CASPER — The prospects of crossover voting legislation finally becoming law this year is much more likely after the Senate on Tuesday revived a defeated bill and moved it to a more favorable committee. 

About half an hour before the Senate broke for lunch, Senate Majority Floor Leader Sen. Larry Hicks (R-Baggs) moved to re-refer House Bill 103, a crossover voting bill that died last week in the Senate Corporations, Elections and Political Subdivisions Committee with a 3-1 vote, to the Senate Revenue Committee. 

Such a move is rare, but within the Senate’s rules. 

The Senate first voted to withdraw the bill from the Senate Corporations Committee, which is typically tasked with considering election-related legislation, in a 19-12 vote. Then the motion to refer the bill to a new committee passed in a narrow 16-14 vote, with Senate president Ogden Driskill (R-Devils Tower) excused. Hicks did not immediately respond to the Star-Tribune’s requests for comment. 

House Bill 103, sponsored by Wheatland Republican Rep. Jeremy Haroldson, would bar voters from changing their party affiliation after the first day of the candidate-filing period. 

In other words, voters wouldn’t be able to see what their candidate options are before deciding which party ticket they want to vote on for the primary election. There would also be a 14-day blackout period prior to general elections. 

Voters wouldn’t be able to cancel their registration in those time periods, the idea being that allowing those cancellations would provide a loophole for people to re-register with a different party affiliation. 

Secretary of State Chuck Gray, who campaigned primarily on a platform focused on voter fraud and banning ballot drop boxes, has voiced his support for the bill. 

The Legislature has wrangled over bills in the past that aimed to curb crossover voting, but without success. 

The practice came to the forefront in particular during the last election cycle as many Democrats switched to the Republican Party to vote for Wyoming’s former Rep. Liz Cheney, who ultimately lost her race to Rep. Harriet Hageman. 

With the new referral, the bill’s chances of clearing the Legislature are much more likely. The Senate Revenue Committee has a majority of almost certain yes votes for the legislation, and the committee’s chairman — Sen. Bo Biteman (R-Ranchester) — sponsored a mirror bill that died in the Senate Corporations Committee earlier this month. 

What’s more, the Senate body as a whole appears more favorable for the bill’s survival. 

Attempting to reverse the decisions of the Senate president, who is in charge of assigning bills to committees, is unusual. 

Sen. Tara Nethercott (R-Cheyenne) warned against the precedent that such a move might set for other votes that lawmakers are unhappy with. 

“There’s a way to do this process properly,” Nethercott said. “Or, we can indulge this opportunity to — just this one time. Just this one time. But what if it isn’t? What is the point? What is the point of committees? What is the point of the process if all we’re going to do is upend it? I urge you to stand with the process, to stand with the history of the upper chamber. Just because you can does not mean it’s wise that you should.” 

Sen. Anthony Bouchard (R-Cheyenne) standing to speak after Nethercott, rebuffed her comments. 

“Or we can just do our jobs, and do what our constituents want us to do down here,” he said. “This is part of the procedures. It’s in the rules, it’s there for a purpose. And we should do it when it’s appropriate. And I feel it is appropriate.” 

In comments on the Senate floor, Hicks acknowledged the rarity of attempts to reverse the decisions of the Senate president. 

“We don’t do this very often, and we shouldn’t,” he said. “But when we do do it, and then we have a vote, and the vote is actually an affirmative vote, it follows the process.” 

Hicks pointed out that the Senate has rules that allow the body to withdraw and re-refer bills and questioned why they would be there if they weren’t meant to be used. 

“This body has repeatedly in the last three sessions voted on this issue and resoundingly sent it out of this chamber,” Hicks said, arguing that this “might be just one of those things” where using rules to overturn the Senate president’s decision makes sense. 

If the bill makes it past a vote in the Senate Revenue Committee, it will have to clear three more votes in the Senate before the governor can sign it into law.