Hardliners didn’t like Mark Gordon when he was elected governor in 2018, because they knew he wasn’t one of their own and never would be.
Opinion
They really don’t like him now, especially after Gordon visited Harvard University to talk about his goal of making Wyoming carbon-negative, then repeated the assertion on “60 Minutes.”
The state Republican Party’s far-right central committee passed a vote of “no confidence” in Gordon, and some members even accused him of being a liberal. That’s a hilarious accusation, especially if you’re a Wyoming liberal who’s watched the governor desperately try to please people on the right on most energy and other issues.
Harriet Hageman, now Wyoming’s U.S. House representative, finished third in the 2018 GOP primary for governor and might have won if she and second-place Foster Friess hadn’t split the conservative vote.
But what would’ve happened if conservatives got their wish five years ago and kept Gordon out of the governor’s office in favor of someone like Hageman, who shares their rabid anti-environmental views?
The form letter you get back from Hageman if you write to voice concern about her plans to gut the Clean Water Act, the Endangered Species Act and others is a poignant display of her ideology.
To wit: “We have repeatedly witnessed Democratic politicians and radical left-wing special interest groups hijack sound environmental conservation policies by pushing regulations and top-down control that is designed to further expand their power and authority over every aspect of American society.”
In her government-funded rant, Hageman goes on to name the GOP’s top boogeymen, including the Green New Deal, unelected bureaucrats, socialist policies, a total air travel ban and plans to bankrupt America with green energy upgrades to all federal buildings.
It’s all election-driven drivel aimed at keeping her party’s base united in its fear and hatred of all things federal. But the fact Hageman is only one of 435 members of a pretty evenly divided U.S. House means most outrageous policies she advocates don’t carry much weight. The really extreme stuff she wants doesn’t stand a chance of passing the Senate or being signed by Democratic President Joe Biden.
But if Hageman was the top elected Republican in Wyoming — provided she kept in the good graces of party leaders — the former Cheyenne lawyer would have much more influence.
If she used her executive powers in combination with bright red majorities in both legislative chambers, Hageman’s future legal battles with federal environmental regulators would be fully funded by the state of Wyoming. She’d also have the power to appoint like-minded judges and agency directors.
There’s a direct link between the creation of the extremist Wyoming Freedom Caucus in 2020 and the GOP’s frustration with Gordon, who was branded as not a “true conservative” and therefore not trustworthy. Gordon won a second term in 2022, but the election also saw a significant increase in Freedom Caucus legislators. If that success continues, the 2026 gubernatorial primary race could see extremists unite behind a caucus member.
That won’t be Hageman, who will likely be content to remain in Washington, D.C., for the rest of her career. But the Freedom Caucus will be highly motivated to install one of its own as governor, particularly because term-limited Gordon has been more outspoken recently about his vision of Wyoming’s energy future.
It’s not like Gordon hid his agenda. He’s been talking about an inclusive “all of the above” energy policy since 2018. The governor has emphasized his support for fossil fuels, as any Wyoming politician would in the wake of generally declining production for coal, oil and natural gas. Protecting the industries that contribute the majority of mineral tax revenue that pays for state government is a no-brainer.
But Gordon’s willingness to explore nuclear energy, renewable energy like wind and solar, geothermal energy, and developing rare earth materials has been a staple of his State of the State speeches to the Legislature since his first inauguration. While he’s backed legislative efforts to prohibit coal-fired power plants from converting to cheaper energy resources, Gordon is all-in on keeping mines open through carbon capture.
The governor was talking about blowing past the “carbon neutral” goal and becoming “carbon negative” at least as far back as 2019. However, it wasn’t until Gordon’s October speech to the Harvard Kennedy School’s Institute of Politics that the Freedom Caucus exploited its opportunity to accuse him of having a “socialist agenda.”
The governor had to know that little trip would rile up the Freedom Caucus chairman, Rep. John Bear (R-Gillette), and provide a platform to bash him on friendly media outlets like Fox News.
“I was embarrassed that our chief executive would go to a pro-Hamas, pro-China school and appease an anti-fossil fuel crowd,” Bear told Fox. “I was embarrassed that someone who campaigned as a conservative is ready to close the coffin on coal, oil and gas in his state. He has given in to the [Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (R-New York) and former Vice President] Al Gore hysteria that is, in fact, disputed science.”
Of course, climate change is not disputed science, a fact Gordon readily admits. His predecessor, two-term Republican Gov. Matt Mead, would not acknowledge climate change is human-caused, only that it’s here and Wyoming reluctantly has to deal with it.
Bear claimed Gordon won’t push back on the “anti-American Biden agenda,” which is absurd, because the governor rarely wastes an opportunity to blast the administration’s energy regulations as bad for Wyoming. The Freedom Caucus leader, though, demands to know why Gordon is “selling our economy and our livelihoods down the liberal river.”
Though Wyoming Republican Party Chairman Frank Eathorne and others blame pesky liberals for crossing over in the primary and electing Gordon, it’s not true. I did do that, hoping that as the least objectionable candidate in the race, Gordon would win. But there weren’t nearly enough Democrats to make it happen. Moderate “traditional” Republicans sealed the deal.
It’s ironic the GOP was so incensed by the outcome, intent on punishing Democrats, that they passed a law keeping voters from changing their party affiliation for three-and-a-half months before the primary.
I know a lot of fellow Democrats who voted for Gordon because they couldn’t stomach the possibility Friess or Hageman would win. Many regretted it — especially if they donated money to his campaign — because Gordon didn’t fulfill all their hopes. But on the plus side, Democrats now know that defeating Hageman really did matter.
During Gordon’s first term, trying to appease the right on most issues didn’t earn their respect. Winning another term, though, should have freed him to do what he thinks is right for Wyoming. That’s probably why Gordon doesn’t seem to care much if the Freedom Caucus calls him a liberal and other nasty words.
The major political lesson for Wyomingites is that elections do matter. GOP moderates didn’t want to elect an extremist governor, so they chose Gordon. The far-right wing of the party will naturally try to select the most Freedom Caucus-loving candidate as its standard-bearer in 2026.
But the 2022 congressional primary between Hageman and former Rep. Liz Cheney had the unlikely effect of attracting a lot more Democratic crossover voters. They didn’t make a difference in Hageman’s landslide victory, but many will remain Republicans. No GOP primary will ever be “pure,” and a moderate governor might well win again.
That’s the second political lesson, and it’s a doozy for Wyoming Republican lawmakers: what goes around comes around.
Correction: The year of the next gubernatorial primary was corrected in this story. —Ed.
We can thank the Citizens United decision for this horrible state of affairs, from the president down to state legislatures. PACs should be outlawed, individuals should not be allowed to give more than $1,000 to a candidate, and corporations should not be considered human beings. The Citizens United decision by the Supreme Court was the beginning of the end; democracy is failing and its only a matter of time.
Harriet is crazy as a loon. She is an embarrassment to our State, and like the tiny-hands guy who showed up in Casper to support her candidacy, she has completely lost touch with reality. God forgive if she is re-elected. Wyoming voters can’t be that stupid, can they? Kerry, your musings are entirely on point.
” Wyoming voters can’t be that stupid, can they?”
Yes, they can be. They prove it every election.
Great idea. Certainly, something to think about.
Sir: Whatever your views of Hageman, choose your words appropriately. Since you often play word games, the word “anti” means “against”. Who is or could possibly be “against” the environment, that which surrounds us all? Is a person who approves of abortion “anti-life”? Of course, not!
Minor nitpick: Hageman is one of only 434 members of the US House of Representatives. Criminal charlatan George Santos was expelled, despite Hageman’s vote against it.
In any event, the citizens Wyoming dodged a bullet when they rejected “Harriet the Horrible,” as she is dubbed in some quarters, for the Governorship. Gordon’s performance during the acute stage of the COVID pandemic was lackluster enough, resulting in the lowest rate of immunization of any state and a high percentage of sickness and death. Could we even imagine what harm would have ensued if she were Governor then? At least, after riding Trump’s soiled coattails to a seat in Congress, she is surrounded by more moderate colleagues who can rein in her extremism. Let’s hope we continue in the Wyoming Way and don’t fall prey to the influence of out-of-state radicalism in the future.
Yes but we have a new and more dangerous threat now hunting the halls of our state Government. Is Mr Gray a better choice than Hageman? One thing I have seen is the “Wyoming Anti Freedom Caucus” are lock step in their efforts to turn this into a semi autocratic state. Phone calls from individuals unknown on how to vote on certain bill, don’t ever cross us or you will feel our rathe from our mob.
Indeed, we all know that Chucky is greedily eying the office across the rotunda, and doing everything possible during his tenure as Secretary of State – constitutional or not – to undermine the voting rights of anyone who might prefer a more moderate candidate. (The anti-crossover law, which is almost certainly unconstitutional, is already in place. He’s now threatening to impose, by fiat, registration requirements that would specifically make it a hassle for UW students, who tend to lean moderate if not left, to vote.) Will we reject him, as we did Eli Bebout some years back, for a candidate more in accord with Wyoming values? I certainly hope so. I would even vote for Cale Case – whom I once opposed – for Governor. (Case has mellowed since his early, pro-corporate, ultra-libertarian days and would now make a reasonable candidate.)
Gordon, Hageman, Lummus, and Barrasso are not your friend. None of them represent the people of Wyoming. They represent industry and “livestock growers”. All of them are against public land and would be very happy to eliminate it, or give it to their buddies. Certainly Mark Gordon is the lesser of evils, but that’s not saying much when compared to the other characters. Hageman is the absolute worst.
It sure appears that you vehemently dislike the food and energy producers who own, direct, or work in those industries. My suggestion would be you show your dislike by refusing to buy food or energy. Now is an excellent time to show how well that would work.
It appears that you think only livestock growers should be represented.
No, she said food and energy. Two things we all need no matter what our political party. What’s more these are the economy that keeps Wyoming going or it will become a ghost state. She is simply saying that no matter who you are, no matter what you politically believe we all need these things and they in the past have been a part of Wyoming’s economy. It’s like the RMP electricity increase that was going to be a 21.6% increase. That wasn’t just going to affect just the Republicans or just the Democrats, that would affect everyone and most likely the older seniors and the people of lower income levels the most. I know a lot of people who fit in those categories. I didn’t know which of these folks were Democrats or which ones were Republicans. I still don’t. I only knew this increase would make their lives difficult and that was all I cared about. Not everything is one side or the other, somethings will hurt people on both sides and that is what is the most important to me. I would think it should be that way for all of us who live in Wyoming. It used to be when I was a kid living in Wyoming. Why has it changed?
That’s right. Not everything is one side or the other. That’s why I wrote what I wrote.
Thank you.
>>During Gordon’s first term, trying to appease the right on most issues didn’t earn their respect. Winning another term, though, should have freed him to do what he thinks is right for Wyoming. That’s probably why Gordon doesn’t seem to care much if the Freedom Caucus calls him a liberal and other nasty words.<<
Exactly why term limits are also needed in the US Senate and House.