Freedom Caucus has no compassion for hungry, struggling students

I’ve seen a lot of conflicting political views between Wyoming legislators on many issues over the years, but if there’s one topic that they’ve all historically agreed on, it’s improving children’s health. 

Until now. 

Far-right lawmakers killed two bills this session purely for political posturing purposes. The resulting betrayal of Wyoming’s kids is so outrageous I hope it sparks a voter backlash in the next election. One was a summer nutrition program for children from low-income families, and the other an optional K-12 mental health program in public schools aimed at helping struggling students find independent behavioral health services.

I can’t think of many less controversial subjects, especially since both bills were already funded. The nutrition program is paid for by the federal government, so the only state expense would be for three temporary employees to administer it. Meanwhile, money was appropriated last year that would cover the costs of the mental health program.

What caused the death of these bills? Opponents complained about so-called government overreach and made vague claims that other states with the same programs don’t like them. Those weak arguments helped win the day for the hard-line Freedom Caucus, which orchestrated the demise of both measures.

The bills were sponsored by Rep. Lloyd Larsen, R-Lander, a veteran legislator who has become a champion of better access to health care for Wyoming’s poor, women and children. He hasn’t won many battles, including his Quixotic quest to help thousands of low-income residents obtain health insurance through Medicaid expansion. But he’s never backed down from a righteous fight.

Wyoming’s initial decision to reject the USDA’s Summer Electronic Benefit Transfer, also known as SUN Bucks, was made last year by Superintendent of Public Instruction Megan Degenfelder.

The program gives income-eligible families EBT cards with $120 per child to buy fruits, vegetables, meat, dairy products, breads, cereals, snack foods and beverages during the summer when kids are out of school.

The program was started by former President Joe Biden, which explains why it was an immediate target for 15 red states that rebuffed the money. Wyoming turned down $3.8 million.

How did Degenfelder justify snubbing a nutrition program in a state where one in five children has been designated “food insecure?” SUN Bucks helps children in states like Wyoming that don’t offer summer food delivery programs in rural areas.

“I will not let the Biden administration weaponize summer school lunch programs to justify a new welfare program,” Degenfelder told WyoFile in early 2024. “Thanks, but no thanks.” 

It was an extremely unpopular move, which explains why Degenfelder didn’t take a position on House Bill 341, “Summer nutrition assistance for children.” It unanimously passed the House Transportation, Highways & Military Affairs Committee. But many Freedom Caucus members, including its chair, Rep. Rachel Rodriguez-Williams, R-Cody, went on the attack when the bill hit the House floor.

“I’ve heard a couple of negative things from other states that are doing this, that there’s kind of a scheme to increase state dependency when it comes to school meal eligibility,” she said. Yes, in light of such hard evidence, it’s tough to blow holes in the conspiracy theory that the feds are just in this to get our kids hooked on free, nutritious food.

First Lady Jennie Gordon, who leads the Wyoming Hunger Initiative, told WyoFile she has serious concerns about children’s food insecurity. “In Wyoming, we call our children our most important and precious resource,” she said. “Supporting them with nutrition is imperative for growing minds and bodies.”

I suspect the Freedom Caucus, which views Republican Gov. Mark Gordon as its enemy, used his wife’s support for HB 341 as a way to try to inflict some political damage. The Freedom Caucus bloc overwhelmingly voted to kill the bill, which died 25-34. But I don’t think caucus members will feel too smug or count this as a “win” when they have to explain next election why they voted against feeding kids.

House Bill 180, “K-12 mental health program-3,” also has the Freedom  Caucus’ bloody fingerprints on it. Five of the six House Education Committee members who voted against the bill belong to the caucus, and the sixth was endorsed by the bloc last election. Only three members of the panel voted in favor of the already funded $5.8 million program.

Improving mental health services for K-12 students has proven difficult because of the lack of access to providers. The state has a youth suicide rate that is double the national average, and the highest prevalence rate of youth-based major depressive episodes in the U.S., according to Dustin Brown of the Wyoming Department of Education.

Rep. Larsen explained HB 180 is based on recommendations from the Mental Health and Vulnerable Adult Task Force, which tried to create a state policy to help students experiencing anxiety, depression, trauma, suicidal ideation and other conditions.

An earlier version of the bill failed, so the Education Committee made it an interim topic. But last November it killed its draft bill on a tie vote. Larsen decided to sponsor it on his own.

Larsen said the task force decided not to design a program to hire K-12 mental health counselors for two reasons: schools shouldn’t be turned into mental health providers, and the cost would be enormous at up to $125 million per year. Both are valid concerns.

Patricia McCoy, chair of the Laramie County chapter of Moms for Liberty, came to the hearing with all of the hysterical talking points you’d expect from the far-right group. She charged the bill interferes with parents’ fundamental rights to make health care decisions for their children.

“We’ve hired armies of counselors and spent millions of dollars in social and learning initiatives,” the mother said. “This is not a funding problem. This is a fundamental lack of understanding about roles and responsibilities.”

No, it’s not, because parents would be involved every step of the way. What the task force settled on is worth trying: equip schools with the ability to hire staff to help identify students who have noticeably changed behavior, and try to stabilize the situation. 

Program coordinators would contact parents, who have the option to let their child be screened for potential mental health conditions affecting their schoolwork and life, or not participate. If they say yes, the program would look for providers outside the school that could offer treatment. 

Degenfelder said she’s on board with this concept because it gives control to parents. She said her department and school districts have tools to evaluate the program’s effectiveness, including graduation rates, performance on state assessments, and an accountability system.

But Freshman Rep. Laurie Bratten, R-Sheridan, a former teacher and Freedom Caucus member, echoed Rodriguez-Williams’ weak complaints about the summer nutrition program.

“I’ve been hearing big pushback and concerns about this from parents as well as teachers,” Bratten said.

I agree with Rep. Martha Lawley, R-Worland, a conservative legislator who voted for the bill because it answers the parental rights questions that kept her from supporting the joint interim committee’s version.

“It’s a dim outlook [for progress], and to me to do nothing is not an option,” Lawley said. 

The WDE’s Brown pointed to the underlying strength of the bill, but the Freedom Caucus — mad with power after taking control of the House — already decided to kill it. He said the program will help teachers and others identify what might be an indication that a child is struggling.

“It improves their assessment ability, it improves the notification of parents, and the district has agreements with providers that can meet those needs for parents,” Brown said.

But the Freedom Caucus prefers to invoke the boogeyman of government overreach and sensationally claim parents’ rights are being violated rather than take commonsense action to improve students’ physical and mental health. It’s a remarkable low for the “new sheriff in town.”