Dark money group questions transparency of Wyoming lawmakers, legislative staff

Honor Wyoming, a conservative political group in Wyoming, has alleged since at least January that the state is blocking and censoring constituent emails to lawmakers, threatening to take legal action as a result. 

The allegations have led to the creation of a legislative panel to examine the matter, and even prompted some critics to accuse the group of pushing for transparency while not being open about its own leadership.

Since the organization made an expensive entrance into the state’s political landscape in 2024 via social media ads and billboards, Honor Wyoming has offered a convenient way for its website visitors to bulk email Wyoming lawmakers. 

When that resulted in thousands of emails landing in lawmaker junk or quarantine folders due to the state email management system’s default security settings, Honor Wyoming cried foul, describing the situation as a free speech violation. 

“Whether wittingly or unwittingly, the Wyoming Legislative Services [sic] Office has been censoring communications with legislators,” the group posted on its website in March. Three months earlier, the group had sent a letter to the state, threatening legal action if the situation was not remedied. 

In April, the Legislature formed a subcommittee to evaluate the group’s concerns in the off-season, also known as the interim, and to better understand the inner mechanics of Microsoft Outlook, the email management system used by the state of Wyoming. Speaker of the House Chip Neiman, R-Hulett, co-chaired the subcommittee with Sen. Barry Crago, R-Buffalo, alongside members Rep. John Bear, R-Gillette, and Sen. Mike Gierau, D-Jackson. 

Ultimately, the four lawmakers split on whether legislation was necessary, and tensions flared last week as the Management Council discussed the subcommittee’s findings. 

“All of the emails are being delivered,” Crago said at the meeting in Cheyenne. “Every one of us in this room and all of our colleagues are receiving the emails from the group that has showed up here to testify and asked for transparency, oddly enough, but can’t even tell us who their board of directors is. I find that somewhat ironic — asking for transparency when unwilling to tell us who’s paying the bills back home.” 

Because Honor Wyoming is a nonprofit, it is not legally required to publicly disclose the details of its funding. When the source of political money isn’t known — unlike funds raised by politicians and political action committees, which are required by law to be publicly disclosed — it is referred to as dark money. According to The Center for Public Integrity, nonprofits and corporate entities, such as limited liability companies, are the two most common vehicles for dark money in politics. 

At the meeting, Sen. Gierau asked the group’s attorney, Drake Hill, about the organization’s makeup.

Hill is married to former Superintendent of Public Instruction Cindy Hill, and has previously served as chairman of the Wyoming Republican Party. 

“Can you tell me a little bit about Honor Wyoming? Like, who’s the board of directors? Who’s in charge of this outfit, Mr. Hill?” Gierau asked. 

“I know that’s been a question that has been directed, and I know you’ve been interested in that question through the press yourself,” Hill said. “Honestly, I’m not aware of who the board members are, but I do know that the scope of their mission is to bring awareness to issues.”

Meanwhile, Rep. Bear led the charge on a bill to require legislative staff to produce a list of emails received by legislators. That way, Bear said, constituents concerned that lawmakers were not receiving their emails could confirm with staff. 

“There’s another side to this story. And that is that our constituents would like to contact us via email, and I’d like to be an advocate for those constituents,” Bear told the council. 

Ultimately, the council voted 5-5 to sponsor the legislation. Without a majority, the bill failed, but an individual lawmaker is likely to sponsor it for the 2026 budget session. 

Staff explanation

The Management Council’s discussion began with a presentation by Legislative Service Office staff members. 

“I think maybe just to start off with, it’s important for everyone to know that these emails in question were all being delivered to legislators,” LSO Director Matt Obrecht said. “It was just a question of whether they’re going to your inbox, your junk folder, or your quarantine folder, all of which legislators have access to.”

Since the subcommittee met in July, “LSO has done a tremendous amount of work,” Anthony Sara, deputy administrator of operations, told lawmakers. 

“We’ve done a deep dive into our legislative email system and probably spent more time on this than anything else this [legislative off-season,]” Sara said. “It’s something that we obviously take very seriously and understand that you have to have your legislative email for important communication with your constituents.” 

That work included extended discussions with Microsoft and education with lawmakers about how to check junk folders and how to release quarantined messages into their inboxes. Staff also updated the Legislature’s website to inform constituents of who to contact if they’re concerned their emails are not being delivered. 

While some changes were made to the system settings, Sara said LSO “also learned that a lot of this is out of our control.

“The scores that Microsoft gives each email for spam, what’s called the spam confidence level, cannot be adjusted by users and is 100% determined by Microsoft,” Sara said. 

Senate President Bo Biteman, R-Ranchester, asked LSO about Honor Wyoming’s accusations. 

“It’s been insinuated online and on billboards that our staff and certain legislators are purposely censoring emails and content thereof. Is that true?” Biteman said. 

“No, I can assure you that nobody within our IT section is selecting where emails go, nor do we have the resources to do that with the amount of emails that you all get,” Sara said. 

Lawmaker debate

Bear told the council that emails that land in a junk or quarantine folder are less likely to be seen. And as a lawmaker, he said he wants to “hear from everybody that I can.” 

A bill to require legislative staff to publish a partially redacted list of quarantined email addresses each working day of the legislative session and once a week otherwise, Bear said, would help solve that problem. 

“I’m here today to try to come up with a solution so that even though we have [security] risks that we live with, the First Amendment opportunity of our constituents to contact us and discuss things with us via email is continued,” Bear said. “There are people like the good Vice President of the Senate and myself who have fought, many have died, so that we would have a First Amendment, a right for the people to bring their grievances to their government.” 

Throughout his testimony, Bear referred to constituent emails as being “blocked” — a characterization that several members of the committee disputed. 

“We’ve established the fact that no emails have been blocked. So you’re being disingenuous when you use the term ‘blocked,’” Biteman said. 

Bear said he would “attempt not to use the word,” but “I will tell you that’s my perception. That’s the perception of probably 99% of people out there.”

Whatever term the Legislature finds appropriate, Hill, Honor Wyoming’s attorney, said, the objective is “that we allow for constituents to be heard in whatever manner” the constituent uses to communicate.

“None is more important than another and none is less important than the other,” Hill said. 

Neiman also spoke in favor of the bill, arguing that the issue is much larger than Honor Wyoming. 

“As I’ve listened to this, I guess the thing that kind of resonates with me is, this really isn’t because of one organization’s issue,” Neiman said. “This wasn’t specific — I mean, we have one organization that came and spoke to us today, but there were multiple organizations that were discussed, [American Gun Owners Association], and others.” 

The bill “isn’t for one organization, it’s for the citizens of the state of Wyoming,” he said. 

But if the issue was one of importance to Wyoming residents, Biteman said, “this room would be full of people testifying. Nobody showed up. Not a single person other than the group who’s caused this whole thing to be before us today.”

RELATED

Wyoming political group makes expensive, murky campaign season entrance

Politics, press and philanthropy: How a Jackson Hole billionaire couple is shaping Wyoming

Sen. Tara Nethercott, R-Cheyenne, took things further, arguing that the bill was about something else entirely. 

“The conversation we’re really having here today is about Wyoming being taken over by large political, well-funded organizations that have the ability to control your elected [officials] through fear and misinformation, wittingly or unwittingly, creating confusion and fractionalization of our great state,” Nethercott said. “It must come to an end.”

In the meantime, Nethercott encouraged residents “to keep communicating with your legislators directly” using the contact information provided on the Wyoming Legislature’s website. 

Sen. Tim Salazar, R-Riverton, and Reps. Bear, Neiman, Jeremy Haroldson, R-Wheatland and Scott Heiner, R-Green River, voted in favor of the bill, while Sens. Biteman, Crago, Gierau, and Nethercott and Rep. Mike Yin, D-Jackson, voted against it. 

The 2026 budget session convenes Feb. 9.