes.  Liberal inability to see the distinction has been to the benefit of Progressives, who have come to increasingly dominate the Democratic Party in recent years.

Liberals and conservatives tend to have a lot in common, but not be able to realize it, in part because liberals feel they need to make camp with the progressives, and the conservatives do make camp with the progressives.

A warning

And here we get, in a way, to where we are now.

Conservatives in the modern West, and always in the English-speaking West, have democracy as a primary virtue, in spite of being aware that they're never in the majority, although the National Conservative movement, which is reactionary in the true sense of the word (it's reacting to something) is weakening that and looking to a pre Second World War model of European conservatism.

Liberals are always in favor of democracy.

Progressives and Populists really aren't quite often. Sometimes they are, but often they are not.

And Progressives and Populists only are in the forefront of politics in odd, and dangerous, times.

We are in odd and dangerous times.

Footnotes:

1.  Hindu conservatives, and there are millions, would say "gods", or some variant of it, we should note.

2. Evolutionary biology is almost an elemental fixture of conservatism.  Indeed, scientists who are evolutioanry biologist have been rebuked, in recent years, by progressives simply for stating scientific truths.

The 2024 Wyoming Legislative Session. Part 6. After the Party

 

The legislators are home, but the Governor is still acting on bills.

And the session can now start to be assessed.

March 12, 2024

The Governor vetoed the charter school grant authorization bill.

None of the election bills survived the session.

Joan Barron, in a Trib op ed run today, has noted how the Senate is now being influenced by the far right and becoming less congenial.

The Wyoming Educational Association, in the same issue, ran a full page age against Casper's Jeanette Ward, a member of the Freedom Caucus, which read:

Ward is from Illinois and relocated from there to Wyoming under the far right's persistent mythical belief that Wyoming's conservatism is the same as the Rust Belt's, although their influence in the state is making the latter true.

The same group voted against increasing funding for police retirement, and did it the day of a Sheridan policeman's funeral.

And it wanted to send unallocated ARPA funding back to the Federal government.

FOR RELEASE Immediately 

DATE March 11, 2024

CONTACT Ryan Frost, Legislative Information Officer

TO REACH 307.777.7881

2024 Budget Session Concludes

CHEYENNE - With the sound of the gavel, the Wyoming Legislature wrapped up the 2024 Budget Session on Friday at the State Capitol in Cheyenne. 

At the start of session, a total of 366 bills and resolutions were numbered for introduction. The Wyoming Legislature passed a total of 126 bills. Of the 107 pieces of legislation that were introduced in the Senate, 71 of those bills passed both the House and Senate. The House introduced 84 bills and 55 of those garnered the approval of both bodies. Sixty-one percent of committee bills passed both chambers, while 20 percent of the individually sponsored bills passed both bodies. Legislation that passed both houses has either been acted on or is waiting to be acted on by Gov. Mark Gordon. 

The Legislature also adopted the State's biennial budget on Friday, and the bill has been sent to the Governor for his consideration. He will have 15 days to consider line-item vetoes and sign the bill. The appropriations and transfers in the bill for the 2025-2026 fiscal biennium total $11 billion. Of this, $3.4 billion is from the General Fund, net of de-appropriations and including $170 million of discretionary transfers to savings. 

Both the House and Senate have addressed a broad range of issues affecting Wyoming residents and while some of these laws will take effect immediately, many will not go into effect until July 1 of this year. Lawmakers will begin their interim committee work in the coming weeks. The Legislature’s Management Council plans to meet and assign interim committee topics April 1. Wyoming’s Sixty-Eighth Legislature will convene next year on Jan. 14 for the 2025 General Session.

The Wyoming Legislature encourages the public to participate in interim activities. The public can use the Legislature's website at www.wyoleg.gov to find information about interim legislative committees, including live video streams of committee meetings, committee rosters, dates and locations of interim meetings, and minutes from those meetings. The website also provides a free email subscription service for all interim committee information. -END-  

March 13, 2024

Ward was the subject of a second major ad in the Trib.

Ward also drew a lengthy letter to the Editor in the Trib.  Usually I don't post those, but I will here as this is interesting.

Ward wasting time with culture wars

Representative Jeanette Ward,

House District 57, has been doing a poor job of representing her constituents and listening to their needs. She has voted against numerous bills that would have helped Wyoming citizens and instead wasted valuable time during the legislative session touting culture war issues. House Bill 50, the “What is a Woman” act, is a prime example of this. During a budget session the legislature has 20 days to pass a budget. That is literally the only job that legislators have during the budget session. It takes a 2/3 majority to get a non-budget bill to the floor for debate. Knowing this, Representative Ward introduced a bill that wasted time and resources and was completely unnecessary. That bill rightly died because it failed introduction.

This session, she also voted against bills that committees had spent many hours considering during the interim period, which was disrespectful to their work and slowed down the legislative process. She voted against funding the 988 suicide hotline even though Wyoming has one of the highest suicide rates in the nation, literally voting against saving lives. Last session she voted against most of the bills that would have helped families and disadvantaged Wyoming citizens, including Medicare for Moms, which helps low-income women provide for their babies. Fortunately, other legislators understood the issue and the bill passed. Representative Ward is not interested in helping Wyoming’s most vulnerable citizens, she would rather propose bills that are solutions looking for problems.

This is not acceptable. House District 57 deserves a legislator who listens to constituents, focuses her time on the budget during a budget session, and understands what genuine issues matter to Wyoming. She is not it. We need someone who has solutions to Wyoming problems, not someone who fans the flames of culture wars. Voters need to remember this on election day.

Judy Trohkimoinen,

Casper

This would suggest that perhaps there's a rising effort against Ward, who was endorsed by her predecessor, now Secretary of State Gray, because of her far right views, even though she had next to no connection with the state when she arrived, or people are getting tired of her.  

In some ways, this reflects a rising feature of Wyoming's politics in which the old Party is beginning to react more strongly to the Trump Party.

March 15, 2024

Governor Gordon Signs Bills That Help Reduce Housing Costs, Protect Critical Infrastructure

 

CHEYENNE, Wyo. – Governor Mark Gordon signed two bills today, one that helps protect key infrastructure in Wyoming from foreign adversaries, and the other that lowers the cost of constructing housing

SF0077 - Homeland defense-infrastructure reporting and investigating requires the state to annually identify “critical infrastructure zones”.  Any property transactions within those zones will be shared among the county clerks, the Wyoming Office of Homeland Security and the Wyoming Division of Criminal Investigation. Those agencies will then determine if the transaction  involves a foreign adversary or a state sponsor of terrorism that could pose a threat to national or state security or to critical infrastructure.

“Our nation has never faced graver threats from adversaries both foreign and domestic,” Governor Gordon said. “Protection of Wyoming infrastructure and identifying potential threats to our state or national security must be among our highest priorities. I want to thank sponsor Senator Tara Nethercott, whose experience and insight were invaluable in the drafting and passage of this bill. It is imperative that we protect our precious property rights, while we also ensure we are aware of any potential threats within our state’s borders.”

Senate File 114 - Contractor licenses-reciprocal recognition requirements require local governments in Wyoming to recognize contractor licenses issued by a Wyoming county, city or town. This ensures that qualified contractors don’t have to go through additional, time-consuming and expensive licensing requirements when working in Wyoming communities. The bill emerged from the interim work of the Regulatory Reduction Task Force, which explored a range of ideas that could help expand housing opportunities for Wyoming’s essential workforce. The Task Force identified a patchwork of state and local licensing requirements that contributed to additional construction costs, which were then passed along to Wyoming home buyers. 

“My administration has been passionate in reducing red tape, and while there is certainly more work to be done in addressing Wyoming’s housing shortage, this new law is a small step towards streamlining unnecessarily redundant and costly requirements,” Governor Gordon said.

Both bills are effective July 1, 2024. 

March 15, cont:

Governor Gordon Vetoes Bills to Prevent Legislature From Overstepping its Authority and Creating Confusion for the Public

 

CHEYENNE, Wyo. – Governor Mark Gordon took action on 18 bills today, vetoing one bill that encroaches on the separation of powers between the executive and legislative branches, and one that could create confusion for consumers, meat processors and producers.

SF0013 - Federal land use plans - legal actions authorized would have duplicated funding for legal actions by the State and have been unconstitutional. The bill authorized the Legislature to take legal action against the federal government, and provided a whopping $75 million in borrowing authority for it to do so. In his veto letter, the Governor lambasted the bill as a “clear attempt to cross, blur and trample the line of separation between our equal, but separate, branches of government.” 

Governor Gordon criticized the bill as not being fiscally conservative, pointing out that $75 million represents 67 percent of the Attorney General’s office biennial budget. He said that the bill would only “enable duplicative Legislative litigation safaris that would be counterproductive and contrary to Wyoming’s well established practice of cooperation between branches.”

The Governor also expressed concern about the confusion that would be created in the courts over who represents Wyoming. It is the Executive branch that “is uniquely designed to provide one voice when it is necessary,” he wrote.

“At best, competing litigation efforts would only serve to confuse courts as to who represents the State of Wyoming, and at worst it would enable frivolous and political pursuits,” the Governor wrote. 

The Governor also vetoed SF0103 - Wyoming PRIME Act, which as a “trigger” bill, would only become effective if the federal PRIME Act is passed by Congress. The Governor noted that while he is supportive of food freedom legislation, the Wyoming PRIME Act could create confusion among consumers, meat processors and livestock producers. Early media reports demonstrate the potential confusion created by the bill. Currently, an attempt to use the provisions of SF0103 by Wyoming producers before the federal PRIME Act is passed by Congress would put them at risk of fines and license revocation, and imperil Wyoming’s primacy for its meat and poultry inspection program. Finally, if the federal PRIME Act is passed by Congress, but is amended during that process, Wyoming statute would likely need to be changed to conform, which could unnecessarily delay state implementation.

The Governor’s veto letters are attached and may be found on the Bills page of the Governor’s website. 

Governor Gordon signed the following bills today: 

SEA0034 SF0014 State fair board-powers and responsibilities.

SEA0035 SF0113 Light and high profile vehicle closures-2.

SEA0039 SF0096 Trusts and bank assets in bankruptcy-clarification.

SEA0040 SF0080 Solid waste management-definition amendments.

SEA0043 SF0053 Sixth judicial district-number of judges

SEA0046 SF0026 Special district vacancies

SEA0047 SF0035 Public records-DOC investigations.

SEA0053 SF0023 Public utilities-energy resource procurement.

SEA0059 SF0100 Prompt payment of insurance claims.

SEA0063 SF0083 Revisor's bill.

SEA0064 SF0090 State-managed local government equity investment pool.

SEA0069 SF0042 Low-carbon reliable energy standards-amendments.

HEA0043 HB0126 Child care is a residential use of property.

HEA0046 HB0058 Forensic genetic genealogy pilot program.

HEA0047 HB0029 Cold case database and investigations.

HEA0051 HB0138 State funds-pool A participation and fund limits.

-END-

March 16, 2024

After a break of one day, the WEA resumbed its advertisements on Jeanette Ward.

March 19, 2024

After a hiatus of several days, the WEA resumed its ad campaign against Jeaette Ward.

Some action occured on various bills on the Governor's desk yesterday:

Governor Gordon Signs Five Bills, Vetoes Bill that Would Impact Management and Use of State Lands

 

CHEYENNE, Wyo. – Governor Mark Gordon took action on six bills today, signing five bills into law. The Governor vetoed one bill that would limit Wyoming’s ability to generate revenue from state lands and take management and decision-making authority away from the state. 

SF0044 - Limited mining operations-amendments as originally introduced and worked by the Minerals, Business and Economic Development committee intended to address existing bonding deficiencies for issuing permits for Limited Mining Operations (LMOs). However, late amendments to the bill specifically targeted development of an exploratory license that had been previously granted for sections of state lands southwest of Casper. 

In his veto letter, Governor Gordon said that the amended bill would not change the particular circumstances of that gravel operation, and there is not a pending application for a LMO from that operation. However, the bill would have had constitutional consequences as to how state lands are managed to help fund schools. These impacts included making state lands uncompetitive due to an increased setback requirement, and a requirement for counties to review and issue a conditional use permit, even though not all counties require one. 

“Statutory changes are not the proper place to address specific concerns for individual operations,” the Governor wrote. “While Wyoming seeks to manage her state lands cooperatively with counties and their land use plans, the state is not constrained by them. State lands and minerals are important to our state’s economic well-being and need to be treated the same as other lands in the state.”

Governor Gordon encouraged the Joint Minerals Committee to review the original bill in the upcoming general session and examine ways to adequately address existing concerns over limited mining operations on state lands. The Governor also plans to take up the topic of mining operations on state lands at the April State Board of Land Commissioners Meeting.

The Governor's veto letter is attached and may be found here. Governor also signed five bills today:

SEA0031 SF0074 Special districts-reversal of dissolution for noncompliance.

SEA0032 SF0036 Uniform Child Abduction Prevention Act.

SEA0036 SF0123 Minor name changes

SEA0044 SF0052 Wyoming Stable Token Act - amendments

SEA0045 SF0027 Special district bond elections exception

The full list of bills the Governor has taken action on during the 2024 Legislative Session can be found on the Governor's website.

-END-

• Veto of SF0044_Enrolled Act No. 62 Limited mining operations-amendments.pdf

On the veto:

March 22, 2024.

 Governor Signs Bills Creating Wyoming Adult Hearing Aid Program and Supporting Early Childhood Centers

 

CHEYENNE, Wyo. – Governor Mark Gordon signed seven bills into law today, including a bill that creates a hearing aid program for low-income adults and a bill that provides additional resources for early childhood centers that serve children with disabilities.

SF0057 - Wyoming adult hearing aid program creates a hearing aid program for eligible low-income adults with hearing impairment. The bill emerged from meetings bill sponsor Senator Dan Furphy had with members of the Wyoming deaf community. It allows severely hearing-impaired adults who meet income requirements to receive a pair of custom hearing aids.

The Governor also signed SF0019 - Developmental preschool funding  which modifies the per-child amounts used to calculate payments to early childhood centers and preschools that serve children with disabilities. The increase in funding will help support these centers and preschools, which families use to access critically needed services for children with developmental disabilities. 

The Governor also issued a line-item veto on the following bill to address a technical error. Click on the bill number for the Governor’s letter:

SEA0071 SF0075 Omnibus water bill-construction.

The Governor allowed the following bill to go into law without his signature. Click on the bill number for the Governor’s letter:

SEA0065 SF0041 Banking division-classification and salary exemptions.

The Governor also signed the following bills today:

SEA0050 SF0047 Law enforcement retirement-contributions.

SEA0051 SF0024 Public service commission-integrated resource plans.

HEA0048 HB0104 Omnibus water bill-planning.

-END-

Governor Gordon Signs Four Bills Expanding and Extending Property Tax Relief 

 

CHEYENNE, Wyo. – Reflecting his call for fair and equitable property tax relief made in his State of the State speech, Governor Mark Gordon signed four bills today that will reduce property taxes to those Wyoming residents who need it most.

The Governor signed HB0003 - Property tax exemption for long-term homeowners; HB0045 - Property tax exemption-residential structures and land; and SF0089 - Veterans ad valorem exemption-amount. House Bill 3 provides an exemption of 50% of a property’s value for primary residence homeowners if the primary owner of the residence or their spouse is 65 or older and has paid property taxes in the state for 25 years or more. House Bill 45 puts a 4% cap on year-to-year property tax increases on residential structures and land, while Senate File 89 doubles the veterans tax exemption from $3,000 to $6,000 of assessed value. 

“I am happy to sign this package of legislation, which provides targeted relief to taxpayers most impacted by increasing valuations, while ensuring our counties and schools are able to continue to provide the services our residents rely on,” Governor Gordon said. “There was an identified need, and this legislature responded to that.”

Governor Gordon exercised his line-item veto authority on HB0004 - Property tax refund program, removing the highest income category from the program. In his letter explaining the line-item, the Governor said the bill brings expanded and needed relief, but expressed concern that the $20 million appropriated by the Legislature would be insufficient to fund the program if that highest income category was included.

“I want to thank the Legislature for answering the call and funding an expansion of this program, which helped more than 9,000 Wyoming families last year,” Governor Gordon said.

The Governor vetoed SF0054 - Homeowner tax exemption, expressing concern that the exemption was not targeted and jeopardized the financial stability of the state and counties. It  represented, “a socialistic type of wealth transfer, mostly from the energy sector, to Wyoming homeowners.” The backfill of lost local tax revenue to local school districts, cities, towns, counties and special districts would likely cost the state more than $220 million for the biennium, the Governor wrote.  

“The Bidenomic-type of ‘tax relief' in this bill is what I would expect from Washington, D.C. liberals, not conservative Wyoming legislators,” the Governor added. “It is a temporary relief measure that could lead to budget shortfalls, and will ultimately be paid for by raising taxes on our children.”

Governor Gordon issued a line-item veto to HB0166 - Education savings accounts-1 to address constitutional concerns over the use of state funds. The bill establishes an education savings account program that provides funding to parents for their children's education expenses, ranging from pre-kindergarten through age 21. The Governor’s line item veto preserves funding for those students whose household income is at or below 150% of the federal poverty level. 

“While the intent to support education and parent choice is commendable, my analysis revealed practical and constitutional complications within the bill’s provisions,” the Governor wrote in his letter. Citing his desire to see the program ultimately succeed, the Governor said he was prepared to press these issues as they relate to religious societies or institutions. 

“By proceeding carefully, with a clear understanding of both the benefits and challenges associated with education savings accounts, we can work towards a system that enhances parental choice while maintaining the integrity and effectiveness of our public education system,” he wrote. 

Governor Gordon also vetoed SF0067 - Public employee retirement plan-contributions. The Governor said the bill’s effect would be to reduce the take-home pay of state employees at a time when inflation eats away at the purchasing power of all Wyoming families.

Governor Gordon allowed the following bills to go into law without his signature:

HEA0055 HB0092 Protection of parental rights.

SEA0055 SF0006 Nursing home administrators-temporary licenses.

The Governor signed the following bills today:

HEA0044 HB0003 Property tax exemption for long-term homeowners.

SEA0061 SF0089 Veterans ad valorem exemption-amount.

HEA0054 HB0045 Property tax exemption-residential structures and land.

The Governor’s letters addressing his vetos and the bills he allowed to go into law without his signature, along with the full list of bills he has taken action on during the 2024 Legislative Session can be found on the Bills page of the Governor's website.

-END-

Governor Signs Bill Outlawing Gender Reassignment Procedures for Children

 Governor Vetoes Abortion Bill While State Defends Current Ban in Court

 

CHEYENNE, Wyo. –Governor Gordon signed SF0099 - Children gender change prohibition today, which bans physicians from performing procedures for children related to gender transitioning and gender reassignment.

“I signed SF99 because I support the protections this bill includes for children, however it is my belief that the government is straying into the personal affairs of families” Governor Gordon said. “Our legislature needs to sort out its intentions with regard to parental rights. While it inserts governmental prerogative in some places, it affirms parental rights in others.”

The Governor noted that the Legislature passed two bills during the recent session reinforcing parental rights in education. 

With regard to House Bill 0148- Regulation of Abortions , as initially proposed, would have properly regulated surgical abortion clinics in Wyoming. However amendments to the bill complicated its purpose, making it vulnerable to legal challenges. Wyoming is currently vigorously defending laws that already prohibit surgical and chemical abortions

“With the judge certifying these cases to the Wyoming Supreme Court, the state is closer than ever to a decision on the constitutionality of abortion in Wyoming,’ Governor Gordon said. “It is my opinion that HB148, as amended, had the potential to further delay the resolution of this critical issue for the unborn. The potential of starting over on a new course of legal arguments would in my mind be derelict, and would have only sacrificed additional unborn lives in Wyoming.”

To avoid further delaying a decision, Governor Gordon has vetoed HB 148. In his veto letter, the Governor points out that since the courts have stayed enforcement of the state’s previous abortion ban, the number of abortions taking place in Wyoming has continued to increase.

The Governor’s veto letter for HB 148 is attached and may be found here.

Governor Gordon also happily signed HB0090 - Newborn child safe havens-age of child today. The bill changes the relinquishment age that a child may be left with a safe haven provider at no penalty to the parent from 14 days or younger to 60 days.

The full list of bills the Governor has taken action on during the 2024 Legislative Session can be found on the Governor's website.

-END-

• doc20240322111200046639.pdf

March 23, 2024

Wyoming Legislature's Presiding Officers Issue Statement Regarding Gubernatorial Vetoes

CHEYENNE - Senate President Ogden Driskill and Speaker of the House Albert Sommers issue the following statement regarding Gov. Mark Gordon's veto of Senate File 0054: 

“As the Presiding Officers of the Wyoming Senate and House of Representatives, we have been closely monitoring the vetoes issued by Governor Gordon of bills passed during the 2024 Budget Session. We have become increasingly concerned about the Governor’s disregard for the will of the people’s representatives and the legislation we have passed. Our concern was further heightened last night by the veto of Senate File 54, which provided all residents of Wyoming with substantial property tax relief.  

“Senate File 54 would have provided a reduction of 25% of the tax burden for every homeowner in Wyoming up to the first $2 million dollars of assessed value for a residential property for the next two years. We are extremely disappointed that Governor Gordon would characterize this relief from skyrocketing property taxes as a giveaway to Wyoming citizens. All Wyoming homeowners deserve property tax relief after double digit tax increases the past two years. Despite the Governor trying to characterize this bill as liberal spending, he forgets that cutting taxes is a conservative value. Time limited tax relief is both conservative and prudent.

"After the Governor's veto of Senate File 54, the Legislature cannot take any action to effectuate tax relief in time for implementation in fiscal year 2024. We will again have our Joint Revenue Committee continue to develop meaningful tax relief for all Wyoming residents, like they did during the 2024 interim, for introduction at the 2025 General Session." - END - 

• Presiding Officers Issue Statement on Gubernatorial Veto of SF54_03.22.24.pdf

 

Governor Gordon Signs Four Bills Supporting the Second Amendment

Governor Vetoes Bill to Repeal Gun Free Zones 

CHEYENNE, Wyo. –  Governor Mark Gordon signed four bills today that strengthen Wyoming’s status as a Second-Amendment friendly state. The Governor signed SF0073 - Concealed firearms-permit eligibility, SF0105 - Wyoming Second Amendment Financial Privacy Act, SF0109 - Prohibit Red Flag Gun Seizure Act., and SF0086 - School safety and security-funding. 

SF0105 protects the privacy and sensitive financial information of people purchasing firearms, firearms parts, or ammunition in Wyoming by prohibiting credit card processors from using firearms or firearm-related merchant category codes. It also prohibits government or private entities from keeping any registry of privately-owned firearms or the owners of those firearms created or maintained through the use of a firearms code.

SF0109 prohibits red flag gun laws from being enforced or implemented in Wyoming, while SF0073 amends the concealed carry permit regulations to make those who have had their firearms rights restored, eligible. SF0086 creates an account to reimburse school districts for costs related to possession of firearms on school property by school district employees.

The Governor vetoed HB0125 - Repeal gun free zones and preemption amendments due to concerns that HB0125 exceeds the separation of powers embodied in Article 2 of our Wyoming Constitution. If the bill were enacted, any specific policy, further regulation, or clarification of the law could only be implemented by the Legislature. 

“House Bill 125/Enrolled Act No. 49, erodes historic local control norms by giving sole authority to the Legislature to micromanage a constitutionally protected right,” Governor Gordon wrote in his veto letter. “Any further clarification of the law, if this bill were enacted, would augment the Legislature’s reach into local firearms regulation.”

The Governor noted the bill would require each state facility, such as the University of Wyoming, Wyoming State Hospital, or the Wyoming Boys School, to receive legislative approval to restrict carrying firearms, or even to set policies as practical as proper weapon storage. It would also repeal the statute that has allowed school districts to establish specific policies allowing concealed carry in their districts.

“Every piece of legislation must stand for critical review, particularly those affecting our constitutional rights,” the Governor wrote. “As delivered to my desk, this bill lacks sufficient review and debate.  A bill covering such a sensitive topic does not lend itself to successive tweaks to correct flaws, and therefore I believe the Legislature should be open to debating and fully working this bill through its established processes.”

The Governor concluded he will direct the State Building Commission to begin a process to reconsider rules to allow concealed carry permit holders to exercise their rights within the Capitol and other appropriate state facilities. That process will involve significant public input.

The Governor’s veto letter is attached and may be found here.

-END-

Governor Gordon Signs Conservative Budget that Lays Foundation for Wyoming’s Future

Exercises line-item veto authority to focus on needs and functionality 

CHEYENNE, Wyo. –Governor Gordon thanked the 67th Legislature and has signed HB0001, punctuating the Legislative Session with a conservative, true biennial budget that achieves his goal of advancing Wyoming. The final budget prioritizes improving government services for citizens, promoting economic growth, bettering the quality of life for families who live and work in the state, as well as investing and saving for the future. 

“This budget addresses our challenges and positions Wyoming for a prosperous future,” Governor Gordon said. “We are fighting federal overreach, advancing our industries, providing practical property tax relief, ensuring adequate funding for our schools, counties, and communities and providing the services Wyoming residents expect.” 

The budget includes numerous priorities the Governor outlined in his State of the State speech, including:

• Fulfilling standard budgets and prudent requests from state agencies.
• Funding the 988 suicide prevention hotline and expanding capacity to add text and chat services. 
• Investing in Wyoming Innovation Partnership initiative to sustain programs for workforce development and economic growth.
• Extending energy matching funds to ensure Wyoming’s legacy industries remain competitive and support for approaches to use and store carbon dioxide
• Allocating more than $300 million for the construction of K-12 schools.
• Adding resources to protect critical infrastructure. 
• Supporting community mental health centers and youth services mental health providers.
• Directing $20 million for property tax relief for Wyoming homeowners.
• Ensuring safe drinking water and guarding against water pollution.
• Increased Wyoming’s savings to prevent future tax increases.

Governor Gordon issued a number of line-item vetoes within the budget, which are fully detailed in his letter, namely to uphold separation of powers, executive authority, and limiting the scope of the bill to properly fund government. In his line-item veto letter, which details each change, the Governor expressed dismay with the curious approach the legislature took to building the budget – one that almost jeopardized state agency operations and other important state needs. 

“Last year in my budget veto letter, I congratulated both chambers on passing a budget in record time – all while increasing transparency. It is unfortunate this session did not follow suit,” Governor Gordon wrote. “Over 300 amendments to this one bill, some of which were introduced to save legislation that failed earlier in the session, almost caused the budget bill to share the same fate.” 

The Governor left intact a budget amendment authorizing the sale of the “Kelly Parcel”, a square mile of school trust property in Teton County, for no less than $100 million with specific conditions relating to the Rock Springs RMP. 

The Governor’s letter and a full version of the budget complete with the Governor’s line item vetoes is available here.

-END-

cont:

Oh. . . great.

Wyoming Legislators Call For Special Session After Latest Round Of Gordon Vetoes

Well, not going to happen, and they won't override them if it does, and with at least one of them, the Wyoming Supreme Court would strike it down.

And we'll not go on to a new installment.

Last Prior Edition:

The 2024 Wyoming Legislative Session. Part 5. Divisive and Mean.