Volume Three, already?
Yes, and there's so much more to go.
Let's summarize where we're at. We only the opening day for filings, so some names are now showing up that weren't there before.
United States Senate
John Barrasso, Republican incumbent and odds on favorite.
John Holtz, Republican. Holtz is a lawyer from Laramie. He's a new entry to the field. I don't know anything about him.
David Dodson, a Republican businessman located in Teton County who is running as an independent and who is very well funded. He's giving away free caps and has been running a grumpy television campaign.
Gary Trauner, a Democratic businessman who must leap for glee every time he sees one of Dodson's ads.
United States House of Representatives
Liz Cheney. Republican incumbent who won due to a three way race taking out two strong Republican contenders and whose election has inspired a certain belief that loose connections with the state won't be held against a candidate.
Rod Miller, former rancher, wild looking dude, and resident of Buford Wyoming.
Travis Helm, immigration attorney running as a Democrat.
Mark Harvey, retired U.S. Department of Transportation employee from Cody running as a Democrat who came out for gun control and a national health care system as soon as he announced, thereby dooming his campaign from the onset.
Governor
Sam Galeotos, Republican businessman running a strong campaign.
Mark Gordon, Wyoming State Treasurer and, according to the pundits, the odds on favorite. Republican. He hasn't run a very impressive campaign so far.
Harriet Hageman, attorney at law and on the Wyoming Liberty Group libertarian end of things. Republican.
Bill Dahlin, Republican, businessman whose campaign has been extremely quiet.
Foster Friess. Wealthy Republican running an unexpected campaign and who may inject a lot of money in the campaign to the potential benefit of, mostly, Mary Throne, who could use the distraction that would create.
Taylor Haynes, retired physician and now a perennial candidate of the radical Tea Party variety. Republican.
Mary Throne. Democratic lawyer from Sheridan who up until now has the Democratic field to herself. The unfortunate entry of another Democrat means she'll have to campaign and this may mean that the difference between the Democrats and the Republicans will be in focus.
Kenneth R. Casner, Democrat from Carbon County and a new entry into the race. His entry will end up hurting Democratic chances in the general election if he mounts a serious campaign.
Rex Rammell, veterinarian and also perennial candidate and even more radical Tea Party candidate running as a member of the Constitution Party.
Secretary of State
Edward Buchanan. Republican incumbent, but only recently so.
Leland Christensen had been a candidate for this position but he's apparently dropped out in favor of running for Treasurer.
James W. Byrd. Well known Democrat from Cheyenne whose mother was an even more well known and long serving Democrat from Cheyenne.
Edward Buchanan. Republican incumbent, but only recently so.
Leland Christensen had been a candidate for this position but he's apparently dropped out in favor of running for Treasurer.
James W. Byrd. Well known Democrat from Cheyenne whose mother was an even more well known and long serving Democrat from Cheyenne.
State Auditor
Kristi Racines. Republican
Nathan Winters. Republican
Jeff Dockter. Democrat.
Kristi Racines. Republican
Nathan Winters. Republican
Jeff Dockter. Democrat.
State Treasurer
Curt Meier. Republican
Leland Christensen, Republican
Curt Meier. Republican
Leland Christensen, Republican
Superintendent of Public Instruction
Jillian Balow. Republican.
Much more to follow.
May 24, 2018
Yesterday, in checking Facebook, I hit upon a Mark Gordon Facebook ad which touts his support for the Second Amendment.
This is a worthless ad. We know that all the candidates who are serious are going to claim they're ardent supporters of the Second Amendment.
What I'd like to know is Mark Gordon's position on public lands. So I emailed his campaign. His campaign manager, the same manager Mead had formerly, emailed me that Mark would be emailing me right back. If he does, I'll let you know what he has to say. If he doesn't email back, I'll email him back and let you know that. In emailing him, by the way, I just sent a flat email without hinting at what my opinion is.
That's going to be my approach this year. I generally don't bother politicians much but starting last year I did a bit and this year I'm going to more so. When I see them, I'm going to ask them the things that matter to me and then flat out say whether or not I like their answer to their faces so they can more than get a bit of feedback.
I also emailed Sam Galeotos. I haven't heard back from him either.
Those were the only two I emailed as amongst the serious candidates, those are the only two whose position I don't know or can't guess.
And speaking of a candidate whose position on this I now know for sure, there's Republican Rod Miller who is running in the GOP primary for Congress against Liz Cheney. He's told us exactly what he thinks.
Miller Video on Public lands
Millers chances are really poor as he's running against an incumbent. But on this he's hit the nail on the head for a lot of people. Reading his website he probably fits the view of a lot of Wyomingites on a lot of things, but he's also in the category of candidate who is problematic for social issue voters, which is unfortunate. He's implicitly in favor of the current status on abortion, for example, which drops him out of consideration for a lot of voters who would otherwise probably go for him but for that, or at least would consider doing so. And he's for the legalization of marijuana which is likely such a non issue in Wyoming that I don't know why a Congressional candidate would even state a position on it, given that it can only irritate those who are against that position.
May 24, 2018, part II
It turns out that Mark Gordon has in fact made a statement about public lands, to a sportsman's group that flat out asked him. Here's what he wrote back to them.
Not very impressive.
Basically a statement like this says as little as possible so as to hopefully not anger anyone. It suggest there'd be a lot of problems (true) and that it would be unconstitutional under the Wyoming constitution (true) and expensive (true) but that doesn't mean he's against it.
He also takes the approach that maybe smaller parcels are okay and that transferring management is a good idea. There's no real reason to believe that transferring management wouldn't be a burden to the state and expensive to users of public lands. Indeed, the state is already more restrictive than the Federal government.
I'm not a single issue voter (indeed, I'll have a post on that) but I"m not impressed. This isn't what most Wyomingites want and this goes a long ways toward defining my views on Gordon.
Mary Throne, it turns out, has also been public in her views. She's flat out said that the public lands should be kept public.
I've noted it here before, but this may be one of the rare instances in which the Democrat can pull in the most votes. Throne has worked as a lawyer in oil and gas matter so she's familiar with that aspect of the state's economy. And she's in favor of public lands.
So what about Galeotos? Turns out that he has made a statement as well, to a newspaper in Sweetwater County. What he had to say was:
Not that this decides everything. But depending where other chips fall, Gordon's views may very well push him off the table for sportsmen and real local ranchers, who need to use the public lands.
May 25, 2018
Sam Galeotos was in Casper yesterday. While here in the state's second largest city (but one in which the population is declining), which has traditionally looked heavily towards the petroleum industry for its economy, Galeotos announced the assembly of his business advisory committee.
Galeotos deserves a lot of credit for taking a really distinct approach in this campaign. Almost all of the GOP candidates have taken a highly traditional, for Wyoming, approach to Wyoming's boom and bust economy. While politicians, particularly Republican politicians, like to speak of Wyoming's economy being a "three legged stool" (which I think to be a rather inaccurate analogy), its generally posed in such a way that one of those legs is an oak post, the extractive industries, while the rest are pine dolls. I'm sure that Galeotos isn't an opponent of the mineral industries, but he's emphasizing high tech with which he has a lot of experience.
I have no idea on whether Galeotos' business ideas for the state's economy are correct or not. I have my real doubts, quite frankly. But nonetheless he deserves credit for not simply approach the real problem of Wyoming's cyclical economy with the suggestion that the entire solution is to aid the mineral industries. The mineral industries are so tied into a global economy that the concepts that are touted out about what helps or hurt that industry tend to be rather naive. Suggestions, such as Hageman has made, that its all about regulation simply fail to acknowledge that the health of coal have a lot more to do about things like the Pacific coast phasing out coal generated power from their grid, or power plants in Texas switching to cheaper, more efficient, and less technologically temperamental natural gas or that the price of oil has more to do with events in Tehran and Baghdad than they do in Bad Water.
Speaking of businessmen, megabucks candidate Foster Friess has commenced advertising on television. In his advertisements he's sporting a black cowboy hat. It may be just me, but as a member of the demographic that actually wears such hats in a working role, and has a working cowboy hat that's covered with dried cow shit, I really take offense at such posing. He notes he's a "conservative businessman". Dressing like a cowboy isn't going to fool anyone that he came up here on the Texas Trail or something.
Galeotos, by the way, is noting that he's also a conservative businessman, which is no doubt correct. He's emphasizing his other conservative credentials, such as that he is pro life. Right now he really stands apart from the GOP crowd, however. He's a Wyoming native whose family goes back a couple of generations in the state. Unlike a lot of the multiple generation Wyoming candidates, however, his family have always been in business, having originally been Greek immigrants who came over and purchased the ice cream shop they worked in, which later became a tavern. Galeotos has real business credentials. He's pro Second Amendment like every other candidate, but he's not anti public lands like every other GOP candidate is or fears not being. He may be a lot more like most Wyoming voters than any other Republican running.
May 27, 2018
The Tribune today had an article in which it summarized its interviews of the major Gubernatorial candidates positions on coal. Throne, Hageman, Gordon and Galeotos were interviewed.
All the candidates are "pro coal", according to the Tribune, but none of them said the exact same thing. It was quite interesting for that reason.
Throne was unique in admitting that she believes that climate science indicates that human caused global warming is real. I'll give her a lot of credit for this because I frankly think most, but not all, well educated people now concede that, although they may not concede the degree or what should be done. Indeed, I'm pretty sure that Governor Mead believes in it but feels that political considerations in the state prevent him from saying that. And my guess is that Gordon and Galeotos, and Dahlin, likewise agree that it's a real thing and a real concern. Throne has the guts to admit her position which shows some real honesty, although it may cost her votes at the ballot box.
Indeed Throne flat out criticized the entire debate over whether global warming was real or not, within the state, by saying that the debate had wasted a lot of time that could have been used to benefit alternative sustainable uses for coal. That's a really bold statement but one that deserves real credit for being made as it shows she's willing to take hits but to deliver them back on an issue that has gone the way she suggests it has in Wyoming.
Anyhow, Throne isn't anti coal, but feels that research needs to be done on what market coal can fulfill in a world increasingly hostile to the burning of it. She's for researching for new sustainable uses for coal in a world that's become hostile to it.
In stark contrast Hageman is quoted as saying that she doesn't believe in global warming and that its a political issue and not an environmental issue, taking the very type of position that Throne criticized. Hageman is for supporting coal, but the paper didn't relate what that meant.
The problem with this view is that it really doesn't matter what the Governor of Wyoming thinks about the truth or not of global warming. That debate has largely moved on and the market is killing the industry off slowly. Simply denying the accuracy of the position is a little King Canute like. Hageman's random comment about why doesn't the state do something along the lines of the advertising it does for tourism for coal probably wasn't serious (and would be a rather odd view given her libertarian economic views), but it shows how fixed her position is.
Before moving on, one thing also in the paper today is a letter by one female Cheyenne lawyer defending Hageman against the accusations by Cheyenne lawyer Larry Wolfe that characterized her as an amateur who should not be elected. Things must be a little testy in the Laramie County Bar right now. Anyhow, the letter seemed to me to be one of those examples of being careful who you get your help from as it boiled down to the argument that as she's a lawyer, she knows government stuff, an argument that doesn't really sit well with everyone. Interestingly, the same argument, if it is convincing, applies to Throne as well except that her practice might arguably be at least as helpful for her role as Governor or would be no less advantageous, if it is, to that role.
Anyhow, noting Hageman's position above the most developed, as explained by the Tribune, was Gordon's.
Gordon is spending a lot of time it seems making nuanced statements which suggests that he has pretty developed opinions on a lot of things but he's afraid to say what they really are as he doesn't want to offend anyone. Reading his statement to the Trib, if you read between the lines, what he's saying is that coal is going into the dumper and won't recover as it can't compete with natural gas and, no matter what Wyomingites believe about global warming, the views elsewhere are moving in one direction that that is contributing to an unarrestable decline in coal. In those views, quite frankly, he's highly like to be right.
Gordon spends a lot of time emphasizing his occupation of ranching but he's also an East coast prep school and university educated businessman with a diverse background. He's been around and likely knows a lot more on various topics than he's willing to admit to knowing, as if he did, it makes him look like an east coast intellectual and that would cut against him here. In this area, however, that's leaking through a bit, and to his credit. He's capable rather obviously of reading the tea leaves which it seems that a candidate like Hageman won't look at. Gordon's arguing for looking at transportation systems for the transport of coal to expand Wyoming coal's market, but didn't say much to the Tribune beyond that. That's probably a rational enough approach.
Galeotos was more "bullish", to use the Tribune's term, on coal's future and not surprisingly was looking to high tech to save coal as well as pushing the market. He'd continue to back the state's extremely expensive research into clean coal. Given his tech background, that's not surprising. He was also in favor of trying to boost the market while a perceived ally is in the White House.
May 31, 2018
Mark Gordon replied to my query about public lands by letter, which I give him credit for.
His letter was mostly the same letter as that one set out above with some additions. So he doesn't really come to a real position in it. He does note that he values public lands and notes how his wife's family depended upon them for recreation when she was growing up, but otherwise the content is much the same.
Well, that has to leave people who have strong views on keeping the public lands public a little uneasy. Gordon is trying to split the middle and not really say much, as he clearly doesn't want to offend any one constituency. That might be acting like a good politician, but it's not comforting for those who care about the issue. I know its clarifying my views about his candidacy.
On other topics, the Tribune ran an article in which they'd asked all of the candidates, including the really extreme ones, what they thought of the recent proposals to allow towns and cities to levy more in the way of taxes directly. It's a really interesting issue for a lot of reasons, one being that it gets to the topic of municipal home rule. The GOP has been huge in recent years about local control, so logic would have it that they'd be in favor of local control for taxation.
Not so much, according to the answers.
Or rather, no really clear position.
Gordon and Freiss were in favor of it. They were the only ones. Bizarrely, Rex Rammel, the Constitution Party candidate who wants to drive the Federal government out of the state on this and that in the name of state control, is opposed to it as he fears the local governments would raise taxes. Maybe they would, but you'd think a guy whose political philosophy is based on the local would be all for local control. Apparently not.
Bill Dahlin was a qualified yes. He'd be in favor of it, but only if it went to the local voters.
Hageman flatly stated that she didn't think she could answer the question, finding it too abstract. Galeotos and Throne both indicated they'd need to study the matter more.
I think the overall interesting nature of it is that it collides with what most candidates want to say about taxation. . .they're opposed, with what they also want to say about local control. . .they're in favor. What if that local control means that the locals do something you don't want?
That could, I note, be extended out to a lot of things. For people who like to imagine the state seizing control of public lands. . . what if Teton County argued it could manage the local public lands better than the state? I'm not so sure a lot of the backers of the grab it movement would be really keen on that.
On really local news the local long time prosecutor has indicated he was retiring, which I already knew. A deputy is running. I'm not really going to comment on that and I don't even have an opinion on it. What I noted in the prosecutor's announcement is that hes' saying that retiring will allow him to go into private practice and be more hands on with the law.
I don't know why lawyers feel compelled to say things like that, or worse yet to attempt the. Our local DA endured some very severe heart problems in the last term and had a heart transplant. Geez, man, relax in retirement. The practice of law is a super stressful endeavor that flat out kills a lot of practitioners and drives over 25% of them into depression. It is something that, frankly, at a certain age you ought to give up, not really get back into.
May 31, 2018, part II
I was downstairs and heard the answering machine pick up, to be followed by an extraordinarily long voice message. Going up to check it, it was a very long Foster Freiss voice mail about being called for a "town meeting".
I know that telephonic town meetings are done by Rep. Cheney and Sen. Barrasso, at least. I don't know how they really work. I was tempted to call in, but did not.
This and the television ads he's running suggests to me that Freiss is serious about trying to take the Governorship. I think he has no chance, but he's making a serious run at it.
June 2, 2018
Well the time to register as a candidate is past, and so the final list is in. Not surprisingly, it includes quite a few people who have registered and whom we're not likely to hear much from again.
We don't need to go over every race, as most of the statewide races haven't changed. The two with real changes are those for Congress.
These races are interesting, although the results are nearly foreordained. The House race in particular shows the absolutely pathetic state of the Democratic Party in Wyoming. It's so bad that the Democrats should be ashamed.
Let's start with the U.S. Senate.
The Candidates are, on the Republican side:
John Barrasso Casper. He's the incumbent, and absent the discovery of something shocking, he'll be the winner in the primary.
Anthony L. Van Risseghem Cheyenne, WY. This candidate is 33 years old and that's about all I could learn about him. He stands virtually no chance.
Republican Charlie Hardy Cheyenne, WY. Charlie Hardy is a symbol of what's wrong with American politics and society in general. The perennial boomer candidate, now crowding 80, if he does't have it surrounded, is a former cleric who has run repeatedly as a Democrat on the social left side of the boomer scale. He sounds like he's from 1978 and ought to knock it off.
He's now switched parties, which in his case is frankly absurd. The thesis is that whoever gets the nomination will be the Senator. That's true, but Hardy is delusional if he thinks he's going to do well in the primary. Van Risseghem and Holtz have a better chance, and they have no chance at all.
Republican Dave Dodson Cheyenne. Dodson is now listed, by the Secretary of State, as being a Cheyenne candidate but he's a wealthy Colorado import to Jackson Hole. I wasn't aware that he'd officially registered as a Republican as his plan had been to run an independent campaign all the way to the finish line. He is running a grumpy television commercial campaign that so far has lacked much in the way of real content. He, and his supporters, have been making the rounds to gun shows, which is interesting.
Republican John Holtz Laramie, WY. Information on Holtz is that he's a former colonel in the Air Force and a retired lawyer who was a Wyoming circuit court judge. I don't recall him as a judge at all, which doesn't mean he wasn't one. Supposedly he was one of the youngest judges to have ever served on the Wyoming bench, having gone on in his early 30s, in which case you'd think I'd recall him, but I don't. He's now 68 years old and retired, living in Laramie. He's running as more conservative than Barrasso.
Republican Roque “ Rocky “ De La Fuente San Diego, CA. This guy shouldn't even be a consideration. He's an eccentric former candidate for the Presidency from the last election and now, thanks I suspect to Liz Cheney, a Virginian who succeeded on getting elected from Wyoming with thin connections to the state, he thinks Wyoming is open territory for out of staters. It isn't.
The Democrats have one candidate.
Gary Trauner. Trauner nearly unseated Barbara Cubin in her last run and has to be laughing when he sees the unexpected state of minor turmoil, mostly caused by Dodson money, in the GOP race. It's almost a certainty that Trauner v. Barrasso will be the race in the Fall, but it might turn out to be more of a race than it otherwise would have been as Barrasso will actually have to contest at least Dodson in the primary.
United States House of Representatives:
Republicans
Liz Cheney Wilson, WY. Cheney is the incumbent and is running for a second term. She wasn't that popular of candidate when she won the first time, but it's highly likely that she'll get the nomination as Wyoming incumbents usually do. Still, having said that, she's a weak candidate if a really strong one opposes her.
Blake E Stanley Cheyenne, WY. I don't know anything about him at all.
Republican Rod Miller WY. Miller is running an eccentric campaign against Cheney. Heavily bearded and a former rancher, he looks like a mountain man.
I suspect his views are too left of center, even as a Republican, to unseat Cheney, but they more force her to learn what locals actually feel. Miller's views on public lands are distinct and reflect the views of the state's citizens. Indeed, while I disagree with him on social issues, his views probably generally reflect those of most Wyomingites much better than Cheney's. Maybe Cheney will be forced to listen as a result.
Democrats.
Neither of the Democrats has any real chance of unseating Cheney and they remain largely unknown. They are:
Greg Hunter Laramie, WY. Hunter only moved to Wyoming in 2012 and has a prior candidate for office in Ohio. Another example of the Cheney effect. He'll not do well in the primary, I suspect. He can't help but note in his campaign site that he's from Dayton. Rightly or wrongly a lot of Wyomingites will have the "go back to Dayton view", and indeed, given his recent arrival, I'm not too certain that I don't have that view. I work quite a bit on topics involving Dayton, oddly enough, and I'm not super impressed.
Travis Helm Laramie, WY He's a fair left of center immigration lawyer who has no chance at all of success in the general election.
But who knows, with two candidates this weak, I suppose either could be the nominee. Indeed, the fact that the Democrats have basically conceded this election by fielding these two extraordinarily poor candidates says a lot about the state of the Democratic Party in Wyoming. It's bad. Cheney's a weak candidate, and the Democrats haven't been able to step up to the plate with a good one. Indeed, it's interesting to speculate what would occur here if Trauner, who isn't a weak candidate, had announced for the House.
This is also the reason that the Democratic Party is nearly dead here. Why wold anyone register as a Democratic voter in Wyoming based on the two races noted above. Trauner supporters are safe to to register as Republicans as he will be the Democratic challenger. The two Democratic candidates for the House are stinking up the race here so much that it doesn't matter which one wins. A rational Democrat, unless he's worried about the Gubernatorial race, would register as a Republican to vote against Cheney.
It's hard to believe that the Democrats once were able to field serious candidates for this office. Now, they can't.
As noted above, the Democrats should be absolutely ashamed of this field. A competent party, knowing what they were undergoing here, would have gone to a prominent member and impressed them to run even as a sacrificial lamb. Somebody like Sullivan or Freudenthal should have been picked. Instead, two blisteringly weak candidates will run instead which will solidify the Democratic Party's hopeless gadfly position and probably cause more of the few remaining Democrats in the state who aren't part of the hopelessly delusional far left to question why they register Democratic, and cross over into the GOP, making Wyoming even more of a one party state.
Heck, even Charlie Hardy, who has no chance of winning in the Senatorial race, can read those tea leaves well enough. He's running as a Republican.
June 5, 2018
The Tribune reports that Mark Harvey, a retired WYDOT employee who was running for the Democratic ticket for the House, has dropped out. Of course, we basically already reported that.
Harvey was running, albeit only very briefly, an eclectic campaign focused on health care and gun control, neither of which are popular topics in Wyoming and the latter of which would have been fatal to any campaign.
The race still features two candidates for the Democratic ticket, however, as also earlier noted here. One of those candidates commented on this thread the other day.
The Tribune also confirms that Dodson is running as a Republican in his bid against Barrasso, which we also already noted. He claims that he did this as Republicans feared that if he continued to run as an independent it would split the ticket in the Fall giving Trauner the seat.
He's taking some heat for this decision from some Republicans, although that doesn't quite make sense as there's some logic to his statements regarding Trauner, although that likely overestimates his own appeal. He's also taking heat for having made some donations in the past to Democratic candidates, which he explained away as having been made in fairness and out of loyalty to his political science major daughter who apparently is a Democrat. The donations tend, however, to focus attention to the fact that his connection to the state is recent and he's a Teton County resident, which is regarded by many in deep Wyoming as largely out of touch with the rest of the state.
The Tribune noted that some local Natrona County races are single ticket, with there being no declared opposition to the announced District Attorney and Sheriff's candidates meaning, absent something really surprising, that those candidates have their victories assured. The Sheriff is running for reelection, of course, but in the DA's office the contestant is currently a deputy, with the current DA retiring as earlier noted.
June 6, 2018
There's some unwritten rule in Wyoming politics that some time during an election campaign, you must be seen with a horse.
The state is far more restrictive on the public's use of the public lands than the Federal government is and sportsmen are well aware of that. This puts Galeotos into the state control camp that public land users are fighting, but the way he poses this, as if this will be for multiple use, shows that he isn't in the group who use the public lands much himself.
At this point, as a result of this, that particular group has found ever single Republican unsatisfactory on this issue. I suspect that an endorsement from at least one sportsmen and conservation group for Throne will be forthcoming.
Indeed, for most Wyomingites, Throne is now the only candidate who holds their views. The various Republicans are various shades of bad on this issue, from extremely bad to seems pretty bad. If they loose on this issue, they deserve to.
Of course what we don't know yet is what Throne thinks on social issues, particularly abortion. She's a lay minister in a Protestant church and if she comes across as more conservative than the Republicans on that issue, I frankly think she stands a good chance of winning the election.
Throne and Galeotos, as well as Hageman and Freiss also were at a Cheyenne meeting yesterday where they talked about technology. It was, frankly, rather bizarre in a way.
Throne again seemed to have the best grasp of things, urging the state to support loans to business to support internet development. Really oddly, Galeotos, who has seemingly been a backer of that sort of industry, countered that this wasn't needed and other sorts of technological businesses could come in and do just fine without the state's help. Hageman, showing a real mid 20th Century view of the state's economy, took the position that technological jobs brought in a fraction of what oil and gas does, showing a blistering ignorance of the boom and bust nature of that sector and a blindness to the fact that the oil industry itself (I was a member of the Association of Petroleum Geologists for a long time) doesn't have that kind of view. The point is to diversify the economy, not to freeze it in an oil based amber. Freiss made some comment that was pro net about being able to sit on the deck of your farm and work in Singapore, which shows sort of a wacky charming belief about the lives of most people. Be that as it may, that comment at least showed more of a grasp of things than the other Republicans demonstrated.
June 13, 1918
Following up a tad, the Tribune reported on an economic discussion in Cheyenne that happened apparently yesterday, although I'm frankly unsure if it isn't the one discussed immediately above.
Anyhow, Republicans Taylor, Hageman, Dahlin, Galeotos, Freiss and Democrat Throne were there.
Some of the positions discussed were surprising, in part because you don't expect them from the candidate in question and in part because they were unrealistic in the context of the candidates other positions. Not much was said about Hageman, but as we know her focus is on the extractive industries.
It seems that Freiss' were too, as he noted that 70% of the state's income comes from minerals. This is true, but the fact of the matter is that Hageman and apparently Freiss both are treating this issue as those its static. Wyoming has a boom and bust economy, they concede, but demand, prices and maybe technology just sort of remain frozen at a late 20th Century level somehow.
Dahlin, who up to now has been pretty quiet, wants to look at "organic growth industries" to move away from an economy so reliant on the energy sector. The one he mentioned was industrial hemp, noting that there is quite a demand for it.
There is quite a demand for it, but the focus on it is a bit eccentric. Of course, we've only started hearing from Dahlin so it'll be interesting to see where he goes.
Taylor said that he would reduce taxes and regulation on business and work on a robust vocational education. The problem with all of that is that Wyoming's taxes are already in the basement and we don't regulate much really on the state level. And a robust vocational education will require a robust funding of the same. . . which means some sort of functioning tax system.
Throne focused on technology, as I reported the other day.
Galeotos indicated he's identified six factors that are key to the economy and went on to state that we need workers, an education system creating workers and to be connected physically through air service and electronically through broadband. It sounds like he had been reading the ENDOW study before he spoke. He apparently contradicted himself a bit from when he was in a debate the other day with Throne, regarding the internet, and now basically agrees with Throne on that.
Regarding Throne, she came out in favor of light rail to Colorado, conceptually. She's the only one to do that so far. That's discussed in an upcoming thread here.
Everyone was opposed to an income tax.
June 14, 2018
Interesting what you see travelling around the state.
In a run up to Cody and back today I saw no Hageman signs. I've been seeing quite a few here in town, but none in Thermopolis or Cody.
Indeed, I saw very few signs up for the gubernatorial candidates at all, but a lot for various sheriff candidates. The very few Gubanatorial signs I saw were for Gordon and Galeotos.
Cody was the first place I saw a Trump sign in the last Presidential election. I don't know if that means anything, but if it does, Gordon will be the next governor.
The Wyoming Sportsmen for Public Lands ran Throne's words on her position on public lands. It was as follows:
That puts Throne squarely in the Wyoming mainstream. If this becomes an issue in this race, and amongst some it already is, Throne may be well positioned to draw a lot of voters who normally vote Republican. As I'll have in an upcoming post, this gives a solid reason for Throne to pull to the right on social issues where there are a lot of single issue voters.
June 17, 2018
A lawsuit headed to the Supreme Court maintains that the requirement that insurance companies not consider preexisting conditions in health insurance, part of the Affordable Healthcare Act, is unconstitutional. The Justice Department has filed a brief in support of that proposition.
All three Wyoming Congressional office holders have stated that they have the opposite view and therefore oppose the Justice Department's position.
It's interesting that this news broke on the same day that I posted an item on social issues and the Wyoming election, as this is a social issue. More than that, however, its a primary example of how benefits extended to the public, no matter what the cost, rapidly become popular and then expectations.
The American health care system is nearly universally regarded as being in need of reform. Everyone agrees with this in varying degrees. But what has happened since the passage of the Affordable Health Care Act is a rapid example of extending a social benefit that solidifies into a right quickly. I'm not venturing an opinion on that, but merely noting it.
After it was passed the GOP was drumbeating to repeal it, which was actually attempted a couple of times. They're not going to now, so it's clear that this heightened element of government involvement in health care will remain.
The requirement that preexisting conditions not be considered in insurance is hugely popular but basically unsound from an actuary position. Anyone familiar with insurance knows this. It's a big part of the reason that premiums keep climbing now and why health insurance as a benefit of employment is rapidly disappearing. It is, quite simply, unsound.
If logic ruled in politics those who have been opposed to AHCA would be very much opposed to this provision. But it's popular, and nobody wants to seem cruel. So, basically, even Wyoming's Congressional representation, which always claimed to be against the AHCA, really isn't all that much anymore. And that didn't take very long.
June 18, 2018
The Wyoming Sports For Federal Lands published Foster Freiss reply to their question about where the candidates stand in regards to Federal Lands. That reply is here:
This makes Freiss the only Republican so far to come out for retained Federal ownership of the public domain, something that the majority of Wyomingites strongly support.
Like a lot of things Freiss states, its sort of oddly put which would suggest that he's not completely clued into the state he's trying to become Governor of. The immediate reference to forest fires is a good point, but it's sort of odd in a state that's half prairie and which has, fwiw, a lot of wildland fires that aren't in the forests. Indeed, I'd guess on an annual basis most of the wildland fires aren't forest fires, although forest fires tend to be the most serious of that sort of fire.
And the "greater access" comment is strange. There's plenty of access already and indeed for members of the general public access on Federal land is superior to access to State land. What Freiss seems to be really indicating is access for oil and gas companies, which is already actually pretty large. And he somewhat endorses the "local control" idea that some who see this as a stepping stone to full control endorse, although I don't think that's his intent.
Having said all of that, the eclectic Freiss has the position, amongst the GOP candidates, which is closest to that held by the majority of Wyomingites. Its interesting that a candidate that will undoubtedly be viewed by many Wyomingites as a rich carpetbagger is less beholden to a lockstep view that's making its way through the GOP than the other candidates have been so far.
Making a bit of a mockery of the item on social issues I just published, Freiss also is doing that, having come out in his full page advertisement in the Tribune over the weekend with a statement that he's opposed to partial birth abortion. It's well known that Freiss is strong on life issues and its clear that, contrary to what I just stated, he's willing to make them an issue.
It's easy to consider Freiss a gadfly, and I frankly think that he in large part is running a Quixotic doomed campaign, but at least recently it's pretty clear that his ideas are conservative but they're not in lock step with the radical view that's infected the GOP in recent years. He's clearly willing to spend vast sums to get his point across. I doubt he'll win, but amongst public land single issue voters, right now he's actually the person most reflecting their view in the GOP (Throne best reflects their view overall). On right to life issues, he's also now a clear contender, although we can suspect that other GOP candidates are close to his views and just haven't stated them as there's been no political advantage to doing so. We'll likely soon know.
June 25, 1918
This thread has been mercifully silent for awhile, but we have some odds and ends to update it with now.
The first, and a bit of a shocker, is that George F. Will, in a piece that just hit the press, is urging voters to vote against the GOP this Fall.
Will, who virtually defines a certain type of patrician conservative Republican, has simply had enough of Trump and called members of Congress in the GOP his "poodles". He feels their numbers need to be reduced, and now, to salvage the situation in more than one way.
Turning from the national to the local, the Tribune reports that Chuck Gray, Wyoming House District 57, has drawn two opponents in his race for reelection.
Gray has been mentioned here before. He's a very young member of the House who has a role with KVOC radio in Casper. Gray is a graduate of the extremely prestigious Wharton School of Business at the University of Pennsylvania and hails originally from South Dakota. Frankly being a graduate from that school makes his location in Central Wyoming rather odd, but he managed to get elected in a race for an open seat when he ran in the GOP primary against now city councilman Ray Pacheco, branding him a bit of a career politician, oddly.
As a legislator, as related by the Tribune, he's met with limited success, although he did sponsor a significant bill regarding abortion early on. Since then he's become mostly noted for his extremely conservative positions and his opposition to nearly any kind of spending on fiscal grounds. He's associated with GOP candidates like Harriet Hageman who are unreliable on public lands issues.
Against him in the GOP primary is former Casper Mayor Daniel Sandoval. Sandoval lost his seat on the Casper City Council in a recent past election but has come out against Gray in the Republican primary as he regards Gray as an "ideologue" of the type who "sabotage government from within." Pretty bold statement but frankly the extreme right of the GOP in Wyoming in some instances comes pretty close to that definition (and at least one prominent former GOP legislator shared with me that he held that view) and Gray might deserve the epithet to some degree. He's definitely on the extreme economic conservative, tea party, end of the spectrum. It'll be interesting to see if the voters in House District 57 feel likewise and go for Sandoval. Sandoval has a though race ahead of him as generally Wyomingites will not turn out an incumbent, but then Gray has not been in the legislature long and his opponent in his first race, Pacheco, was exposed to claims of being a liberal and a former Democrat.
Not all of the voters will in that district will feel that way, to be sure. Gray was recently listed by one national organization as one of the most effective, or something to that effect, young legislators in the US. Given that his bills have overall not met with success I'd question that, but then I often question "most" type listings of that type. Still, I see quite a few signs up here and there for Gray and not all in his district.
One thing the voters in House District 57 won't be doing is voting to put in office the Democrat, Jane Ifland. Ifland virtually defines the views that have destroyed the Democratic Party in Wyoming. I don't know her, or any of these individuals personally, and this isn't intended in any fashion to be a comment on her character (I don't know her at all) but Ifland is one of the local Democrats who is very left of center on social issues and can be reliably counted on to appear at any left wing gathering on anything in this area. That makes her well known in a way that Democrats here cannot afford to be. She'll make for a much more energetic opponent for Gray, should Gray win in the primary, but there's no earthly way she can win in the general election and she presumably must know that. Still, the Democrat in the last election who opposed Gray was anemic in her approach to the race and Ifland will do a better job of at least making her presence known.
Another race also featured in the Tribune today, that being House District 16 in Teton County. That race is virtually the antithesis of the one in House District 57. The winner of that Democratic primary will almost assuredly go on to win in the general election, although the GOP isn't giving up. That district is becoming, and already is, a rare Wyoming liberal district with a Democratic majority, showing the influence of migration to Teton County from outside of the state. The candidates are Mike Gierau and Mike Yin. If Yin advances in the primary, he'll likely be the first Chinese American to win a legislative position in the Wyoming legislature, although as I've said on this blog before "firsts" of this type are hardly relevant to anything anymore.
The Republican is former Teton County Commissioner Barbara Allen, a moderate who is much like what most Wyoming Republicans used to look like. Allen's positions actually match Yin's on a bunch of things that would cause her to be branded a liberal if she was a Democrat. But that's also true of Kate Mead who is challenging Geirau for a Teton County Senate seat. That Senate District is solidly Democratic, making Gierau's victory probable.
All of these races combined make for an interesting picture. Is Gray the young face of the Wyoming GOP or are candidates like Sandoval, Allen and Mead more reflective of where the GOP is headed? Are Yin and Gierau the base of a slowly rising tide?
On another local race, the paper profiled, although only barely, the eight county commissioner candidates who are running for three positions on Saturday. You could hardly tell what any of them thought from that article, but one interesting feature was the reappearance of Todd Murphy.
Murphy won a seat on the Casper City Council recently and then resigned soon thereafter. His resignation was cited to personal reasons but it followed Murphy falling into controversy after supporting Gerald Gay in his statements that were taken, and indeed appeared, as having a rather old fashioned view of women in the workplace. After that, the Tribune picked up some statements Murphy had on his Facebook page on some things and it made him appear rather poor. I'm surprised to see him resurface. I am seeing some of his signs around, however.
On signs, I've really been wondering how effective they are. I know in my case, they aren't.
We have a family policy of not putting political signs up. As a group, we rarely decide we're for any candidate until just before the election as, after all, you don't really know what they're going to say. But beyond that, just because I support something hardly means other people are going to. We still get asked, however, and every once and awhile we will violate the policy, usually because we know somebody personally and can't really say no.
Nonetheless, I know that I'm more likely to find signs to be a bit disturbing rather than encouraging me to vote for anyone person. That may be odd, but I'll bet that this is more common than people realize. In one instance, there's a person I know of whose views I regard as so extreme that if he puts candidate signs out, and he always does, it causes me to basically reject those candidates. I'm not kidding. That individual has a host of signs up now and those people are pretty much on my "no go" list. They mostly were already, but when the signs go up there, that pretty much confirms my view. I'd guess that quite a few people have a similar reaction. Be careful where you put your signs up, I guess.
June 29, 2018
All the Gubernatorial candidates were in Casper yesterday at an event sponsored by the Nicolaysen Art Museum, which explains why I saw vehicles marked with their logos as I was leaving the office yesterday.
According to the Tribune the topic was tourism, which they all declare themselves to be in favor of and they all recognize its value to the state's economy. Galeotos promised funding for tourism efforts. Throne, again being the only one to interject some realism into these discussions in recent weeks, noted that funding means figuring out how to pay for things and that means figuring out a new tax base. That's true, but people don't like to think of that. She also noted that everyone talks about diversification, but nobody really does much about it (although I think Mead's ENDOW study certainly fits into the doing something category).
July 4, 2018
Well known Wyoming columnist and at least one time politician, Bill Sniffin, has a full page advertisement in (at least) the Tribune today on why he's supporting Foster Freiss. As you'd expect from Sniffin, his full page advertisement is well written and presents cogent arguments.
I had just realized that Sniffin had a role with the Freiss campaign earlier this week when he responded to the revelation that some over zealous members of the Freiss campaign were putting up signs on properties they were not authorized to. Sniffin responded in his role as campaign manager or something on the gaff.
Quite a few Freiss signs are going up locally, along with everyone else's, on DOT easements, which must be allowed I suppose. Some confusion where they end, I suspect, may have created the error in some cases. I have to think that it has to be irritating for people to find campaign signs for candidates they don't support showing up bordering their properties, however, as it makes it look like they support that candidate.
Governor Mead announced that he's retiring to a ranch in Albany County. Mead is only 56 so he's got a lot of ranching years ahead of him and he's picked a nice spot. I'm glad to see that he's staying in Wyoming and returning to his family's traditional business, although not in their original home of Teton County which has now more or less been almost pushed out of the ranching business.
Speaking of ranching, Mark Gordon is sending out emails to at least agricultural producers, which I am, on his plans for agriculture. According to that email, those are:
At least one of these ideas is one that I floated here earlier, interestingly, showing I guess that my skepticism on my Distributist economic views going mainstream may not be completely warranted. Others are sort of code words for problems that are perceived to exist but don't, such as the concept that Wyoming is being Constitutionally abused.
I'm impressed that Gordon has been thinking this out and some of these ideas I like, while others I do not. One thing I'd note is that one of the ideas, "Protecting Wyoming's Agricultural Labor Market", is demonstrative of why some problems never get fixed and how neither the GOP nor the Democrats mean it when they say they want to address the country's immigration problems. The H2-A Visa program is an anachronism left over from World War Two and could simply go, and should, but the agricultural industry on it nationwide has grown accustomed to it and doesn't want to give up cheap immigrant labor. So Republicans, such as Gordon, turn a blind eye to the intellectual inconsistency that supporting that program is while otherwise being tough on immigration, assuming that this is his position. But he does deserve credit for some fresh ideas and for publishing them.
One thing I'm not impressed by is the Republican candidates need to go after the Federal government in a way that frankly doesn't make much sense. Sam Galeotos, who started off campaigning on his history as a businessman, has just issued a television advertisement which states that if elected he'll be able to help Donald Trump repeal "Obama era regulations". That's absurd.
The GOP controls both houses of Congress right now and can repeal any regulation it wants to. If regulations are hanging around in the CFR its' because the Republicans choose to keep them there, not because Obama and the Democrats are making this happen. And the role of a Governor in repealing regulations is pretty darned slim and limited to influence.
In spite of this obvious truth, GOP candidates continue to beat this drum. It would make a little sense if the Democrats were in control of anything in Washington D. C., but they aren't. The statute of limitations on "these regulations are Obama's fault" has expired.
July 5, 2018
The Dodson campaign has struck upon the idea that it is going to set out the candidates "program" or positions in some detail. That's probably a wise thing for Dodson to do as the uphill battle he faces is so daunting he basically has nothing to loose by doing so.
Wyoming has a very long history of keeping incumbents in office, no matter what. That alone makes it extremely unlikely that Dodson will be able to unseat Barasso. Beyond that, Dodson is very exposed to accusations he's an outsider, as he is. Some might point out that Barasso isn't from Wyoming either, but Barasso didn't make a pile of money and then move to Teton County from outside the state. That's a significant difference.
Perhaps because of that, Dodson has begun to state in some detail, as noted, his concepts on various things. He's done that with the economy. As he has, so far, made the economy his focus, that might be worth looking at.
Before I move on to his posts about the economy, I'd note that at least according to his Facebook feed, he's come out in favor of keeping the Public Lands in Federal possession. Assuming that's correct, that's also a wise move. Barasso is on record favoring the opposite and was instrumental in getting that position into the GOP national platform last election. That angered a lot of Wyoming sportsmen. If Dodson, by publishing his "Plan", comes out as no worse than Barasso on other issues, some sportsmen and individuals concerned about this issue will be likely to go for him. Even as a protest many will figure that vote may well be worth casting.
Indeed, in a recent Facebook debate to which he responded one person came on asking him what his position on abortion is. He promised a detailed post on his site. That's significant for a couple of reasons, the most significant being that the individual he was debating clearly supports Barasso but felt rather obviously distressed that Dodson's views are much more closely aligned to the average Wyomingites on this issue than Barasso's are. As abortion tends to be a make or break issue for some voters (including myself) Dodson's position is important. Here too, if he's no worse than Barasso on that issue, and Barasso is pro life, Barasso may have some cause for concern, although Dodson is still a long shot.
According to his website, his plan, set out in multiple posts, is as follows. It starts off with this:
Let's look in detail beyond that, as Dodson has posted more. He first posts his qualifications and education, and then sets out a plan.
I suppose it isn't in opposition to the role, but it's also not very connected to it. Dodson is running for Senator, not Governor. This looks like the platform of somebody running for Governor.
I'm fine with all of this as well, and again, if this was the platform of a Gubernatorial candidate, I'd be thrilled to read it. But he's running for Senator.
I guess this doesn't hurt anything, obviously, but Dodson seems to have confused the role of the office he's running for.
Here's more:
On this, I'd note however that programs like this are inherently contrary to the positions Republicans always claim to take. This is a direct Federal support of something in the economy, in the form of funding for education. That's fine, but its also the sort of thing that on a local level, without being specific, Republicans constantly claim to deplore.
As is t his. I'm always amazed by how we in Wyoming constantly declare that that the Federal government needs to get out of the state. . . unless its sending money for things that we want.
Well, once again, a lot of Wyomingites likely agree with what's stated here.
The next part of the plan is a lengthy plan in and of itself on health care. Here, he states:
Well, let's turn to the next thing . . .coal.
Okay. This isn't going to work in my view.
I've posted on this probably ad nausem, but coal has been on a long term decline for over a century. The bullet was really put in coal when the Royal Navy decided to move to oil. So what's proposed here basically isn't going to occur, and it likely won't work if it did.
It's interesting that one of the platforms here is a proposed Federal subsidization of carbon sequestration. The state is already doing this. This is again interesting, however, as a Republican candidate for the Senate. . . or the Governor, can get away with proposing what is effectively a Socialist program as we like coal. We don't tend to think of things in this fashion, but that's what this is. And its not going to pass Congress, in my view.
But, having said all of that, Dodson deserves credit for really coming out with a pretty detailed, in a campaign context, set of ideas. And frankly for a lot of Wyomingites there are things to like in all of this. Dodson is campaigning as just as big of supporter of the 2nd Amendment as Barasso is, and he likely would be. He's campaigning, probably without realizing it, with some ideas that are basically Distributist in nature, which appeals to people like me even if I'm quite skeptical that a Senator can do much to bring any of that about (that would require cooperation form the Legislature and the Governor). He appears to be more in line on public lands with the views of average Wyomingites than Barasso is.
This means, like the arguing Facebook poster suggested, that his position on other significant national issues, such as abortion, really matter. Dodson may turn out to be a more attractive candidate than might be initially supposed. But how that plays out depends on him overcoming the fact that he's not from here but rather relocated here in wealth, and how he comes out on the remaining issues.
An interesting race to watch.
July 7, 2018
A complaint has been field against Gubernatorial candidate Taylor Haynes alleging that he's not a resident of Wyoming.
Apparently Haynes claims an Albany County residence that's a business of some sort. According to t he Tribune he leases that from a third party and its occupied by a business registered to Haynes. His ranch, also in Albany County. . . in part, has its headquarters and apparently all of its buildings in Colorado.
That could indeed be problematic.
Haynes has no chance of winning in the race and indeed his star has been falling ever since his first run for the office, at which time he was not quite so extreme. So this won't impact the race all that much, I suspect, although I've seen a few Haynes signs here and there. It'll be interesting to see how it plays out, however. Haynes has been big on kicking the Federal government out of Wyoming. If his actual residence isn't in Wyoming, that looks more than a little odd.
Jillian Balow. Republican.
Much more to follow.
May 24, 2018
Yesterday, in checking Facebook, I hit upon a Mark Gordon Facebook ad which touts his support for the Second Amendment.
This is a worthless ad. We know that all the candidates who are serious are going to claim they're ardent supporters of the Second Amendment.
What I'd like to know is Mark Gordon's position on public lands. So I emailed his campaign. His campaign manager, the same manager Mead had formerly, emailed me that Mark would be emailing me right back. If he does, I'll let you know what he has to say. If he doesn't email back, I'll email him back and let you know that. In emailing him, by the way, I just sent a flat email without hinting at what my opinion is.
That's going to be my approach this year. I generally don't bother politicians much but starting last year I did a bit and this year I'm going to more so. When I see them, I'm going to ask them the things that matter to me and then flat out say whether or not I like their answer to their faces so they can more than get a bit of feedback.
I also emailed Sam Galeotos. I haven't heard back from him either.
Those were the only two I emailed as amongst the serious candidates, those are the only two whose position I don't know or can't guess.
And speaking of a candidate whose position on this I now know for sure, there's Republican Rod Miller who is running in the GOP primary for Congress against Liz Cheney. He's told us exactly what he thinks.
Miller Video on Public lands
Millers chances are really poor as he's running against an incumbent. But on this he's hit the nail on the head for a lot of people. Reading his website he probably fits the view of a lot of Wyomingites on a lot of things, but he's also in the category of candidate who is problematic for social issue voters, which is unfortunate. He's implicitly in favor of the current status on abortion, for example, which drops him out of consideration for a lot of voters who would otherwise probably go for him but for that, or at least would consider doing so. And he's for the legalization of marijuana which is likely such a non issue in Wyoming that I don't know why a Congressional candidate would even state a position on it, given that it can only irritate those who are against that position.
May 24, 2018, part II
It turns out that Mark Gordon has in fact made a statement about public lands, to a sportsman's group that flat out asked him. Here's what he wrote back to them.
Not very impressive.
Basically a statement like this says as little as possible so as to hopefully not anger anyone. It suggest there'd be a lot of problems (true) and that it would be unconstitutional under the Wyoming constitution (true) and expensive (true) but that doesn't mean he's against it.
He also takes the approach that maybe smaller parcels are okay and that transferring management is a good idea. There's no real reason to believe that transferring management wouldn't be a burden to the state and expensive to users of public lands. Indeed, the state is already more restrictive than the Federal government.
I'm not a single issue voter (indeed, I'll have a post on that) but I"m not impressed. This isn't what most Wyomingites want and this goes a long ways toward defining my views on Gordon.
Mary Throne, it turns out, has also been public in her views. She's flat out said that the public lands should be kept public.
I've noted it here before, but this may be one of the rare instances in which the Democrat can pull in the most votes. Throne has worked as a lawyer in oil and gas matter so she's familiar with that aspect of the state's economy. And she's in favor of public lands.
So what about Galeotos? Turns out that he has made a statement as well, to a newspaper in Sweetwater County. What he had to say was:
Galeotos said it is not likely that Wyoming will seize federal lands, but that he believes local control is always better. He would like to come to an agreement with the federal government and find a model that would allow local control over Wyoming’s lands.
He said the issue of the state selling lands to private owners needs to be addressed because he does not want that.That's not a great, for backers of public lands, but it's not as wishy washy as Gordon nor as scary either. Not as good as Throne.
Not that this decides everything. But depending where other chips fall, Gordon's views may very well push him off the table for sportsmen and real local ranchers, who need to use the public lands.
May 25, 2018
Sam Galeotos was in Casper yesterday. While here in the state's second largest city (but one in which the population is declining), which has traditionally looked heavily towards the petroleum industry for its economy, Galeotos announced the assembly of his business advisory committee.
Galeotos deserves a lot of credit for taking a really distinct approach in this campaign. Almost all of the GOP candidates have taken a highly traditional, for Wyoming, approach to Wyoming's boom and bust economy. While politicians, particularly Republican politicians, like to speak of Wyoming's economy being a "three legged stool" (which I think to be a rather inaccurate analogy), its generally posed in such a way that one of those legs is an oak post, the extractive industries, while the rest are pine dolls. I'm sure that Galeotos isn't an opponent of the mineral industries, but he's emphasizing high tech with which he has a lot of experience.
I have no idea on whether Galeotos' business ideas for the state's economy are correct or not. I have my real doubts, quite frankly. But nonetheless he deserves credit for not simply approach the real problem of Wyoming's cyclical economy with the suggestion that the entire solution is to aid the mineral industries. The mineral industries are so tied into a global economy that the concepts that are touted out about what helps or hurt that industry tend to be rather naive. Suggestions, such as Hageman has made, that its all about regulation simply fail to acknowledge that the health of coal have a lot more to do about things like the Pacific coast phasing out coal generated power from their grid, or power plants in Texas switching to cheaper, more efficient, and less technologically temperamental natural gas or that the price of oil has more to do with events in Tehran and Baghdad than they do in Bad Water.
Speaking of businessmen, megabucks candidate Foster Friess has commenced advertising on television. In his advertisements he's sporting a black cowboy hat. It may be just me, but as a member of the demographic that actually wears such hats in a working role, and has a working cowboy hat that's covered with dried cow shit, I really take offense at such posing. He notes he's a "conservative businessman". Dressing like a cowboy isn't going to fool anyone that he came up here on the Texas Trail or something.
Galeotos, by the way, is noting that he's also a conservative businessman, which is no doubt correct. He's emphasizing his other conservative credentials, such as that he is pro life. Right now he really stands apart from the GOP crowd, however. He's a Wyoming native whose family goes back a couple of generations in the state. Unlike a lot of the multiple generation Wyoming candidates, however, his family have always been in business, having originally been Greek immigrants who came over and purchased the ice cream shop they worked in, which later became a tavern. Galeotos has real business credentials. He's pro Second Amendment like every other candidate, but he's not anti public lands like every other GOP candidate is or fears not being. He may be a lot more like most Wyoming voters than any other Republican running.
May 27, 2018
The Tribune today had an article in which it summarized its interviews of the major Gubernatorial candidates positions on coal. Throne, Hageman, Gordon and Galeotos were interviewed.
All the candidates are "pro coal", according to the Tribune, but none of them said the exact same thing. It was quite interesting for that reason.
Throne was unique in admitting that she believes that climate science indicates that human caused global warming is real. I'll give her a lot of credit for this because I frankly think most, but not all, well educated people now concede that, although they may not concede the degree or what should be done. Indeed, I'm pretty sure that Governor Mead believes in it but feels that political considerations in the state prevent him from saying that. And my guess is that Gordon and Galeotos, and Dahlin, likewise agree that it's a real thing and a real concern. Throne has the guts to admit her position which shows some real honesty, although it may cost her votes at the ballot box.
Indeed Throne flat out criticized the entire debate over whether global warming was real or not, within the state, by saying that the debate had wasted a lot of time that could have been used to benefit alternative sustainable uses for coal. That's a really bold statement but one that deserves real credit for being made as it shows she's willing to take hits but to deliver them back on an issue that has gone the way she suggests it has in Wyoming.
Anyhow, Throne isn't anti coal, but feels that research needs to be done on what market coal can fulfill in a world increasingly hostile to the burning of it. She's for researching for new sustainable uses for coal in a world that's become hostile to it.
In stark contrast Hageman is quoted as saying that she doesn't believe in global warming and that its a political issue and not an environmental issue, taking the very type of position that Throne criticized. Hageman is for supporting coal, but the paper didn't relate what that meant.
The problem with this view is that it really doesn't matter what the Governor of Wyoming thinks about the truth or not of global warming. That debate has largely moved on and the market is killing the industry off slowly. Simply denying the accuracy of the position is a little King Canute like. Hageman's random comment about why doesn't the state do something along the lines of the advertising it does for tourism for coal probably wasn't serious (and would be a rather odd view given her libertarian economic views), but it shows how fixed her position is.
Before moving on, one thing also in the paper today is a letter by one female Cheyenne lawyer defending Hageman against the accusations by Cheyenne lawyer Larry Wolfe that characterized her as an amateur who should not be elected. Things must be a little testy in the Laramie County Bar right now. Anyhow, the letter seemed to me to be one of those examples of being careful who you get your help from as it boiled down to the argument that as she's a lawyer, she knows government stuff, an argument that doesn't really sit well with everyone. Interestingly, the same argument, if it is convincing, applies to Throne as well except that her practice might arguably be at least as helpful for her role as Governor or would be no less advantageous, if it is, to that role.
Anyhow, noting Hageman's position above the most developed, as explained by the Tribune, was Gordon's.
Gordon is spending a lot of time it seems making nuanced statements which suggests that he has pretty developed opinions on a lot of things but he's afraid to say what they really are as he doesn't want to offend anyone. Reading his statement to the Trib, if you read between the lines, what he's saying is that coal is going into the dumper and won't recover as it can't compete with natural gas and, no matter what Wyomingites believe about global warming, the views elsewhere are moving in one direction that that is contributing to an unarrestable decline in coal. In those views, quite frankly, he's highly like to be right.
Gordon spends a lot of time emphasizing his occupation of ranching but he's also an East coast prep school and university educated businessman with a diverse background. He's been around and likely knows a lot more on various topics than he's willing to admit to knowing, as if he did, it makes him look like an east coast intellectual and that would cut against him here. In this area, however, that's leaking through a bit, and to his credit. He's capable rather obviously of reading the tea leaves which it seems that a candidate like Hageman won't look at. Gordon's arguing for looking at transportation systems for the transport of coal to expand Wyoming coal's market, but didn't say much to the Tribune beyond that. That's probably a rational enough approach.
Galeotos was more "bullish", to use the Tribune's term, on coal's future and not surprisingly was looking to high tech to save coal as well as pushing the market. He'd continue to back the state's extremely expensive research into clean coal. Given his tech background, that's not surprising. He was also in favor of trying to boost the market while a perceived ally is in the White House.
May 31, 2018
Mark Gordon replied to my query about public lands by letter, which I give him credit for.
His letter was mostly the same letter as that one set out above with some additions. So he doesn't really come to a real position in it. He does note that he values public lands and notes how his wife's family depended upon them for recreation when she was growing up, but otherwise the content is much the same.
Well, that has to leave people who have strong views on keeping the public lands public a little uneasy. Gordon is trying to split the middle and not really say much, as he clearly doesn't want to offend any one constituency. That might be acting like a good politician, but it's not comforting for those who care about the issue. I know its clarifying my views about his candidacy.
On other topics, the Tribune ran an article in which they'd asked all of the candidates, including the really extreme ones, what they thought of the recent proposals to allow towns and cities to levy more in the way of taxes directly. It's a really interesting issue for a lot of reasons, one being that it gets to the topic of municipal home rule. The GOP has been huge in recent years about local control, so logic would have it that they'd be in favor of local control for taxation.
Not so much, according to the answers.
Or rather, no really clear position.
Gordon and Freiss were in favor of it. They were the only ones. Bizarrely, Rex Rammel, the Constitution Party candidate who wants to drive the Federal government out of the state on this and that in the name of state control, is opposed to it as he fears the local governments would raise taxes. Maybe they would, but you'd think a guy whose political philosophy is based on the local would be all for local control. Apparently not.
Bill Dahlin was a qualified yes. He'd be in favor of it, but only if it went to the local voters.
Hageman flatly stated that she didn't think she could answer the question, finding it too abstract. Galeotos and Throne both indicated they'd need to study the matter more.
I think the overall interesting nature of it is that it collides with what most candidates want to say about taxation. . .they're opposed, with what they also want to say about local control. . .they're in favor. What if that local control means that the locals do something you don't want?
That could, I note, be extended out to a lot of things. For people who like to imagine the state seizing control of public lands. . . what if Teton County argued it could manage the local public lands better than the state? I'm not so sure a lot of the backers of the grab it movement would be really keen on that.
On really local news the local long time prosecutor has indicated he was retiring, which I already knew. A deputy is running. I'm not really going to comment on that and I don't even have an opinion on it. What I noted in the prosecutor's announcement is that hes' saying that retiring will allow him to go into private practice and be more hands on with the law.
I don't know why lawyers feel compelled to say things like that, or worse yet to attempt the. Our local DA endured some very severe heart problems in the last term and had a heart transplant. Geez, man, relax in retirement. The practice of law is a super stressful endeavor that flat out kills a lot of practitioners and drives over 25% of them into depression. It is something that, frankly, at a certain age you ought to give up, not really get back into.
May 31, 2018, part II
I was downstairs and heard the answering machine pick up, to be followed by an extraordinarily long voice message. Going up to check it, it was a very long Foster Freiss voice mail about being called for a "town meeting".
I know that telephonic town meetings are done by Rep. Cheney and Sen. Barrasso, at least. I don't know how they really work. I was tempted to call in, but did not.
This and the television ads he's running suggests to me that Freiss is serious about trying to take the Governorship. I think he has no chance, but he's making a serious run at it.
June 2, 2018
Well the time to register as a candidate is past, and so the final list is in. Not surprisingly, it includes quite a few people who have registered and whom we're not likely to hear much from again.
We don't need to go over every race, as most of the statewide races haven't changed. The two with real changes are those for Congress.
These races are interesting, although the results are nearly foreordained. The House race in particular shows the absolutely pathetic state of the Democratic Party in Wyoming. It's so bad that the Democrats should be ashamed.
Let's start with the U.S. Senate.
The Candidates are, on the Republican side:
John Barrasso Casper. He's the incumbent, and absent the discovery of something shocking, he'll be the winner in the primary.
Anthony L. Van Risseghem Cheyenne, WY. This candidate is 33 years old and that's about all I could learn about him. He stands virtually no chance.
Republican Charlie Hardy Cheyenne, WY. Charlie Hardy is a symbol of what's wrong with American politics and society in general. The perennial boomer candidate, now crowding 80, if he does't have it surrounded, is a former cleric who has run repeatedly as a Democrat on the social left side of the boomer scale. He sounds like he's from 1978 and ought to knock it off.
He's now switched parties, which in his case is frankly absurd. The thesis is that whoever gets the nomination will be the Senator. That's true, but Hardy is delusional if he thinks he's going to do well in the primary. Van Risseghem and Holtz have a better chance, and they have no chance at all.
Republican Dave Dodson Cheyenne. Dodson is now listed, by the Secretary of State, as being a Cheyenne candidate but he's a wealthy Colorado import to Jackson Hole. I wasn't aware that he'd officially registered as a Republican as his plan had been to run an independent campaign all the way to the finish line. He is running a grumpy television commercial campaign that so far has lacked much in the way of real content. He, and his supporters, have been making the rounds to gun shows, which is interesting.
Republican John Holtz Laramie, WY. Information on Holtz is that he's a former colonel in the Air Force and a retired lawyer who was a Wyoming circuit court judge. I don't recall him as a judge at all, which doesn't mean he wasn't one. Supposedly he was one of the youngest judges to have ever served on the Wyoming bench, having gone on in his early 30s, in which case you'd think I'd recall him, but I don't. He's now 68 years old and retired, living in Laramie. He's running as more conservative than Barrasso.
Republican Roque “ Rocky “ De La Fuente San Diego, CA. This guy shouldn't even be a consideration. He's an eccentric former candidate for the Presidency from the last election and now, thanks I suspect to Liz Cheney, a Virginian who succeeded on getting elected from Wyoming with thin connections to the state, he thinks Wyoming is open territory for out of staters. It isn't.
The Democrats have one candidate.
Gary Trauner. Trauner nearly unseated Barbara Cubin in her last run and has to be laughing when he sees the unexpected state of minor turmoil, mostly caused by Dodson money, in the GOP race. It's almost a certainty that Trauner v. Barrasso will be the race in the Fall, but it might turn out to be more of a race than it otherwise would have been as Barrasso will actually have to contest at least Dodson in the primary.
United States House of Representatives:
Republicans
Liz Cheney Wilson, WY. Cheney is the incumbent and is running for a second term. She wasn't that popular of candidate when she won the first time, but it's highly likely that she'll get the nomination as Wyoming incumbents usually do. Still, having said that, she's a weak candidate if a really strong one opposes her.
Blake E Stanley Cheyenne, WY. I don't know anything about him at all.
Republican Rod Miller WY. Miller is running an eccentric campaign against Cheney. Heavily bearded and a former rancher, he looks like a mountain man.
I suspect his views are too left of center, even as a Republican, to unseat Cheney, but they more force her to learn what locals actually feel. Miller's views on public lands are distinct and reflect the views of the state's citizens. Indeed, while I disagree with him on social issues, his views probably generally reflect those of most Wyomingites much better than Cheney's. Maybe Cheney will be forced to listen as a result.
Democrats.
Neither of the Democrats has any real chance of unseating Cheney and they remain largely unknown. They are:
Greg Hunter Laramie, WY. Hunter only moved to Wyoming in 2012 and has a prior candidate for office in Ohio. Another example of the Cheney effect. He'll not do well in the primary, I suspect. He can't help but note in his campaign site that he's from Dayton. Rightly or wrongly a lot of Wyomingites will have the "go back to Dayton view", and indeed, given his recent arrival, I'm not too certain that I don't have that view. I work quite a bit on topics involving Dayton, oddly enough, and I'm not super impressed.
Travis Helm Laramie, WY He's a fair left of center immigration lawyer who has no chance at all of success in the general election.
But who knows, with two candidates this weak, I suppose either could be the nominee. Indeed, the fact that the Democrats have basically conceded this election by fielding these two extraordinarily poor candidates says a lot about the state of the Democratic Party in Wyoming. It's bad. Cheney's a weak candidate, and the Democrats haven't been able to step up to the plate with a good one. Indeed, it's interesting to speculate what would occur here if Trauner, who isn't a weak candidate, had announced for the House.
This is also the reason that the Democratic Party is nearly dead here. Why wold anyone register as a Democratic voter in Wyoming based on the two races noted above. Trauner supporters are safe to to register as Republicans as he will be the Democratic challenger. The two Democratic candidates for the House are stinking up the race here so much that it doesn't matter which one wins. A rational Democrat, unless he's worried about the Gubernatorial race, would register as a Republican to vote against Cheney.
It's hard to believe that the Democrats once were able to field serious candidates for this office. Now, they can't.
As noted above, the Democrats should be absolutely ashamed of this field. A competent party, knowing what they were undergoing here, would have gone to a prominent member and impressed them to run even as a sacrificial lamb. Somebody like Sullivan or Freudenthal should have been picked. Instead, two blisteringly weak candidates will run instead which will solidify the Democratic Party's hopeless gadfly position and probably cause more of the few remaining Democrats in the state who aren't part of the hopelessly delusional far left to question why they register Democratic, and cross over into the GOP, making Wyoming even more of a one party state.
Heck, even Charlie Hardy, who has no chance of winning in the Senatorial race, can read those tea leaves well enough. He's running as a Republican.
June 5, 2018
The Tribune reports that Mark Harvey, a retired WYDOT employee who was running for the Democratic ticket for the House, has dropped out. Of course, we basically already reported that.
Harvey was running, albeit only very briefly, an eclectic campaign focused on health care and gun control, neither of which are popular topics in Wyoming and the latter of which would have been fatal to any campaign.
The race still features two candidates for the Democratic ticket, however, as also earlier noted here. One of those candidates commented on this thread the other day.
The Tribune also confirms that Dodson is running as a Republican in his bid against Barrasso, which we also already noted. He claims that he did this as Republicans feared that if he continued to run as an independent it would split the ticket in the Fall giving Trauner the seat.
He's taking some heat for this decision from some Republicans, although that doesn't quite make sense as there's some logic to his statements regarding Trauner, although that likely overestimates his own appeal. He's also taking heat for having made some donations in the past to Democratic candidates, which he explained away as having been made in fairness and out of loyalty to his political science major daughter who apparently is a Democrat. The donations tend, however, to focus attention to the fact that his connection to the state is recent and he's a Teton County resident, which is regarded by many in deep Wyoming as largely out of touch with the rest of the state.
The Tribune noted that some local Natrona County races are single ticket, with there being no declared opposition to the announced District Attorney and Sheriff's candidates meaning, absent something really surprising, that those candidates have their victories assured. The Sheriff is running for reelection, of course, but in the DA's office the contestant is currently a deputy, with the current DA retiring as earlier noted.
June 6, 2018
There's some unwritten rule in Wyoming politics that some time during an election campaign, you must be seen with a horse.
The horse. The ultimate arbiter of who is qualified to hold office in Wyoming.
So far during this election we've been reminded that Harriet Hageman is from a ranch family and that Mark Gordon owns a ranch. Sam Galeotos (who so far seems to me to be the most impressive candidate) has been filmed with a horse. I'm sure more horses are coming.
One place horses have arrived is television, as noted. Mark Gordon's television advertisements so far have been remarkably content free. It'd be almost impossible to tell what he believes in other than that, at the end of his ads, we're told he's going to protect the state against Washington D.C.. We're not really told what the threat is, so this presumably buys into the popular Wyoming thesis that the Republican controlled Federal government is picking on us.
Of course, this isn't how it is posed, but that would be the reality of it. If we are to really buy off on that thesis, we have to accept that Republicans in the state are going to protect us from Republicans in Washington and most particularly form the most populist President since Andrew Jackson.
Hmmm. . . .
Anyhow, Gordon's ads have lots of ranch scenes so we know that he can heard cattle and shoe horses.
Foster Friess now apparently wants us to know that he can do that too.
In a full page advertisement in the Casper Star Tribune Friess informs us that he "grew up herding cattle" on a family "ranch".
Friess is from Rice Lake, Wisconsin. His website doesn't say anything about having worked a family ranch but it does mention that his mother dropped out of high school in order to work (actually it says "save") a family cotton farm in Texas and that his father dealt in cattle and horses.
By that measure, I should be Governor. I deal in cattle and I'm pretty familiar with horses. My mother also didn't complete high school (she did have an Associates Degree from Casper College, however) as she was taken out of school to work due to the Great Depression.
Presumably, now that this has been published, Foster will drop out of the race in favor of me.
I'm being sarcastic, of course, but the point is that if you are going to claim to have worked a "ranch" you should be a little more specific. There may be cattle farming in Wisconsin, indeed I am sure that there is, but ranching? Hmmm. Even if he was referring to Texas, Texas is enormously large and the cotton growing region in East Texas does produce lots and lots of cattle, but it's not ranching as we'd imagine it nor even as those in West Texas would imagine it.
This is all just grousing, of course. But none the less.
June 10, 2018
Somebody stumping for Harriet Hageman was in the neighborhood yesterday. I missed their appearance as I was at a funeral. They left a flyer. Later in the day I saw a pickup truck licensed in Albany County with a big Hageman sign on the door near the edge of the subdivision, so presumably that was the stumper.
I have seen a lot of Hageman signs around, but none in my neighborhood. I'm not sure what that means, but that's the fact. Be that as it may, a lot of her signs are showing up around here and they're often associated with a couple of local candidates who have very similar signs. I'm not sure if that's accidental or intentional.
Hageman's campaign flyer, which was left in my door, is pretty blunt. It states:
Anyhow, assuming her work reflects here views, which isn't a safe assumption about any good lawyer, and I'm sure she is that, this list is a bit disturbing. I guess the point is the ongoing local Tea Party one that everything Federal is bad, but when did we start dissing the Forest Service and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife? Who were they being sued for and what was the cause?
This hate the Federal government theme, however, is really predominate this year. The irony of it is that now that there's a populist Republican President in the White House, what that means, by extension, is that the GOP in the White House is a menace. That's not what they're saying, but if we apply logic to it, that is what it would have to mean. So after having been told in the last election that Donald Trump was going to be the friend of Wyoming in the White House, and with a Republican controlled House and Senate, how do these claims make any sense? There's a logic disconnect with these views.
In regards to campaign propaganda, Foster Freiss keeps running the same full page ad in the Tribune every day. He also promises to keep out the Federal government and get Wyoming's economy rolling, in the same sentence, which fully buys into the idea that the Federal government is keeping the economy down. The evidence for that is really thin. We'll be looking at it soon.
June 11, 2018
The CST featured an article on Dodson today. It was an interesting one.
The Tribune columnist all but characterized Dodson as a gadfly with unrealistic economic concepts. Indeed, Dodson took the view, with the Trib's reporter, that all he had to do was to boost Wyoming like a salesman and that would change Wyoming's economy. He concluded his article by flat out stating that Dodson didn't understand that economy, which based upon my reading of his article, assuming it was accurate, I'd have to agree with.
June 11, 2018, part two
Wyoming Public Media, it turns out, has interviewed several candidates:
Wyoming Public Media Interviews.
June 12, 2018
A couple of interesting things this morning.
First, Galeotos responded, through a spokesman, to a query from a sportsman's group about public lands and issued a response which shows a complete disconnect from the issue. Here it is:
What on earth.June 10, 2018
Somebody stumping for Harriet Hageman was in the neighborhood yesterday. I missed their appearance as I was at a funeral. They left a flyer. Later in the day I saw a pickup truck licensed in Albany County with a big Hageman sign on the door near the edge of the subdivision, so presumably that was the stumper.
I have seen a lot of Hageman signs around, but none in my neighborhood. I'm not sure what that means, but that's the fact. Be that as it may, a lot of her signs are showing up around here and they're often associated with a couple of local candidates who have very similar signs. I'm not sure if that's accidental or intentional.
Hageman's campaign flyer, which was left in my door, is pretty blunt. It states:
Harriet fought the Environmental Protection Agency And WonFirst of all, let me note that I'm very hesitant to associate a lawyer with a lawyer's clients. I've known, for example, a couple of lawyers who primarily worked for oil companies, and did great jobs for those companies, but who were definitely left of center personally on environmental issues. Lawyers are highly acclimated to separating their personal views from the work place roles in a way that few other professions take to such an extent. Indeed, I was recently at an industry conference where a panelist closed with a fiery speech about the industry being under attack and the other panelist were clearly of the "what the heck?" view about its extent.
Harriet fought the United States Forest Service And Won
Harriet fought the United States Fish & Wildlife And Won
Harriet Represented Wyoming Against Other States And Won.
Anyhow, assuming her work reflects here views, which isn't a safe assumption about any good lawyer, and I'm sure she is that, this list is a bit disturbing. I guess the point is the ongoing local Tea Party one that everything Federal is bad, but when did we start dissing the Forest Service and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife? Who were they being sued for and what was the cause?
This hate the Federal government theme, however, is really predominate this year. The irony of it is that now that there's a populist Republican President in the White House, what that means, by extension, is that the GOP in the White House is a menace. That's not what they're saying, but if we apply logic to it, that is what it would have to mean. So after having been told in the last election that Donald Trump was going to be the friend of Wyoming in the White House, and with a Republican controlled House and Senate, how do these claims make any sense? There's a logic disconnect with these views.
In regards to campaign propaganda, Foster Freiss keeps running the same full page ad in the Tribune every day. He also promises to keep out the Federal government and get Wyoming's economy rolling, in the same sentence, which fully buys into the idea that the Federal government is keeping the economy down. The evidence for that is really thin. We'll be looking at it soon.
June 11, 2018
The CST featured an article on Dodson today. It was an interesting one.
The Tribune columnist all but characterized Dodson as a gadfly with unrealistic economic concepts. Indeed, Dodson took the view, with the Trib's reporter, that all he had to do was to boost Wyoming like a salesman and that would change Wyoming's economy. He concluded his article by flat out stating that Dodson didn't understand that economy, which based upon my reading of his article, assuming it was accurate, I'd have to agree with.
June 11, 2018, part two
Wyoming Public Media, it turns out, has interviewed several candidates:
Wyoming Public Media Interviews.
June 12, 2018
A couple of interesting things this morning.
First, Galeotos responded, through a spokesman, to a query from a sportsman's group about public lands and issued a response which shows a complete disconnect from the issue. Here it is:
The state is far more restrictive on the public's use of the public lands than the Federal government is and sportsmen are well aware of that. This puts Galeotos into the state control camp that public land users are fighting, but the way he poses this, as if this will be for multiple use, shows that he isn't in the group who use the public lands much himself.
At this point, as a result of this, that particular group has found ever single Republican unsatisfactory on this issue. I suspect that an endorsement from at least one sportsmen and conservation group for Throne will be forthcoming.
Indeed, for most Wyomingites, Throne is now the only candidate who holds their views. The various Republicans are various shades of bad on this issue, from extremely bad to seems pretty bad. If they loose on this issue, they deserve to.
Of course what we don't know yet is what Throne thinks on social issues, particularly abortion. She's a lay minister in a Protestant church and if she comes across as more conservative than the Republicans on that issue, I frankly think she stands a good chance of winning the election.
Throne and Galeotos, as well as Hageman and Freiss also were at a Cheyenne meeting yesterday where they talked about technology. It was, frankly, rather bizarre in a way.
Throne again seemed to have the best grasp of things, urging the state to support loans to business to support internet development. Really oddly, Galeotos, who has seemingly been a backer of that sort of industry, countered that this wasn't needed and other sorts of technological businesses could come in and do just fine without the state's help. Hageman, showing a real mid 20th Century view of the state's economy, took the position that technological jobs brought in a fraction of what oil and gas does, showing a blistering ignorance of the boom and bust nature of that sector and a blindness to the fact that the oil industry itself (I was a member of the Association of Petroleum Geologists for a long time) doesn't have that kind of view. The point is to diversify the economy, not to freeze it in an oil based amber. Freiss made some comment that was pro net about being able to sit on the deck of your farm and work in Singapore, which shows sort of a wacky charming belief about the lives of most people. Be that as it may, that comment at least showed more of a grasp of things than the other Republicans demonstrated.
June 13, 1918
Following up a tad, the Tribune reported on an economic discussion in Cheyenne that happened apparently yesterday, although I'm frankly unsure if it isn't the one discussed immediately above.
Anyhow, Republicans Taylor, Hageman, Dahlin, Galeotos, Freiss and Democrat Throne were there.
Some of the positions discussed were surprising, in part because you don't expect them from the candidate in question and in part because they were unrealistic in the context of the candidates other positions. Not much was said about Hageman, but as we know her focus is on the extractive industries.
It seems that Freiss' were too, as he noted that 70% of the state's income comes from minerals. This is true, but the fact of the matter is that Hageman and apparently Freiss both are treating this issue as those its static. Wyoming has a boom and bust economy, they concede, but demand, prices and maybe technology just sort of remain frozen at a late 20th Century level somehow.
Dahlin, who up to now has been pretty quiet, wants to look at "organic growth industries" to move away from an economy so reliant on the energy sector. The one he mentioned was industrial hemp, noting that there is quite a demand for it.
There is quite a demand for it, but the focus on it is a bit eccentric. Of course, we've only started hearing from Dahlin so it'll be interesting to see where he goes.
Taylor said that he would reduce taxes and regulation on business and work on a robust vocational education. The problem with all of that is that Wyoming's taxes are already in the basement and we don't regulate much really on the state level. And a robust vocational education will require a robust funding of the same. . . which means some sort of functioning tax system.
Throne focused on technology, as I reported the other day.
Galeotos indicated he's identified six factors that are key to the economy and went on to state that we need workers, an education system creating workers and to be connected physically through air service and electronically through broadband. It sounds like he had been reading the ENDOW study before he spoke. He apparently contradicted himself a bit from when he was in a debate the other day with Throne, regarding the internet, and now basically agrees with Throne on that.
Regarding Throne, she came out in favor of light rail to Colorado, conceptually. She's the only one to do that so far. That's discussed in an upcoming thread here.
Everyone was opposed to an income tax.
June 14, 2018
Interesting what you see travelling around the state.
In a run up to Cody and back today I saw no Hageman signs. I've been seeing quite a few here in town, but none in Thermopolis or Cody.
Indeed, I saw very few signs up for the gubernatorial candidates at all, but a lot for various sheriff candidates. The very few Gubanatorial signs I saw were for Gordon and Galeotos.
Cody was the first place I saw a Trump sign in the last Presidential election. I don't know if that means anything, but if it does, Gordon will be the next governor.
The Wyoming Sportsmen for Public Lands ran Throne's words on her position on public lands. It was as follows:
That puts Throne squarely in the Wyoming mainstream. If this becomes an issue in this race, and amongst some it already is, Throne may be well positioned to draw a lot of voters who normally vote Republican. As I'll have in an upcoming post, this gives a solid reason for Throne to pull to the right on social issues where there are a lot of single issue voters.
June 17, 2018
A lawsuit headed to the Supreme Court maintains that the requirement that insurance companies not consider preexisting conditions in health insurance, part of the Affordable Healthcare Act, is unconstitutional. The Justice Department has filed a brief in support of that proposition.
All three Wyoming Congressional office holders have stated that they have the opposite view and therefore oppose the Justice Department's position.
It's interesting that this news broke on the same day that I posted an item on social issues and the Wyoming election, as this is a social issue. More than that, however, its a primary example of how benefits extended to the public, no matter what the cost, rapidly become popular and then expectations.
The American health care system is nearly universally regarded as being in need of reform. Everyone agrees with this in varying degrees. But what has happened since the passage of the Affordable Health Care Act is a rapid example of extending a social benefit that solidifies into a right quickly. I'm not venturing an opinion on that, but merely noting it.
After it was passed the GOP was drumbeating to repeal it, which was actually attempted a couple of times. They're not going to now, so it's clear that this heightened element of government involvement in health care will remain.
The requirement that preexisting conditions not be considered in insurance is hugely popular but basically unsound from an actuary position. Anyone familiar with insurance knows this. It's a big part of the reason that premiums keep climbing now and why health insurance as a benefit of employment is rapidly disappearing. It is, quite simply, unsound.
If logic ruled in politics those who have been opposed to AHCA would be very much opposed to this provision. But it's popular, and nobody wants to seem cruel. So, basically, even Wyoming's Congressional representation, which always claimed to be against the AHCA, really isn't all that much anymore. And that didn't take very long.
June 18, 2018
The Wyoming Sports For Federal Lands published Foster Freiss reply to their question about where the candidates stand in regards to Federal Lands. That reply is here:
Like a lot of things Freiss states, its sort of oddly put which would suggest that he's not completely clued into the state he's trying to become Governor of. The immediate reference to forest fires is a good point, but it's sort of odd in a state that's half prairie and which has, fwiw, a lot of wildland fires that aren't in the forests. Indeed, I'd guess on an annual basis most of the wildland fires aren't forest fires, although forest fires tend to be the most serious of that sort of fire.
And the "greater access" comment is strange. There's plenty of access already and indeed for members of the general public access on Federal land is superior to access to State land. What Freiss seems to be really indicating is access for oil and gas companies, which is already actually pretty large. And he somewhat endorses the "local control" idea that some who see this as a stepping stone to full control endorse, although I don't think that's his intent.
Having said all of that, the eclectic Freiss has the position, amongst the GOP candidates, which is closest to that held by the majority of Wyomingites. Its interesting that a candidate that will undoubtedly be viewed by many Wyomingites as a rich carpetbagger is less beholden to a lockstep view that's making its way through the GOP than the other candidates have been so far.
Making a bit of a mockery of the item on social issues I just published, Freiss also is doing that, having come out in his full page advertisement in the Tribune over the weekend with a statement that he's opposed to partial birth abortion. It's well known that Freiss is strong on life issues and its clear that, contrary to what I just stated, he's willing to make them an issue.
It's easy to consider Freiss a gadfly, and I frankly think that he in large part is running a Quixotic doomed campaign, but at least recently it's pretty clear that his ideas are conservative but they're not in lock step with the radical view that's infected the GOP in recent years. He's clearly willing to spend vast sums to get his point across. I doubt he'll win, but amongst public land single issue voters, right now he's actually the person most reflecting their view in the GOP (Throne best reflects their view overall). On right to life issues, he's also now a clear contender, although we can suspect that other GOP candidates are close to his views and just haven't stated them as there's been no political advantage to doing so. We'll likely soon know.
June 25, 1918
This thread has been mercifully silent for awhile, but we have some odds and ends to update it with now.
The first, and a bit of a shocker, is that George F. Will, in a piece that just hit the press, is urging voters to vote against the GOP this Fall.
Will, who virtually defines a certain type of patrician conservative Republican, has simply had enough of Trump and called members of Congress in the GOP his "poodles". He feels their numbers need to be reduced, and now, to salvage the situation in more than one way.
Turning from the national to the local, the Tribune reports that Chuck Gray, Wyoming House District 57, has drawn two opponents in his race for reelection.
Gray has been mentioned here before. He's a very young member of the House who has a role with KVOC radio in Casper. Gray is a graduate of the extremely prestigious Wharton School of Business at the University of Pennsylvania and hails originally from South Dakota. Frankly being a graduate from that school makes his location in Central Wyoming rather odd, but he managed to get elected in a race for an open seat when he ran in the GOP primary against now city councilman Ray Pacheco, branding him a bit of a career politician, oddly.
As a legislator, as related by the Tribune, he's met with limited success, although he did sponsor a significant bill regarding abortion early on. Since then he's become mostly noted for his extremely conservative positions and his opposition to nearly any kind of spending on fiscal grounds. He's associated with GOP candidates like Harriet Hageman who are unreliable on public lands issues.
Against him in the GOP primary is former Casper Mayor Daniel Sandoval. Sandoval lost his seat on the Casper City Council in a recent past election but has come out against Gray in the Republican primary as he regards Gray as an "ideologue" of the type who "sabotage government from within." Pretty bold statement but frankly the extreme right of the GOP in Wyoming in some instances comes pretty close to that definition (and at least one prominent former GOP legislator shared with me that he held that view) and Gray might deserve the epithet to some degree. He's definitely on the extreme economic conservative, tea party, end of the spectrum. It'll be interesting to see if the voters in House District 57 feel likewise and go for Sandoval. Sandoval has a though race ahead of him as generally Wyomingites will not turn out an incumbent, but then Gray has not been in the legislature long and his opponent in his first race, Pacheco, was exposed to claims of being a liberal and a former Democrat.
Not all of the voters will in that district will feel that way, to be sure. Gray was recently listed by one national organization as one of the most effective, or something to that effect, young legislators in the US. Given that his bills have overall not met with success I'd question that, but then I often question "most" type listings of that type. Still, I see quite a few signs up here and there for Gray and not all in his district.
One thing the voters in House District 57 won't be doing is voting to put in office the Democrat, Jane Ifland. Ifland virtually defines the views that have destroyed the Democratic Party in Wyoming. I don't know her, or any of these individuals personally, and this isn't intended in any fashion to be a comment on her character (I don't know her at all) but Ifland is one of the local Democrats who is very left of center on social issues and can be reliably counted on to appear at any left wing gathering on anything in this area. That makes her well known in a way that Democrats here cannot afford to be. She'll make for a much more energetic opponent for Gray, should Gray win in the primary, but there's no earthly way she can win in the general election and she presumably must know that. Still, the Democrat in the last election who opposed Gray was anemic in her approach to the race and Ifland will do a better job of at least making her presence known.
Another race also featured in the Tribune today, that being House District 16 in Teton County. That race is virtually the antithesis of the one in House District 57. The winner of that Democratic primary will almost assuredly go on to win in the general election, although the GOP isn't giving up. That district is becoming, and already is, a rare Wyoming liberal district with a Democratic majority, showing the influence of migration to Teton County from outside of the state. The candidates are Mike Gierau and Mike Yin. If Yin advances in the primary, he'll likely be the first Chinese American to win a legislative position in the Wyoming legislature, although as I've said on this blog before "firsts" of this type are hardly relevant to anything anymore.
The Republican is former Teton County Commissioner Barbara Allen, a moderate who is much like what most Wyoming Republicans used to look like. Allen's positions actually match Yin's on a bunch of things that would cause her to be branded a liberal if she was a Democrat. But that's also true of Kate Mead who is challenging Geirau for a Teton County Senate seat. That Senate District is solidly Democratic, making Gierau's victory probable.
All of these races combined make for an interesting picture. Is Gray the young face of the Wyoming GOP or are candidates like Sandoval, Allen and Mead more reflective of where the GOP is headed? Are Yin and Gierau the base of a slowly rising tide?
On another local race, the paper profiled, although only barely, the eight county commissioner candidates who are running for three positions on Saturday. You could hardly tell what any of them thought from that article, but one interesting feature was the reappearance of Todd Murphy.
Murphy won a seat on the Casper City Council recently and then resigned soon thereafter. His resignation was cited to personal reasons but it followed Murphy falling into controversy after supporting Gerald Gay in his statements that were taken, and indeed appeared, as having a rather old fashioned view of women in the workplace. After that, the Tribune picked up some statements Murphy had on his Facebook page on some things and it made him appear rather poor. I'm surprised to see him resurface. I am seeing some of his signs around, however.
On signs, I've really been wondering how effective they are. I know in my case, they aren't.
We have a family policy of not putting political signs up. As a group, we rarely decide we're for any candidate until just before the election as, after all, you don't really know what they're going to say. But beyond that, just because I support something hardly means other people are going to. We still get asked, however, and every once and awhile we will violate the policy, usually because we know somebody personally and can't really say no.
Nonetheless, I know that I'm more likely to find signs to be a bit disturbing rather than encouraging me to vote for anyone person. That may be odd, but I'll bet that this is more common than people realize. In one instance, there's a person I know of whose views I regard as so extreme that if he puts candidate signs out, and he always does, it causes me to basically reject those candidates. I'm not kidding. That individual has a host of signs up now and those people are pretty much on my "no go" list. They mostly were already, but when the signs go up there, that pretty much confirms my view. I'd guess that quite a few people have a similar reaction. Be careful where you put your signs up, I guess.
June 29, 2018
All the Gubernatorial candidates were in Casper yesterday at an event sponsored by the Nicolaysen Art Museum, which explains why I saw vehicles marked with their logos as I was leaving the office yesterday.
According to the Tribune the topic was tourism, which they all declare themselves to be in favor of and they all recognize its value to the state's economy. Galeotos promised funding for tourism efforts. Throne, again being the only one to interject some realism into these discussions in recent weeks, noted that funding means figuring out how to pay for things and that means figuring out a new tax base. That's true, but people don't like to think of that. She also noted that everyone talks about diversification, but nobody really does much about it (although I think Mead's ENDOW study certainly fits into the doing something category).
July 4, 2018
Well known Wyoming columnist and at least one time politician, Bill Sniffin, has a full page advertisement in (at least) the Tribune today on why he's supporting Foster Freiss. As you'd expect from Sniffin, his full page advertisement is well written and presents cogent arguments.
I had just realized that Sniffin had a role with the Freiss campaign earlier this week when he responded to the revelation that some over zealous members of the Freiss campaign were putting up signs on properties they were not authorized to. Sniffin responded in his role as campaign manager or something on the gaff.
Quite a few Freiss signs are going up locally, along with everyone else's, on DOT easements, which must be allowed I suppose. Some confusion where they end, I suspect, may have created the error in some cases. I have to think that it has to be irritating for people to find campaign signs for candidates they don't support showing up bordering their properties, however, as it makes it look like they support that candidate.
Governor Mead announced that he's retiring to a ranch in Albany County. Mead is only 56 so he's got a lot of ranching years ahead of him and he's picked a nice spot. I'm glad to see that he's staying in Wyoming and returning to his family's traditional business, although not in their original home of Teton County which has now more or less been almost pushed out of the ranching business.
Speaking of ranching, Mark Gordon is sending out emails to at least agricultural producers, which I am, on his plans for agriculture. According to that email, those are:
Wyoming’s agricultural economy is a crucial part of Wyoming’s future. Our agriculture products are second to none.As governor of our great state, I’ll prioritize policies that advance this key industry and support Wyoming farmers and ranchers.My plan is as follows:
- ‘Born and Raised Wyo’ Products - As Governor, I will work with producers and the Legislature to tailor policies to support the branding and marketing of our high quality agricultural products as ‘Born and Raised Wyo.’ Whether here at home or far away, using the ‘Born and Raised Wyo’ brand will help ranchers and farmers sell their products.
- Meat Inspection in Wyoming - While a majority of Wyoming beef and lamb goes to out-of-state backgrounders, feeders, packers and fabricators, there are opportunities for more value to be realized here in Wyoming if we had greater processing capacity. As Governor, I will seek to expand opportunities under the state and federal meat inspection systems for Wyoming producers.
- Enforcing the Constitution - Wyoming producers are entitled to all the protections enshrined within our Wyoming Constitution, which includes safeguards to keep our livestock healthy and viable. That means a sound system of inspection and protecting personal property rights. As Governor, I will continue protecting your Constitutional rights.
- Predator Control and Animal Damage - Wyoming must assure that producers have all the tools they need to manage wildlife when it harms their livelihoods. Wyoming worked hard and successfully earned the right to manage species such as the grizzly bear and wolf. As Governor, I will ensure Wyoming’s wildlife is managed by Wyoming - not the Federal Government.
- Bringing Commonsense to Federal Agencies - Wyoming citizens are affected every day by a blizzard of delaying, complicated and burdensome federal regulations such as those that directly affect management of endangered species and of our public lands. I will strive to build collaborative relationships with federal natural resource agencies based on full recognition of the critical role of state and local government in management of our natural resources. As Governor, I will lead the way in reforming regulatory structures so they are implemented in a common sense and locally accountable manner.
- Meaningful Solutions for Transportation - Trucking is a critical component when bringing Wyoming agricultural goods and livestock to market. The advent of Electronic Logging Devices (ELDs) as mandated by the federal government has the potential to disrupt this system. As Governor, I will fight back against these burdensome regulations and suggest meaningful solutions that ensure safety and protect our agricultural industry.
- Protecting Wyoming’s Agriculture Labor Market - Wyoming is the second leading exporter of wool in the country. However, some proposed revisions to the H-2A Visa program could significantly hurt the sheep industry. As Governor, I will work with Wyoming’s congressional delegation in fixing these types of burdensome regulations that simply don’t make any sense for agriculture producers and threaten their very livelihood.
- Crops, Opportunities, and Innovation - Wyoming can do more to help Wyoming’s burgeoning crops sector. Entrepreneurialism is alive and well across the state with a vast variety of crops. Wyoming entrepreneurialism has expanded, and Wyoming’s efforts have expanded. As Governor, I will support Ag Innovation Summits and cohesive agriculture policies throughout state government.
- Expanding Export Markets - Neighboring states have seen tremendous success in marketing their agricultural products to places like Taiwan, Vietnam and China. Idaho in particular has seen significant growth in their agricultural industry after taking a variety of steps to promote trade in the Far East. As Governor, I will make expanding the overseas market for our products a high priority.
- New Technology - Wyoming is leading the way with innovations in technology from blockchain to vertical gardens to new ways to control weeds. The University of Wyoming, our community colleges, high schools and extension offices should engage in a collective manner to improve producer understanding and access to emerging technologies. As Governor, I will encourage the adoption of transformative technologies in agriculture.
- Water - Wyoming’s water is among our most precious resource. It is a critical component of our agricultural production. Water rightfully belongs to the state and we must ensure state management at every turn. As Governor, I will fight rules such as Waters of the United States (WOTUS) that would expand federal authority over both surface and underground water quality. I will defend Wyoming’s rights under our interstate compacts.
At least one of these ideas is one that I floated here earlier, interestingly, showing I guess that my skepticism on my Distributist economic views going mainstream may not be completely warranted. Others are sort of code words for problems that are perceived to exist but don't, such as the concept that Wyoming is being Constitutionally abused.
I'm impressed that Gordon has been thinking this out and some of these ideas I like, while others I do not. One thing I'd note is that one of the ideas, "Protecting Wyoming's Agricultural Labor Market", is demonstrative of why some problems never get fixed and how neither the GOP nor the Democrats mean it when they say they want to address the country's immigration problems. The H2-A Visa program is an anachronism left over from World War Two and could simply go, and should, but the agricultural industry on it nationwide has grown accustomed to it and doesn't want to give up cheap immigrant labor. So Republicans, such as Gordon, turn a blind eye to the intellectual inconsistency that supporting that program is while otherwise being tough on immigration, assuming that this is his position. But he does deserve credit for some fresh ideas and for publishing them.
One thing I'm not impressed by is the Republican candidates need to go after the Federal government in a way that frankly doesn't make much sense. Sam Galeotos, who started off campaigning on his history as a businessman, has just issued a television advertisement which states that if elected he'll be able to help Donald Trump repeal "Obama era regulations". That's absurd.
The GOP controls both houses of Congress right now and can repeal any regulation it wants to. If regulations are hanging around in the CFR its' because the Republicans choose to keep them there, not because Obama and the Democrats are making this happen. And the role of a Governor in repealing regulations is pretty darned slim and limited to influence.
In spite of this obvious truth, GOP candidates continue to beat this drum. It would make a little sense if the Democrats were in control of anything in Washington D. C., but they aren't. The statute of limitations on "these regulations are Obama's fault" has expired.
July 5, 2018
The Dodson campaign has struck upon the idea that it is going to set out the candidates "program" or positions in some detail. That's probably a wise thing for Dodson to do as the uphill battle he faces is so daunting he basically has nothing to loose by doing so.
Wyoming has a very long history of keeping incumbents in office, no matter what. That alone makes it extremely unlikely that Dodson will be able to unseat Barasso. Beyond that, Dodson is very exposed to accusations he's an outsider, as he is. Some might point out that Barasso isn't from Wyoming either, but Barasso didn't make a pile of money and then move to Teton County from outside the state. That's a significant difference.
Perhaps because of that, Dodson has begun to state in some detail, as noted, his concepts on various things. He's done that with the economy. As he has, so far, made the economy his focus, that might be worth looking at.
Before I move on to his posts about the economy, I'd note that at least according to his Facebook feed, he's come out in favor of keeping the Public Lands in Federal possession. Assuming that's correct, that's also a wise move. Barasso is on record favoring the opposite and was instrumental in getting that position into the GOP national platform last election. That angered a lot of Wyoming sportsmen. If Dodson, by publishing his "Plan", comes out as no worse than Barasso on other issues, some sportsmen and individuals concerned about this issue will be likely to go for him. Even as a protest many will figure that vote may well be worth casting.
Indeed, in a recent Facebook debate to which he responded one person came on asking him what his position on abortion is. He promised a detailed post on his site. That's significant for a couple of reasons, the most significant being that the individual he was debating clearly supports Barasso but felt rather obviously distressed that Dodson's views are much more closely aligned to the average Wyomingites on this issue than Barasso's are. As abortion tends to be a make or break issue for some voters (including myself) Dodson's position is important. Here too, if he's no worse than Barasso on that issue, and Barasso is pro life, Barasso may have some cause for concern, although Dodson is still a long shot.
According to his website, his plan, set out in multiple posts, is as follows. It starts off with this:
Okay, first let me note that absent carving up the pork, I feel there's little that a Senator can do to directly impact a state's economy. So I'm quite skeptical of candidates for Congress promising to do anything about the state's economy and really being able to.Create a Healthy Economy
I’m not happy with our state's economy. Period. Under John Barrasso’s leadership, we fell to last place in the nation for the number of workers that had to leave Wyoming to find employment. For overall economic health, Bloomberg News ranked Wyoming last of all 50 states. We need a healthy economy to preserve our communities for our children and grandchildren, and I'm the only candidate with the business experience to help get that job done.
Let's look in detail beyond that, as Dodson has posted more. He first posts his qualifications and education, and then sets out a plan.
Promote entrepreneurship among Wyomingites
Okay, this is all nifty, but does it have much to do with running for Senate?Nearly 90% of the jobs in America come from businesses with less than 20 employees. I say we promote entrepreneurship here in Wyoming, instead of importing jobs from out of state.
There is nothing I know more about than entrepreneurship, having operated businesses in 22 states, and invested in over 100 others.
My track record led the highest-ranked entrepreneurship program in the country to offer me a position on its faculty, where I have since trained hundreds more entrepreneurs. I’d like to lead an entrepreneurial revolution in this state, and I’ve got the know-how and the connections to do it.
Home-grown entrepreneurship is the engine that fueled our country’s growth—and it’s a mistake to spend resources recruiting companies from California to Wyoming. Instead let’s harness the talent of Wyoming to launch a generation of Wyoming company founders.
We have no income tax, low cost of living, great outdoor recreation, and abundant natural resources—for these reasons the Small Business and Entrepreneurship Council ranked Wyoming as the 4th best state for small business. We have everything we need to get the job done, except leadership.
I’ve got three specific steps to my program:
- Expand quality education. I know from experience entrepreneurs need training to succeed. Let’s expand our programs in our high school, college, and university system to nurture the next generation of business owners and operators.
- Take advantage of federal tax policy. We have twenty-five designated Subchapter-Z Opportunity Zones, where investors and entrepreneurs can relocate or begin businesses under very attractive Federal tax laws. As your senator, I will work with the Governor’s office to fast-track approval of businesses that qualify for Subchapter-Z Opportunity Zones.
- Connect investors to talented Wyomingites. Investors in this country are looking for trained entrepreneurs and good ideas. Capital follows people and opportunity – not the other way around. Rather than create a small source of start-up capital run by the state government that would only help a few entrepreneurs and have the government picking winners and losers, I’ll use my background to connect a vast network of highly experienced investors to Wyoming and its people.
I suppose it isn't in opposition to the role, but it's also not very connected to it. Dodson is running for Senator, not Governor. This looks like the platform of somebody running for Governor.
Grab value from our existing industries
Here I find myself in the weird position, once again, of finding my Distributist economic views picked up by one of the candidates, something I never see happen.We need to Put Wyoming First and process more of our abundant raw goods and natural resources in-state instead of shipping them elsewhere for higher value processing. We stand to win a lot of jobs and economic rewards by doing this.
Here are just a few examples of where we can build on our existing industries:
1. Beef Processing and Marketing: Most of our cattle are shipped to places like Nebraska and Colorado to get processed, yet today’s modern plants create good middle-class jobs which should go to Wyomingites. Keeping our production in-state will also allow our ranchers to create a strong consumer brand for Wyoming steaks, allowing them to raise the price of their beef.
I’ll work with the USDA to fast track new processing facilities, expand FDA marketing programs that favor Wyoming (such as the National Organic Program), work closely with the Wyoming Stock Growers Association to support their current initiatives to export our beef, and make sure Federal labeling laws support the marketing of Wyoming beef.2. Distillery/Spirits: We grow barley, corn, wheat, and sugar beets, which we send out of state for production. Given our access to fresh mountain water, and the cowboy image of Wyoming, we should expand our craft spirits industry—creating business opportunities and jobs for our smaller communities. Just like California created a brand around wine, we should work with companies like Backward Spirits of Casper, or Wyoming Whiskey of Kirby, to create a similar brand for Wyoming.
I’ll fight to get our spirits taxed competitively with wine, and end prohibition-era laws that penalize rural states with limited markets and protect states like California and New York—to create jobs and companies for our state, by Wyomingites.3. Trona: Wyoming produces nearly all the trona in the United States. Trona is an ingredient in the production of glass, detergents, and pollution control. With the advancement of internet retail, we have an opportunity to take advantage of the explosion of branded consumer products that can be easily sold on the internet.
As your senator, I’ll help expedite approval of the Opportunity Zones established in Uinta, and Sweetwater county, and promote education of product opportunities, to expand jobs that take advantage of our trona resources.4. Sheep/Wool: We are among the top five sheep producing states, and the number one based on quality. Yet nearly all of that raw wool is sent out of state to be turned into yarn or finished products.
Mountain Meadow Wool in Buffalo proves we can build upon the image of the rugged Rocky Mountain West, to spin yarn and manufacture finished products we can sell for a premium. Wyoming needs to market “Wyoming Wool,” and then manufacture products like blankets, horse rugs, saddle cloths, and sweaters – so that our sheep farmers can receive a premium for their wool, and we can create jobs for Wyomingites.5. Wind Energy: We are one of the top wind-producing states in the country, but with few exceptions, all we do is sell electrons to other states. Wind technology requires the manufacture and transportation of enormous turbine components – from blades to towers to nacelles, and we have a transportation network that connects us to virtually every other wind-producing state.
Despite our trained workforce of electricians, we have allowed other states to dominate the service of wind components—whether it be gearbox refurbishment, electrical or component repair, or hub assembly. As your senator, when a wind project is proposed in Wyoming, before saying yes, I’ll be asking how many of those turbines will be serviced or built by Wyoming companies.6. Industrial Hemp: Industrial hemp has been used to manufacture an estimated 25,000 products – including the pages of our Declaration of Independence and high-end bibles.These are just six examples that highlight how I plan to use our Senate seat not as a platform for my career, or to raise money from special interests, but to grab more value from our existing industries, and Put Wyoming First.
With most parts of Wyoming receiving greater than 15 inches of rain each year, our climate and resources are ideal for production, and then the manufacture of finished products like rope, clothing, sunscreen, and insulation. I’ll work to reverse our outdated 1937 law, allowing our farmers to grow this versatile product, and Wyoming entrepreneurs to turn it into finished goods.
I'm fine with all of this as well, and again, if this was the platform of a Gubernatorial candidate, I'd be thrilled to read it. But he's running for Senator.
I guess this doesn't hurt anything, obviously, but Dodson seems to have confused the role of the office he's running for.
Here's more:
Okay, this does have something to do with being in Congress. I don't know anything about the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act of 2006, but it seems to have had widespread report in the House.Expand Career and Technical Education (CTE)
We need to invest in our workforce, so manufacturers and businesses have access to talent that spans from welders and CNC operators, to software engineers. While John Barrasso has been in office, the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act of 2006 which provided funding for CTE expired and has not been replaced, even though the House of Representatives passed a replacement bill 405 to 5!
On this, I'd note however that programs like this are inherently contrary to the positions Republicans always claim to take. This is a direct Federal support of something in the economy, in the form of funding for education. That's fine, but its also the sort of thing that on a local level, without being specific, Republicans constantly claim to deplore.
Rebuild our Infrastructure
We rank 36th overall for infrastructure despite our key role in the nation’s transportation system, and 48th in the nation for internet access! We can’t even drive I-25 between Casper and Cheyenne without cell phone drops! A healthy economy requires we fix our crumbling roads and bridges, poor cellular service, and dismal internet access, and we need a senator that understand the importance of getting this done NOW.
As a businessperson, I have been an outspoken critic of our senator’s inattention to our situation. I understand how important infrastructure is for economic development, and despite being a member of the Senate Public Works Committee, in two terms as our senator, John Barrasso has not passed a single piece of legislation advancing Wyoming’s infrastructure.
Born and raised in rural America, I recognize that our state’s contribution to the country cannot be measured by population. Nonetheless, the currently proposed legislation allocates money principally in that way, leaving us with less than we deserve.
I will oppose any legislation that underfunds block grants to rural communities, requires Wyoming to match federal funding at a ratio of 4:1, and does not recognize agriculture and energy producing states as “projects of national significance.”
Our wide-open spaces create different infrastructure needs than densely populated areas of the coasts. I will Put Wyoming First, and happily ruffle a few feathers, if that’s what it takes to pass an infrastructure bill and to make sure we get our fair share of federal dollars.
Well, once again, a lot of Wyomingites likely agree with what's stated here.
The next part of the plan is a lengthy plan in and of itself on health care. Here, he states:
Healthcare Reform: The Families First Prescription Drug Act
Well, once again, I don't have much to say in opposition to any of this, or to even criticize it. I'm skeptical that it would get passed, but that's no reason not to back a candidate."Prescription drug prices are out of control. [Drug companies] contribute massive amounts of money to political people. But I have to tell you: I'm not interested in their money. I don't need their money."- President Donald TrumpI don’t need drug companies’ money either, and even if I did, I wouldn’t take it. Because I want to restore competitiveness to our system, and not use regulation to protect big corporations.
Americans paid $609 for a box of EpiPens while a family in England paid $70. During the last few years, the cost of insulin in the U.S. rose 300%, and retail prices for 268 of the most common brand name drugs increased 130 times the rate of inflation.
Bottom line: We pay more for prescription drugs than families in every developed country.
Even worse, a quarter of Americans report they are unable to take their medication as prescribed because they cannot afford the cost, and twenty-nine million Americans have no prescription drug coverage at all.
We’re overcharged, plain and simple, which is why the same industry that makes our medicine is the most profitable in America. That’s messed up.
I have a plan to fix this. It’s called the Families First Prescription Drug Act.
But first, I need to give you some important background.
Drug companies accomplish these anti-competitive practices through two deliberate means:
To pull this off, the pharmaceutical industry needed a partner, which explains why they contribute more to Congress than any other industry, and give that money to 95 of our 100 senators!
- Restrict competition by preventing new products from entering the market.
- Conceal price information, making it impossible for patients and doctors to discuss cost-effective alternatives.
Of those 95 U.S. senators, John Barrasso received the fourth-highest amount. Our senator, representing a small rural state run on agriculture and mining, raked in more money from Big Pharma than nearly every other senator in America.
Big Pharma couldn’t care less about Wyoming’s public lands, the shape of our roads, or the future of wind or coal. They send money to John Barrasso to influence his vote.
And they’ve gotten great return on their investment, by getting congress to go along with anti-free market regulations:
These and other practices are approved by our Congress in return for a bag full of money—raising the price of our medicine, inflating profits, and lining the pockets of politicians’ campaigns.
- We are the only developed country whose government is not permitted to negotiate drug prices! Medicare is required by Congress to pay whatever price a drug company charges.
- Big Pharma can pay off competitors not to enter the market. “Pay-for-Delay,” in clear violation of normal antitrust laws, artificially inflates the prices we pay for medicine.
- Drug companies make changes that offer no therapeutic advantage (e.g. changing the coating of the pill) to start the patent clock over again and keep competitors out of their markets (“Product Hopping”).
- Drug companies routinely refuse to provide generic competitors with sufficient samples of their product, blocking generics from creating a competitive product.
- Congress prevents government agencies from researching and communicating information to our doctors about the cost effectiveness of different drug alternatives.
We Republicans worship free enterprise with good reason. This country’s never seen a greater anti-trust crusader than GOP President Teddy Roosevelt. But today our bought-and-paid-for Congress has allowed an illegal web of monopolistic practices to cost Wyoming families thousands of dollars each year, while harming the health of our children and elderly parents.
Within my first six months in office, I will Put Wyoming First by introducing The Families First Prescription Drug Act ending the anti-competitive practices of the pharmaceutical industry. My plan would:
1. Forbid pharmaceutical and healthcare employees from contributing to any federal candidate or candidate’s “Super PAC.” Because of the conflict of interest, restrictions like Rule G-37 prevent certain parties that do business with our government from making political donations. This principle should apply to the pharmaceutical and healthcare services industries, where the federal government is the largest purchaser of their products.
2. Permit the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services to negotiate drug prices. Like every other industrialized country, our government will be required to negotiate with pharmaceutical companies, saving taxpayers money, and creating lower reference pricing for private insurance companies. Medicaid will also be free from the formula-based requirement which incentivizes pharmaceutical companies to raise prices.
3. Requests for extensions of patent protection must show enhanced clinical effectiveness. Under The Families First Prescription Drug Act, for a patent extension, a company must demonstrate clear therapeutic advantage to the consumer.
4. Forbid “Pay for Delay” and “Product Hop” tactics. These tactics, designed to restrict competition, will be outlawed and will extend to non-cash tactics including mergers and acquisitions.
5. Require drug companies to cooperate with the development of generic drugs. In return for patent protection, pharmaceutical companies must cooperate with generic manufacturers 18 months prior to the expiration of a drug patent, to assist in the timely development of biosimilar alternatives.
6. Allow overseas competitors to enter the market when there are limited domestic alternatives. When there are less than two domestic generic drug alternatives, consumers may purchase the same drug from a list of FDA-approved countries (such as Canada, Switzerland, Australia, or England).
7. Provide patients and doctors with pricing transparency and efficacy. As we do with loans and mortgages, The Families First Prescription Drug Act will forbid practices that obscure pricing information from our doctors, and ban hidden pricing through rebates and coupons.
8. Require pharmacists to inform patients about lower-cost alternatives. While doctors and patients together should ultimately decide the best treatment, patients need to be provided with needed information to discuss alternatives with their healthcare providers.
9. Re-authorize the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute to consider cost as a central focus. Transparency in cost and drug effectiveness is routine in countries like Germany, Australia and Canada, but to protect Big Pharma, Congress restricted the PCORI research into the costs of comparative treatments. That needs to end.
10. Create a “fast lane” approval for generic drugs. When a patent has expired and there is no generic alternative, the approval process for a generic will have a “fast lane”—maintaining the quality of the approval process but moving approval to the front of the line.
11. Put an end to the practice of “patent clustering.” Pharmaceutical companies routinely create a web of overlapping patents (also called a “patent thicket”) to make it impossible for innovators to introduce a competing product—usurping the intent of our patent laws. The FDA and Congress will guide the U.S. Patent Office in developing improved standards for what qualifies as intellectual property rights for medicine, supporting innovation while thwarting manipulation.
We deserve a senator who will fight to end the monopolistic practices of the pharmaceutical industry. These rip-offs cost Americans an estimated 100 billion dollars every year, leaving us unable to afford the medicines to keep ourselves and our families healthy.
In the 1980’s, while Ronald Reagan was in office, we had a Congress with the courage to stand up to donors. We also had senators with the moral values to put the health of our communities ahead of profits and donors. I am a champion of free markets, which is why when I see monopolistic schemes, I will go after them. I will put the health of Wyoming families first.
I commit to take a wrecking ball to the anticompetitive tactics of the healthcare industry.I will use my free-market Republican values to take a wrecking ball to the anti-competitive practices of the pharmaceutical and healthcare insurance industry, so that the children and parents of Wyoming have access to affordable medicine and insurance. We will put the safety and health of our families ahead of donors. - Dave Dodson
Well, let's turn to the next thing . . .coal.
Change How We Save Coal
“Do I not destroy my enemies when I make them my friend.”
- Abraham Lincoln
Much of America has a pretty poor opinion of coal. But we need public opinion on our side to end this War on Coal. Today we have a sympathetic Congress and President, but we can’t count on a permanent Republican majority.
It’s time we changed our image. It’s time we changed how we save coal. We need to do this, because like it or not, coal pays the bills around here.
It starts with reminding America that when the Clean Air Act was amended, it was Wyoming’s Powder River Basin low-sulfur coal, safely and inexpensively mined under the strictest environmental standards, that bailed out the nation. Many Americans, and a few politicians, have forgotten that.
We need to show America what our Wyoming landscape looks like after the mining is over—how much better our land looks after we mine and restore it.
We must show the enemies of coal that communities – great communities – developed around our mines. Gillette is not just a source of coal, but a community of schools, playgrounds, hospitals, and small businesses. Any conversation about energy needs to include consideration for the men and women, and neighborhoods, that served our country’s energy needs for decades.
In explaining coal to the rest of the nation, we need to put faces and names to the conversation.
When the country’s demand for anthracite coal went away, so did the mines and the communities near my grandfather’s coal company in Appalachia. All I found on a visit there were outlines of once-vibrant small towns along the coal seams of the Appalachian Valley.
I don’t want to see that happen to the Powder River Basin. My commitment to coal comes from both my head and my heart.
There are two initiatives that can help preserve Wyoming’s state economy and the communities of Campbell County. I will fight for both, with a mind toward positioning coal as part of the nation’s overall environmental solution – not its environmental problem.
Specifically, we need to:
End the Blockade
- End the west coast’s coal terminal blockade
- Subsidize carbon sequestration and ultra-supercritical coal plants
The west coast’s coal terminal blockade is based principally on two objections:
Both arguments are being incorrectly fought by our current senator. Instead of picking media fights with Sierra Club, Greenpeace, and the communities along the Columbia River—all of whom have thus far been winning—we need to show them that PRB coal helps to solve their environmental concerns -- we are on the same side. Here’s why:
- Coal increases greenhouse gas emissions.
- Coal dust from coal trains will pollute the Columbia River.
Japan and South Korea import 96% of their energy. Unlike the United States, which has the landmass to support wind and solar projects, these countries depend on coal for a major portion of their energy needs. Exporting coal from Wyoming to Asia doesn’t displace renewable energy, it replaces less-environmentally-friendly coal from Indonesia. Over a twenty-year period, from mine to end-use consumption, exporting our coal will save 63 million metric tons of CO2 emissions across our planet! That’s good news for Campbell County and good news for Greenpeace.
As signers of the Paris Climate Accord, Japan and Korea upgraded their coal fired electrical generation to further reduce emissions. In order to reach the emission reduction targets of the Paris Accords, they need access to the clean coal of the PRB which has a favorable chemical composition for their environmentally-friendly plants.
We also need to understand that residents living along the rail lines that connect our mines to potential export terminals worry about coal polluting their neighborhoods and the Columbia River as it blows off loaded train cars, harming their health and disrupting fishing and other outdoor activities. We too love our outdoors, and need to show them that we understand their concerns. Then we can show them why they don’t need to worry.
Today’s coal is aerodynamically loaded, and dust-reducing sealants are placed on the surface of the coal, keeping it in place during transportation (no dust). Rather than stick our finger in the chests of people who are concerned but nonetheless misinformed, we need to invite them to walk along the rail lines that leave our mines, see how the cars are loaded, have dinner with us in Gillette, meet our community and witness for themselves the absence of dust where the coal is mined. And if that doesn’t work, we should facilitate testing to prove that the same amount of coal arrives in Oregon that left from Gillette.
Time is not our friend. Our miners and rail workers need jobs now, and if these delays continue, Japan and South Korea will develop permanent alternatives to PRB coal. Rather than make the West Coast our enemy, let’s focus on areas of agreement – namely, helping Japan and South Korea comply with the Paris Accords.
Developing Carbon Sequestration and Ultra-Supercritical Coal Plants
We’ve spent over $175 billion supporting the development of wind technology, while neglecting the opportunities to invest in an environmentally friendly future for coal. Coal deserves the same chance as renewables at being part of our energy future—but we’ve not had the leadership to make that case. The fight for new coal technology should have started on the first day of John Barrasso’s term as a senator, not a few weeks before his re-election campaign.
Carbon sequestration, also known as carbon capture and storage (CCS), is a promising technology that takes CO2 emissions and safely stores them underground or below the ocean. We are way behind in the development of CCS, and our leadership should have actively advocated for the advancement of CCS technology alongside like-minded Democrats over the last decade—valuable time and Wyoming jobs have been lost as a result.
Ultra-supercritical coal plants (USC). Based on their successful deployment in Norway and Germany, USC technology has proven to eliminate nearly all nitrogen and particulate emissions, reduce CO2 by 15-20%, and use less water (addressing coal’s problems with the Clean Water Act). The technology has been available for nearly twenty years, but to date has only been deployed in one plant here in the U.S.
Unfortunately, CCS and USC have received far less attention and financial support than other alternatives. I’m a free market guy, but also an economist. There is a place for initial taxpayer subsidization to support promising technologies that reduce our impact on the environment which benefits all Americans. CCS and USC technologies deserved a senator that will fight for a fair shot at becoming viable, not as a way to get re-elected, but instead to Put Wyoming First.
We need to change how we promote coal. There will be no faster and more obvious way to insure the long-term future of coal than to make allies out of those currently waging the War on Coal.
We should work together to protect our communities and state economy, insure our country’s long-term energy independence, and environmental well-being.
This inaction has squandered time and jobs, and put Wyoming’s coal industry and the PRB at risk. It’s time to Put Wyoming First, by making our state once again part of the country’s environmental solution.
I promise to do whatever it takes to make the Powder River thrive again.I will work tirelessly to change the way we approach the national conversation on coal so we can open export terminals and fund new technologies. With these we can make coal part of the energy solution for the next generation. - Dave Dodson
I've posted on this probably ad nausem, but coal has been on a long term decline for over a century. The bullet was really put in coal when the Royal Navy decided to move to oil. So what's proposed here basically isn't going to occur, and it likely won't work if it did.
It's interesting that one of the platforms here is a proposed Federal subsidization of carbon sequestration. The state is already doing this. This is again interesting, however, as a Republican candidate for the Senate. . . or the Governor, can get away with proposing what is effectively a Socialist program as we like coal. We don't tend to think of things in this fashion, but that's what this is. And its not going to pass Congress, in my view.
But, having said all of that, Dodson deserves credit for really coming out with a pretty detailed, in a campaign context, set of ideas. And frankly for a lot of Wyomingites there are things to like in all of this. Dodson is campaigning as just as big of supporter of the 2nd Amendment as Barasso is, and he likely would be. He's campaigning, probably without realizing it, with some ideas that are basically Distributist in nature, which appeals to people like me even if I'm quite skeptical that a Senator can do much to bring any of that about (that would require cooperation form the Legislature and the Governor). He appears to be more in line on public lands with the views of average Wyomingites than Barasso is.
This means, like the arguing Facebook poster suggested, that his position on other significant national issues, such as abortion, really matter. Dodson may turn out to be a more attractive candidate than might be initially supposed. But how that plays out depends on him overcoming the fact that he's not from here but rather relocated here in wealth, and how he comes out on the remaining issues.
An interesting race to watch.
July 7, 2018
A complaint has been field against Gubernatorial candidate Taylor Haynes alleging that he's not a resident of Wyoming.
Apparently Haynes claims an Albany County residence that's a business of some sort. According to t he Tribune he leases that from a third party and its occupied by a business registered to Haynes. His ranch, also in Albany County. . . in part, has its headquarters and apparently all of its buildings in Colorado.
That could indeed be problematic.
Haynes has no chance of winning in the race and indeed his star has been falling ever since his first run for the office, at which time he was not quite so extreme. So this won't impact the race all that much, I suspect, although I've seen a few Haynes signs here and there. It'll be interesting to see how it plays out, however. Haynes has been big on kicking the Federal government out of Wyoming. If his actual residence isn't in Wyoming, that looks more than a little odd.
Related Threads:
Issues In The Wyoming Election: An issue that won't be there. The Courts
Issues In The Wyoming Election. A Series. Issue(s) No. 2: The Social Issues.
Lex Anteinternet: Issues In the Wyoming Election. A Series. Issue No. 1 (d). The Economy again. . . Tourism. The fragile leg of the stool
Lex Anteinternet: Issues In the Wyoming Election. A Series. Issue No. 1 (c). The Economy again. . . Agriculture
Lex Anteinternet: Issues In the Wyoming Election. A Series. Issue No. 1(b). The Economy again. . . dare we say it. . . Government (shush). And, what's up with Wyoming's GOP hating the Federal Government?
Lex Anteinternet: Issues In the Wyoming Election. A Series. Issue No. 1 (a). The Economy again. . . the extractive industries
Issues In the Wyoming Election. A Series. Issue No. 1. The Economy
Issues In The Wyoming Election: An issue that won't be there. The Courts
Issues In The Wyoming Election. A Series. Issue(s) No. 2: The Social Issues.
Lex Anteinternet: Issues In the Wyoming Election. A Series. Issue No. 1 (d). The Economy again. . . Tourism. The fragile leg of the stool
Lex Anteinternet: Issues In the Wyoming Election. A Series. Issue No. 1 (c). The Economy again. . . Agriculture
Lex Anteinternet: Issues In the Wyoming Election. A Series. Issue No. 1(b). The Economy again. . . dare we say it. . . Government (shush). And, what's up with Wyoming's GOP hating the Federal Government?
Lex Anteinternet: Issues In the Wyoming Election. A Series. Issue No. 1 (a). The Economy again. . . the extractive industries
Issues In the Wyoming Election. A Series. Issue No. 1. The Economy
The 2018 Wyoming Election. Volume Two
The 2018 Wyoming Election
*A sort of vaguely related earlier thread on this topic is here.
The 2018 Wyoming Election
*A sort of vaguely related earlier thread on this topic is here.
