Khale Lenhart

The 2024 legislative session has revealed a lot about the state of Wyoming politics. As with most legislative sessions, we have seen both calculated grandstanding and remarkable instances of selflessness. Our elected officials have wrestled over big issues, and by watching that process, we can see who is deserving of our support. Serving in the Legislature requires many decisions on big issues in a short period of time, and it is hard to hide one’s true self in that setting. Fortunately, this lets the rest of us see the true colors of our elected officials and gives us the opportunity to decide who is ready to make the decisions that will set our state’s path into the future. Perhaps the biggest thing we have learned from this legislative session is who the self-styled “Freedom Caucus” really is. If this session is any indication, they have already lost sight of why they were elected and have instead let their own talking points get in the way of doing what is right for the state.  

There are many examples of this, but two jump immediately to mind. First, in a discussion about funding to cities and towns, Rep. John Bear (R-Gillette), chairman of the Wyoming House Freedom Caucus, asked whether small towns in Wyoming should even exist. All of us should sit up and take note of this. The leader of a significant — albeit shrinking — group of legislators in the Wyoming Legislature genuinely questioned whether Wyoming should have small towns. He was so caught up in his ideology that he lost sight of reality. Our state was founded on its small towns and communities. Wyoming should have small towns. Arguing otherwise shows just how out of touch this group is.  

The second example demonstrates both a lack of judgment and a lack of basic knowledge about how our government functions. Our state recently saw its first police officer die in the line of duty since 1997 when Sheridan Police Sgt. Nevada Krinkee was shot and killed.  The Wyoming House took up a budget amendment seeking to increase the death benefit for a fallen officer’s family from 62.5% of the officer’s salary to 90%. While the House ultimately passed the measure, it was not without opposition, again primarily from Freedom Caucus members.  

The arguments against this provision primarily focused on the cost to the state. This is dismaying on multiple levels. First, the impact to the state is about $20,000 a year. This is nothing as a portion of our state budget, but a significant amount to a family that lost a husband and father. The callousness with which these members approached the subject is disheartening.  

To make it even worse, these members of the Freedom Caucus showed a lack of understanding about how the funding even works. They argued against the provision based on budgetary concerns, but these funds do not come from the state’s general fund. Voting against this provision has no impact on the budget they pass or the taxes that they distribute. All of these death benefits come from the state’s law enforcement pension fund, which is paid into by the officers and their employers as a term of their employment. This fund has more than enough to absorb the increased cost. Those opposing this bill showed both a lack of human empathy and a lack of understanding about how our government works. They opposed this proposal without even taking the time to learn about the sources of the funds. The ideology was enough for them.

These examples are merely reflections of the underlying issue in state government right now. Wyoming has real challenges that require thoughtful responses. However, a portion of our Legislature is more committed to maintaining their ideological stances than in supporting the people of our state. They are willing to let our small towns die and to turn away from the families of those who gave their life protecting our state.  

We need people who are willing to consider all the facts, understand the law and our government, and display wisdom and good judgment in how to address our state’s problems. If this session is any indication, Freedom Caucus struggles to do any of the things we ask of them. They are not a serious group with serious solutions. Maybe it is time to find some better alternatives with a vision for our state, rather than empty talking points and ideological rigidity. Let’s hope we can all make the right decision in how our state will be led when we are at the ballot box this year.

(Khale J. Lenhart is a partner at the law firm Hirst Applegate in Cheyenne, where he has practiced since 2011. He is a former chairman of the Laramie County Republican Party.)