The Third Side: Raise the level
Northeast Wyoming voters are about to get a high-profile political showdown — and it could either be really entertaining or really valuable, but it isn’t likely that it can be both.
House Speaker Chip Neiman and former Senate President Ogden Driskill — two of the most high-profile Republican legislators in recent state history — have signaled they are planning to square off for the same Senate seat.
On its face, it is a compelling contest. Experience versus experience. Leadership versus leadership. The race is made even more compelling because there is a lot of well-documented bad blood between the pair, but the personal rivalry between the veteran politicians could also distract from the very serious issues confronting Wyoming.
That would be a tremendous disservice to the constituents the two have served and hope to serve again, but we need to be honest about what this contest could become. It could very easily devolve into another round of labels, insults, factions and division — the kind of politics that has already decreased the level of trust and satisfaction Wyoming voters have with the legislature.
The state doesn’t need a proxy war between the Freedom Caucus and Wyoming Caucus. It doesn’t
need another race defined by claims and accusations of who is more conservative, more loyal, or more aligned with whichever faction happens to be loudest at the moment.
What Wyoming needs is leadership.
Real leadership.
Because this race is not just another election. It is an opportunity. Neiman and Driskill can use it to settle scores, or they can use it to set a standard. Imagine what this campaign could look like if both men made a conscious decision to raise the level of discourse instead of lowering it.
No name-calling. No labels. No tired shorthand like “RINO,” “Freedom Caucus,” or “establishment.” No attempts to divide voters into teams.
Instead, focus on the issues — honestly and in plain language.
Explain school funding in a way people can actually understand. Lay out the real trade-offs in property tax policy. Be transparent about the long-term consequences of decisions on energy, infrastructure and economic development.
Don’t just tell people what to think. Show them how to think about it.
That’s the part that’s been missing.
Wyoming residents are often asked to choose sides without ever being given a clear, honest explanation of the choices in front of them. Campaigns become contests of identity rather than discussions of policy, but it doesn’t have to be that way.
This race will draw attention, and people will be watching. That attention can be used to educate, to clarify and to build trust — or it can be wasted on the same old arguments that leave everyone more divided and no better informed.
Both men have enough credibility that they don’t need to tear the other down to make their case, and both have long records they can defend. More importantly, both understand the stakes facing Wyoming, so the responsibility for running a campaign that enriches the people of Wyoming falls squarely on the shoulders of these candidates.
That responsibility is significant because this race will send a
signal far beyond a single Senate district, so we ask these leaders what kind of campaign they will choose to run. One that feeds the frustration people already feel with politics, or one that proves Wyoming can do it better?
If it turns into the anticipated brawl, it will reinforce the idea that politics in Wyoming is no different than anywhere else — loud, divided and focused more on winning than solving problems.
But if it becomes a serious, substantive conversation about the future of the state, it could do something far more valuable. It could show that Wyoming is still capable of governing itself with clarity, honesty and respect, and that is not a small thing. At a time when trust in government is thin, this is a chance to rebuild some of it — not through promises, but through conduct.
We would gladly offer the pages of the News Letter Journal or airtime on the Top of Main podcast as platforms on which these informative conversations could occur. We encourage both candidates to seriously consider the offer because the ability to respectfully disagree in this type of forum will actually be a demonstration of respect to the people they hope to represent.
The choice belongs to Neiman and Driskill. They can make this race about each other, or they can make it about Wyoming.
If they accept the challenge and commit to informing voters instead of inflaming them, to explaining instead of labeling, to leading instead of dividing — then the outcome of the election will matter a lot less than what is gained along the way.
Because regardless of who wins and who loses, the people of Wyoming will be the ones who come out ahead.