Controversial bills were the norm in the recent legislative session.
Gov. Mark Gordon let some pass into law without his signature while still airing his frustration in so-called “no-sign” letters.
Wyoming Public Radio’s state government reporter Chris Clements caught up with the governor to ask him about his thoughts on legislative rubber meeting the road.
Editor’s Note: This transcript has been lightly edited for brevity and clarity.
Chris Clements: Thanks so much for joining me today, Gov. Gordon.
Mark Gordon: Chris, it’s wonderful to be here and have a chance to talk to you.
CC: My first question is, what do you see as the high point and the low point of the recent legislative session?
MG: I was thinking about that “The Good, the Bad and the Ugly” movie. I think there’s a lot of good that we come out of the session with. But there were some ugly parts, a little bit of sniping between the various groups, I think, kind of setting up to [say], ‘We’re just going to oppose whatever the governor is doing.’ It sort of started the process, which seemed pretty shallow to me.
When you really talk about what’s important for Wyoming, I think [it’s notable] that [the] Legislature completely missed the issue of OB-GYN care that is so important to Wyoming mothers. [They missed] the fact that it’s getting harder and harder to find good quality OB care in [the] state, which then causes issues for people having to travel out of state at some expense, [especially] when you consider how many of our births are Medicaid births. So that was a challenge, [as was] completely sidestepping and missing mental health issues – that was problematic.
I think people can feel pretty good about the fact that the Legislature, after having pushed so many measures on property tax, [people are] seeing that this year. I don’t think what they fully understood, and I think this is going to be a continuing issue, is what that did to local communities. People have got to understand how important it is that local communities have the ability to choose their own taxes and to be able to support the infrastructure and not depend on the state.
CC: You wrote some scathing letters disagreeing with the legislature and the secretary of state. Let’s dig into them. Nine bills became law without your signature [this past session], the most during your tenure as governor. One requires voters to show proof of citizenship and that they’ve lived in Wyoming for 30 days. You’ve noted there’s friction between this law in the U.S. Constitution, and you expect this new law will be litigated. Why let it go into law if you have these reservations and are confident in the way the state runs elections?
MG: As I’ve said, I’ve been confident in the way the state runs elections. I’ve voted here for over 50 years. The security is very tight. It’s never been an issue. There has been a lot of concern raised nationally about the security of our elections. I support any effort to make them more secure, more clear.
The one issue that you refer to, which is the reason I couldn’t sign it, was the fact that there is a statute that has a duration requirement. I think it’s been tested in a few states. It may stand up, I don’t know. And I’ll just say, overall, I think there was less regard for the Constitution this year. [There was] more regard by particularly some of the new, more ideologic legislators, to push a national agenda or model legislation that’s been drafted somewhere else, without regard to the Wyoming Constitution. And in some cases, [I was] questioning whether the federal Constitution even applied.
CC: But with that bill, my question is, why not sign it outright, or veto it and let the Legislature override if they had the votes?
MG: That’s certainly a possibility. I have tried on the no-sign letters to always say, ‘Here are the flaws that I see.’ I still think the bill has merit, but I think [pointing out] the flaw [and saying], ‘This is the reason I can’t sign it,’ that’s the way I’ve looked at it. Now, maybe others in the past have said, ‘I don’t want to have my signature on it or anything else.’ I think the fact you put a letter there shows that you made a very conscious decision.
CC: [Moving on to] the bill repealing most gun-free zones in the state, and your no-sign letter for that bill. You wrote, and I’m paraphrasing, that it was a “legislative power grab.” I’ve heard criticism from other people, in addition to you, about bills this session eroding local control more broadly, and not just in the area of gun control. So could you talk to me about your motivation for this one?
MG: The Legislature really was anxious to say, ‘This is our deal. We’re going to control it.’ We’re now trying to figure out how to deal with the circumstances that come afterwards on that bill. The reason that I was anxious to make sure that that [local control] point was made was because I do think that the Legislature really needed to understand that this was more than just a Second Amendment bill. This was something that was going to be complicating for people’s behaviors. I knew that there was no way that I would be able to sustain a veto.
CC: But then, what would you say, governor, to someone who might go up to you and tell you, ‘I appreciate you writing that no-sign letter and expressing your concerns. But at the same time, talk is cheap, and you could have vetoed this. You could have taken action.’ What would you say to someone who might have that opinion?
MG: Take a look at the majorities by which that bill passed in each house. It really wouldn’t have made a difference. My interest is not in a show. My interest is to demonstrate responsible policies moving forward.
CC: I’ll ask one last question about the interim looking forward. People are quite concerned with the point of an interim at this point, and I’m wondering if you share those concerns, with all these committee bills being killed.
MG: Yeah, I do. You know, you look at the history of the last couple of sessions, where so much of that work that is thoughtful, that is accessible to people in the state, there really is deliberate conversation – and those things die. And I think that there’s a benefit to committee work. I think if you’re not going to take the work at its value, and you’re going to substitute it right before the session, that’s kind of disappointing for the state of Wyoming.
CC: Thank you so much for your time, governor, I really appreciate it.
MG: Thank you.
This reporting was made possible by a grant from the Corporation For Public Broadcasting, supporting state government coverage in the state. Wyoming Public Media and Jackson Hole Community Radio are partnering to cover state issues both on air and online.
