Bill Tallen

In a conversation some years ago with a friend over an HOA-induced argument between neighbors, he commented that if people can’t stay civil over property markers and short-term rentals, how likely is it that they would pull together in a real emergency? A tape from “Hamburger Hill,” the best of the first-generation Vietnam movies, plays in my head: infantrymen in the mud, fighting side by side, day after day, who come to blows in the rear one day over racial slurs and stereotypes, until one of them steps back and says, “It don’t mean nothing, man. Not a thing.” Because the next day, they’ll be back in it, as brothers. That’s the necessary attitude I’ve seen among soldiers and first responders for most of my life. 

Why can’t we do that in the political realm? 

The scandal of the moment is “Checkgate,” arising from the distribution of campaign contribution checks on the House floor a couple of weeks ago. 

This last week I spent some idle hours watching proceedings on the Wyoming Senate floor through YouTube. I saw the introduction of an amended Senate rule that would prohibit the solicitation or receipt of campaign contributions in the Senate chamber or elsewhere in the capitol under the authority of the Senate president. The House has enacted a similar rule, and the governor has weighed in with an executive order covering areas and proceedings beyond legislative control. All of which confirms to my satisfaction that there were no such rules in place when campaign contribution checks were handed to representatives on the floor after the day’s House session had adjourned. I agree that the optics were bad, but I’m still waiting to see anyone cite exactly what rules or laws were broken. 

And yet the implication and then the bald accusation of bribery soon followed, and there is now a legislative committee investigation, another investigation by the Laramie County Sheriff, and of course the trial by bonfire, torches and pitchforks in the media and worst of all, over social media. 

Is there an epidemic of selective amnesia, or willful blindness, about how critical campaign contributions are to every elected official in the state? Their political careers and aspirations depend on those contributions. It’s acceptable, I’m learning, if the money changes hands out of sight. And then there’s the assumption that since the lady who distributed a third party’s checks has opinions regarding legislation, that she was trying to bribe legislators to support her positions. The illogic here is obvious and extreme. 

I believe there’s more to it, that elevates the controversy from mere absurdity to maliciousness. There’s been a political revolution brewing in state politics, that boiled over in the 2024 election of a broad slate of legislators and other candidates that are at least a few points to the right of many previous and continuing incumbents. Factions become entrenched and do not take kindly to upset and loss of influence. I am not jumping into the mosh pit to defend the Freedom Caucus, because I have found points on which I disagree with them; I’m no one’s loyal foot soldier in the political realm. But what I do observe is that many of the old guard in state government are irate and resentful about the challenge. I’m ready to call it desperation, in an election year. They are afraid of losing their control and instead of entering and encouraging healthy, principled debate on the issues, they seize on any pretext to attack the opposition’s character, since they are failing on the issues to a degree that they are unwilling to accept.

Incivility on all sides remains under control, for the most part, in formal proceedings — which is precisely why we have rules and procedures — but it manifests a “gotcha!” attitude in uncivil, irrational and acrimonious statements and behaviors in the public and media sphere and sometimes downright kindergarten playground behavior on social media, by both elected and unelected officials, and politically active citizens. 

In my former employment as a federal agent, I spent days on end cooped up in a vehicle with two other men or women who were not always my friends. We learned to be civil about our disagreements, and treat each other respectfully regardless of our differences of opinion — because the agent I insulted or disrespected today might be the one I’d need to pull me out of a burning vehicle in the next hour, or cover my rear in a firefight. I wish our political class could keep their disagreements within similar bounds of civility and respect; and that our fellow citizens could employ similar tact and self-control. In the end, we’re all in this together.