Learning from the past necessary
There has been no shortage of retrospectives and analyses of this year’s Republican primary election. The Wyoming Freedom Caucus saw major losses, with incumbents and challengers alike losing. This faction that controlled the Wyoming House the last two years will be reduced to ten or fewer members out of 62 total seats come next January. There is no way to interpret those results other than as the voters’ rejection of the Freedom Caucus.
What is less clear is the reason why Wyoming voters rejected these candidates. Was it their policies? Their apparent unwillingness to accept input? Their reliance on unelected consultants and national organizations to direct their votes? There is no way to really know if a single factor that led to the rejection. Most likely, it was a combination of many factors that caused the voters to turn away.
What lessons can we learn from the Freedom Caucus’s time in office and their ensuing decimation at the ballot box? One takeaway is that our policy makers must understand the real-world consequences of their actions. Many of the issues championed by the Freedom Caucus were not the topics that genuinely impacted most people’s lives. Voters want a government that is responsive to their needs, not just responsive to story lines.
In the same vein, even when the Freedom Caucus took on pressing issues, they tended to move forward with proposed policies without considering outside input, even when presented to them. Their decisions appeared to be made elsewhere, which left no room for the real work of legislating. Citizens felt that their legitimate concerns went unheard, which painted the picture of a group detached from the actual needs of their constituents. It should be no surprise that voters reacted unfavorably.
In just a few months, a new crop of elected officials will be taking office. They will have much to learn. Nearly half of the Wyoming House will be freshman legislators, and most of the rest of the returning house members will be in only their second or third term. The Senate also will see many new faces. Of the seventeen Senators on the ballot, eight will be new beginning in January. A majority of our statewide officials will be new to the office beginning next year. Cities and counties also will see new officeholders elected. All will be learning on the job.
In recognition of this learning process, we should be careful to temper our expectations. It takes a long time to turn a ship, especially with an inexperienced crew. Not everything that voters want is going to happen right away. What we should look for instead is, first, whether they are making progress and, second, whether our new leaders are taking in input, learning the job, and engaging in the process that will lead to better outcomes. We can forgive being new and clumsy, but it is much harder to forgive hubris in the face of this
inexperience.
Our policymakers, both newly-elected and veterans, must be careful to avoid the mistakes of those who are leaving office. Just as there are many reasons the Freedom Caucus lost this election, there are many reasons why they won the last one. Our leaders should not be blind to the fact that part of the reason the Freedom Caucus won in the first place was that they spoke to a need in our society. Something was not right in the way things were being done, so the voters were willing to try something new. Granted, those voters quickly saw that the “something new” they voted for was not the answer, but we should not interpret the most recent results as a mandate to return to the
way things were done before. Our leaders should learn and grow from the experience, not revert to the prior methods and status quo that led to their initial downfall.
Lastly, and above all else, those who now find themselves in positions of power or influence should resist the temptation to turn the tables on others who may have wronged them. Turnaround may be fair play, but it is bad governance. We expect our leaders to act in the best interests of the people, even if that means setting aside hurt feelings, or even legitimate grievances. Good ideas advanced by your opponents are still good ideas, and the uncollaborative, “us vs. them” division will only be further entrenched if the reaction to taking power is to punish those who came before you. Someone must break the cycle, and what better time than now? Our state has a great opportunity in front of it. Now is the time to rise to the occasion and show what the best version of Wyoming can be.
Ensure These Stories Are Told
Despite the challenges facing independent local journalism, what sustains us — and fills us with deep gratitude — is the loyal support of readers who believe our communities deserve accurate, trusted, and locally rooted news.
It is no exaggeration to say that we are here because of you. Every story we report, every local issue we follow, every public meeting we cover, and every community voice we lift up is made possible by readers who understand the value of an independent newspaper.
Your support does more than fund articles. It helps protect the independence that allows us to report honestly, ask important questions, and keep our community informed without fear or favor.
If you are able, please consider supporting the News Letter Journal by donating to our Unabridged Fund today. Whether your gift helps cover reporting time, printing costs, video, photography, editing, or distribution, every contribution helps keep local journalism strong in Wyoming.
All gifts are deeply appreciated. Your support helps ensure that local stories continue to be told, local decisions continue to be watched, and local voices continue to be heard.
Thank you for standing with independent community journalism.