Good and bad in the 2026 Wyoming Legislature

The 2026 Wyoming legislative session was both better and worse than anticipated. Better in that most of the worst policies and proposals were defeated, but worse because it demonstrated the full depth of the dysfunction and lack of statesmanship displayed by certain members. One well-known euphemism compares legislating to sausage making: messy processes by nature, but ones that generally yield good results. This legislative session was not that.

Each legislative session is a mixed bag in some ways, but this one was more mixed than most. The House struggled more than the Senate, weighed down by inefficient procedure and a set of bills that were in worse shape than those considered by the upper chamber.  

The budget process in the House is a particularly poignant example of wasted time and poor prioritizing. Coming into the session, the Freedom Caucus-led appropriations committee made major cuts to Gov. Mark Gordon’s proposed budget, including a $40 million cut to the University of Wyoming’s block grant, defunding the Wyoming Business Council and a multitude of other reductions that were intended more as a show of force than an effort at serious policymaking. The Senate almost immediately restored the governor’s proposals as the starting point for discussion, taking a serious and thoughtful look and then voting on amendments based on evidence and demonstrated needs. The House, on the other hand, spent four days working through hundreds of amendments to the Freedom Caucus budget, then raced through negotiations with the Senate before accepting almost all of the Senate’s proposals. The waste of legislative time and energy in pursuit of nothing more than weak political theater was egregious.

Furthermore, while most bad bills failed this session, that was in large part due to procedure, not the wisdom of the majority of the members. A budget session requires a two-thirds vote before bills can be introduced. Because the Freedom Caucus and their allies did not have a two-thirds majority in the House, many of their worst bills did not survive introduction. These bills failed, not because they lacked a majority, but because they lacked a supermajority. In a regular session, these bills would have been introduced and likely would have passed the House, putting Wyoming at risk of even worse policymaking in the future.

No reflection on this legislative session would be complete without mentioning “Checkgate,” this year’s stain on Wyoming’s legislative integrity.  When multiple far-right members of the Legislature were accused of, and later admitted to, accepting campaign contributions on the floor of the House from an activist championing a bill that would soon be before them, the optics and ethics of the acts quickly became a major controversy. While the House ultimately determined that no rule had been broken, that was largely because no one had thought to write a rule barring such obviously improper conduct. It reflects poorly on the judgment, wisdom and discernment of those who provided and accepted those checks. The defense, raised by several, that they did not think they did anything wrong is the most concerning thing of all.  

Nevertheless, this session was not without its bright spots. Most bad bills died, even if on procedural grounds. Despite the attempts at posturing and using legislative time to score points for reelection, the budget that the Legislature passed funded the government responsibly and recognized areas that need reexamining or reimagining. One example, the Wyoming Business Council, was at risk of total defunding. This would have left us without a statewide economic development organization at a time when Wyoming is already behind neighboring states when it comes to attracting businesses and future prosperity. Fortunately, the Legislature funded the council for another year, allowing time to consider how it should operate, whether and what changes might occur, while maintaining existing programs that Wyoming entrepreneurs depend on. This measured approach is far better than the smash-and-slash tactics that the Freedom Caucus attempted.

Despite the silver linings, this legislative session exposed the problems facing our state politics. Fortunately, the antidote to this dysfunction is in the voters’ hands. This is an election year, and the choice of what type of leaders and policymakers will make decisions for our state falls to us. I am optimistic about what Wyoming will do. The public has now seen what this style of governance looks like, and the feedback has been encouraging.  Wyoming wants a conservative, efficient government, not one based on tearing down what we have built and mortgaging our future. Make no mistake, there is urgency in this decision. If Wyoming returns a similar Legislature to next year’s legislative session, things will likely get worse, not better. This Legislature just showed us what the choice really is — I hope we all choose wisely.