- Your support helps us bring you programs you love.

Go to wyomingpbs.org, click on "support", and become a sustaining member or an annual member.

It's easy and secure.

Thank you.

- I'm Steve Peck of Wyoming PBS.

We're nearing the completion of the third week of the 67th Wyoming Legislature and Medicaid Expansion has become a key issue.

We'll speak with representative Amber Oakley and Representative Steve Harshman.

Join us for "Capital Outlook".

(symphonic music) - [Announcer] This program is supported in part by a grant from the BNSF Railway Foundation, dedicated to improving the general welfare and quality of life in communities throughout the BNSF Railway Service area.

Proud to support Wyoming PBS.

- [Announcer] And by the members of Wyoming PBS.

Thank you for your support.

- Hi, I'm Steve Peck of Wyoming PBS and welcome to this week's edition of "Capital Outlook".

We're here at the State Capitol today with Representative Steve Harshman, House District 37, and Representative Amber Oakley, House District 55.

Thanks to both of you for being with us today and making an unusual time of day available to us right after adjournment at the end of a long day for you.

So we appreciate this, we know how busy it is and thanks for being with us.

I wanted to talk to you both today, at least at the beginning, about the Medicaid expansion issue that's in Wyoming.

Representative Oakley, there's a bill, tell us quickly where it stands now.

- So House Bill 80 is this year's version of the Medicaid Expansion Bill.

It was heard in our committee, the Revenue Committee, and passed out of there with a six to three vote.

And so it is on the general file now.

- So the expectation is, of course, it would come to the floor to be debated by the committee of the whole, and everybody who hasn't worked the bill yet will start to be able to do that.

Is that what you're saying?

- That's correct, Mr. Peck, yeah.

- Okay.

This has been an issue that's been around for a long time and Representative Harshman, you've been in legislature for, I think is this year, 20th year now?

- 21st, yeah.

- 21st year so you remember when it first arose, and there's a sense this session that things are a little different and I wanna make sure we get to that, but I want to walk us through it more gradually.

Let's begin with something basic, what is Medicaid?

- Well, Medicaid is really just a, there's two, really three types of public insurance, right?

We have private insurance, we know those large companies, but then public insurance, you know, Medicare for elderly citizens.

- And that's a universal retirement.

- Universal, Veteran's Benefits is a public insurance system.

And then Medicaid, which is really, in Wyoming, the Medicaid program in Wyoming is only for poor children and disabled adults.

That's it and so, and that is a cost share with the federal government and currently it's based on the state's average household income.

And we have an outlier in Wyoming.

We have Teton County, the wealthiest county in America, which really drives our average household income up.

So, unfortunately Idaho's got a 70% federal, 30% state match, Utah, 70 30, Montana, 60 some 40 some, but Wyoming's 50 50.

And so that, you know, every five percentage points is 25 million a year in state funds that cost us.

So, we're trying to fix that issue as well with this Medicaid expansion bill.

- So part of what you just explained, having something to do with Teton County and the way that each state handles it differently and the numbers in each state make it less than a universal process because although it's a federal program, it states administer it individually to their own devices and with their own funding, depending.

In Wyoming, this has creates a gap.

Am I stating that correctly?

With people who can't quite afford Affordable Care Act policy on their own, who aren't covered with one of the other things that you mentioned.

- Right.

- Who also are considered to be too high income, so to speak, to qualify for typical Medicaid.

So we're trying, and it, the amount of, the number of people in the state is typically at about 20,000.

Is that the fair figure?

- That is.

- Some people say it's more than that, but that's a figure that most people can live with, right?

- Right.

And we're, the group we're talking about are adults, single able body adults who make under a hundred percent of the federal poverty level, which is 12,800 a year.

Now, if you make a dollar over that, you can buy insurance off the exchange, heavily subsidized by the federal government.

Maybe $5 a month is your premium to have the best gold plan, best insurance you can buy.

But if you make a few dollars less, no insurance at all.

And so those folks then end up in our hospital emergency rooms, don't get care, right?

Increase mortality rates.

And then, but when they do use those emergency services, it gets passed onto the rest of us.

And then it increases insurance rates for everybody.

- Now, representative Oakley, I'm correct in knowing or saying, I believe, that many states, most states, have to use, lack of a better word, have passed Medicaid expansion.

Wyoming is one of the ones that hasn't.

What is there, and maybe we partly answered this as well, but what would the bill exactly do?

- So, and correct me if I'm wrong, Representative Harshman knows this very well, but, so this does that gap that we've discussed, so from up to 138% of the poverty level.

So, what this does is creates insurance for what we dub a lot when we're talking about this, for the working poor.

So, these are able bodied adults, but they are working.

Maybe they work at a convenience store, using that as an example.

- Or they don't have benefits from their job.

- And they don't have benefits and so they don't have any insurance and they don't make enough to either, you know, buy insurance or receive healthcare.

So what we're trying to do is address that issue for about 20,000 Wyomingites, where we they could access healthcare in an affordable manner for them and also hopefully in a manner that then our healthcare facilities also receive compensation for providing that service.

- Which is a complicated issue in and of itself, of course.

Mr. Harshman, you've been around since before this issue came to the Wyoming legislature and through the years, what has been the objection to it in Wyoming, typically?

- Yeah, I think part of it, you know, it's a 90 10 federal match.

And first of all, just to expand on Representative Oakley, she said it right.

And so who are we talking about?

These are the working poor.

Two thirds of these folks are women.

Most of 'em are ages 23 to 35.

The next biggest group is that 58 to 65 group before Medicare but they're working people, almost two thirds of these folks are working.

But it's the biggest issue I think is this 90 10 match.

All the feds will renege on this agreement.

Now that's federal law.

There'd have to be a law changed by Congress.

Every time we've written this, we've written in that if that changes, we're out.

Now, I've voted against this probably 10 times.

We've tried, we said we're gonna figure out a Wyoming way to do this.

We've explored all kinds of, we've had at least five initiatives over the last 10 years and it's too expensive or none of it works.

And so we've, we really don't have a better plan.

And so we look at the other 40 states now, we've waited and we've been rightly cautious.

I mean, we didn't want to jump into this thing.

And I, and but as you watch all of our surrounding states now have done it and Montana, most recently, you know, when I served as speaker, I gotta know other leaders around the country and the Montana leaders said, "You know," he told me, I'll never forget this.

I got him on my cell phone contacts.

He said, "I never voted for it."

But see the part of the talking points where it's destroyed Montana's budget and all that, he said, "It didn't destroy our budget."

He said, "It's saved our rural healthcare system."

And just these, and we know this, you know, it's a hundred million just to our hospitals, not necessarily the doctors and clinics, but there's a hundred million a year in uncompensated care.

Montana's recovered about 45% of that.

We, conservative estimate we will recover 25% of that at a minimum, probably 25 million of that hospital care that goes uncompensated in your public hospital, my hospital, and so on.

So, and probably much more and I think the experience Montana had, I think, bodes well for us.

In the early days, 10 years ago, I think the estimates were not real reliable.

I think we've watched all these other 40 states.

I think we've got good data and I think it's been a process as I've learned more.

But I think the people of Wyoming have learned more too.

And I think you see that in the polls and all that.

And I think the other thing is, you know, we've got a federal government that's in debt, why would we add to the federal debt?

Those kind of things.

Those are the arguments.

But I think, you know, we have the largest economy in the world.

If our Congress gets busy, they can take out a mortgage and pay this federal debt off.

You know?

- Well that's kinda a joke 'cause there's nothing that the taxpayer can't afford if it comes to that.

So, you're saying that there's been a track record from states that can be compared to ours at least, and they're finding that some of the worries that were expressed earlier haven't necessarily come to pass.

Of course Wyoming and all states take money from the federal government in other ways all the time without much incident.

And so I'm, is that reassuring to an extent to think of it in those terms?

- Well I think all of us have a certain amount of hypocrisy, right?

I mean, you drove down here on a federally funded road.

We all did.

- Absolutely, yeah.

- You know, two thirds of our minerals are federally owned in this state and you know, about half of our surface area as part of the United States.

You know, it's a beautiful thing.

But, so I don't worry about that so much.

I have faith in United States and our system of government.

I'm not, so that's to me not an argument.

I'm trying to find a way 'cause we know what's gonna happen.

We're gonna reduce mortality amongst these people.

We know that we're gonna cut the mortality rate, you know, and I think that's a pro-life measure.

And I think the deacon of the Catholic church here in Cheyenne said it pretty well, Deacon Lehman.

There's a balance, you know, not every one of these initiatives takes you, in his words, to the fiery pit of socialism.

And I think Abe Lincoln said it best, you know, he said basically to paraphrase, nothing is wholly evil or wholly good and in citing public policy, you gotta kind of balance, you know, the greater good is it have more good than evil.

And I think when we think about our people, we're gonna extend mortality, we're gonna reduce mortality rates and save lives and these people are gonna be more productive.

We know those studies all around the country.

So, we think it's the right thing to do.

And if somebody's got a better idea, I'm open.

- [Steve Peck] Sure.

- We've been working on for 10 years.

- Representative Oakley one thing that you mentioned and you by, you're in your second term?

- That's correct.

- Correct?

Representative Harshman, you're in your 11th term.

- Yeah.

- Is that right?

So, there's a difference here.

One thing you said you noticed though, in just the short time you've been in is that there's been a ground swell of public opinion that at least tells you that this is a pretty popular idea, at least among your constituents, right?

- Yes, Mr. Peck.

So, I've been surprised, of course, I was aware before even I was elected, right, because it has been on the table- - [Steve Peck] Yeah.

- For a long time and I really thought that there was a lot of negative sentiment and we see that from our body, I would say.

But boy, when I'm out there, when I'm talking to people in my community of Riverton and the numbers of emails that I've received as a legislator, boy for me they are, I mean, it's certainly a majority.

And people are saying, why aren't, you know, why aren't you doing this?

And one of the things that was striking to me when we've been looking at this at, at the estimates, so by, in the biennium, this is estimated with using about the $20,000, I mean 20, excuse me, 20,000 people estimate for new enrollees, that it would cost 22 million over the biennium.

So that's 10 to 11 million is what we're estimated that it would cost Wyoming.

And when you're looking at our budgets, that is, it is just, it's very little money for something that I very much believe and I'm hearing that I think it's the will of the people.

I very much do.

- You said, I saw you quoted in a story by a reporter that I know, Jasmine Hall, from Tribune Eagle here in Cheyenne.

You said, "I think we're there."

Meaning that passed out of the committee and that doesn't mean, of course, that the bill has passed.

There are lots of things that could happen.

It could, couldn't agree on a conference version of it with the Senate.

It could get amended to death.

It could get defeated, it could get vetoed.

I mean, I'm not saying predicting any of these things are gonna happen, but is it fair to say that it's closer to becoming reality than it's ever been before?

Or is that where, are we is that's not what we're there means.

- To answer, since that's what I said, I think we are there, meaning the, as I've discussed, meaning the the will of the people, that we've looked at other options, and that I think personally it's the right thing to do.

But I've also said publicly, so not to overstate, I don't, I do not believe that the current body that's elected, the 67th legislature will pass Medicaid expansion.

I mean, I would be pleasantly surprised if I'm incorrect.

But we passed it out, we passed it off the floor last year, two years ago in the 66th.

But with the current makeup, if I were betting, I would say we are not going to pass it in the 67th Legislature.

- What happened two years ago?

- It died in the Senate Health Committee, three to two.

Never was heard on the Senate floor.

- So just, it's, any bill faces this minefield.

- It does.

- No matter what it is.

The state cookie.

I remember that was a disagreeable issue incredibly some years ago.

So something like this, it may have a long way to go.

I'm interested though, in how a legislator's opinion and judgment and decision making can be affected over time or over debate or information or any number of other things.

And so here's a comparison I've thought of, and I don't mean to be flip about it, but let's say there's chocolate and strawberry ice cream here and you say, I don't like strawberry ice cream.

So no.

Would you say representative Harshman that today we're at a point where you like strawberry ice cream now or you realize that boy, a lot of people are lining up for that strawberry ice cream and it's not a, it's not my place to say they shouldn't have it.

- I think it's a thing all of us as we go through life, you know, hopefully we keep learning, you know, and I've learned, I know more, I think now, at age 59 than I did at 49- - Yeah.

- When this first came to the legislature and I hopefully know more than I did when I was 29 or 19, you know, but too soon old, too late smart, you know, my mother would say.

But I think I've just learned more and then we've worked on these issues.

You know, I brought an amendment when Senator Bebout and I chaired Appropriations, we both agreed we were gonna try to open up the state insurance plan for these issues and for employers.

Couldn't do it, it was a Constitutional issue.

We tried Cowboy care, we did pass couple laws.

One is to try to promote this charity or volunteer care.

I think there is probably a clinic that might open in Lander actually, be the only one in the state.

So, we've done some of this stuff, tried to expand the insurance, different programs, and all that things.

But the bottom line is, it just, we haven't gotten there and everybody said there's a better way, but nobody's brought it forward.

And it's not for lack of work or effort.

I think we've worked hard on the issue.

But, you know, I guess it is just finding this balance and, you know, of regulated capitalism.

Where does the public sector fit in the private sector and finding that balance and that's really the issue.

I agree with Amber, I think the bill with the makeup right now in the 67th, it's gonna be pretty tough.

I think there'll be a movement to put it in the budget as well, which is appropriate 'cause Medicaid is in the budget.

Try to get it passed, at least get into some kind of, you know, discussion in the other body but it's hard to say.

- One thing that has, that I've heard through the years is that one of the reasons that Wyoming, which is a deep red state politically, that's the reality of it.

One of the objections of it was that it came from a Democratic president's administration.

And if it hadn't, if it had been from the Bush Administration or perhaps the Trump Administration, maybe it would have a better chance.

From your positions of the real world.

Do you think that's a, fair to say?

Or does, how much of a factor is something like that, do you think?

- I guess my opinion on that isn't so much that, I mean that it was originally called Obamacare.

So I, that certainly, probably, might have some effect.

But we discussed earlier, you know, what is the reticence and the reticence in Wyoming to do a deal with the feds, you know, that just exists.

But we have to talk about the realities of this program and how much it will cost Wyoming, I think, to overcome some of that.

We also discussed in committee side boards some of the reticence to do, I think to partner with the federal government, which is certainly what this is, are feeling like you will have crammed down mandates on let's say like the types of service that, the services that could be provided.

We do have the ability to put sideboards on some of that.

And we discussed that.

- And there is one of those in the works right now, correct?

- That's correct and actually Chairman Harshman brought that amendment and so I mean it, do you want to discuss that?

- Well, I mean we have the Hyde Amendment in our state statutes.

Wyoming has, you know, before Roe versus Wade, abortion was illegal in Wyoming.

We have the lowest or the second lowest abortion rate in the United States at 1% compared to Texas's 10% and Florida's 20%.

So, Wyoming has done a tremendous job in that area, and we've passed several bits of legislation.

But you'll hear folks say, well this Medicaid dollar is used for abortion.

It's not true.

There's been one abortion using Medicaid dollars.

It was in 2002 for the life of the mother.

And there are some states, but they're using state Medicaid dollars.

The Hyde Amendment is still federal law.

We have a state law that mirrors the Hyde Amendment.

So there's not gonna be any use for abortions.

And so I think to me, this is really a pro-life measure.

We're gonna save lives, Wyoming lives and many of 'em working women.

The other part I would say to you, there's another bill out there that's a step that Governor Gordon has supported too, is so we cover poor children in Medicaid and we cover pregnant women when they have those babies, right?

But we only give postpartum care for three months.

- This is the bill I was referring to.

- Sure and I think there's a proposal now, a bill, it hasn't been heard in House, passed the committee, to extend that coverage to a year.

So, these are mothers who didn't go to a neighboring state and abort their baby.

They're Wyoming mothers and how can we support them and their baby.

I think it's another pro-life issue, but you know, it's bordering on the fiery pit of socialism.

So, I don't know it'll go there.

I think the other pro-life issue we got in front of us, in medical care is the 988 suicide hotline.

And so your question about a Democratic president, this was signed by President Trump, 2020, is a signature piece of legislation.

We are the last state to implement it and just got the data in the last couple days.

Just since we've implemented the suicide hotline, 988, it's gone from 189 suicides in this country, which leads the nation per capita in 2021 to 155, which is still too many.

And all we've done in that time is implement the 988 hotline.

That bill has passed the house with no funding today, but it's structure is intact.

So that's good, that's moving forward.

- Representative Oakley, you've, in your second term now, what's the difference in your comfort level, your knowledge level, et cetera, between the first term and the second, when among other things you've had a chance to work the, participate in the interim period when so much important work gets done.

I'm sure it's makes a lot more sense to you now.

- Yeah, it's incredible how much you learn, you're learning on the, you know, you're learning on the go, you're learning on the fly.

- [Steve Peck] Sure.

- When I came in, our class actually was during COVID restrictions, so we started online, Zoom, so we didn't have the trainings, we didn't have that.

And then we came down to Cheyenne and we were in the middle of session.

I've seen a lot of the training that this new freshman class has gotten and I was like, we didn't have the benefit of that.

So it really is amazing how much more comfortable you feel with the process and then you're much more effective because you can get in and argue and participate.

So I think it certainly makes you more effective, but there's only one way to go through it.

- Learn by doing.

- Yep.

I'll flip the question.

11th term now you've been a rookie legislator to a seasoned legislator, committee chairman, two terms as speaker back in the, is in the chairman's seat again now, what keeps you interested?

- Well, I think it's a love for Wyoming and I'm really honored people in Casper.

I'm a native of Natrona County.

I grew up in Midwest, you know, Eli and I used to talk, he's a Shoshone Wrangler, I'm the Midwest oiler.

And so I'm really honored to serve first of all, the people in House District 37.

But I think there's just a love of this state and I'll just tell you, we all in our job sometimes sit in a lot of meetings and sometimes you walk out of there going, "Geez, did it, "did I make any difference?"

And I think you could say that for the legislative process, but, and we're sitting hours and hours and hours of meetings over the last 20 years.

But I think you've been, you know, I feel like I've been able to do some good for Wyoming in some of those meetings.

They haven't been meetings in vain, now many of 'em have.

But it's a building process and many of the things you do, you don't see the fruits of that labor for a decade later.

You know, I think of the nuclear plant going in in Kemmerer.

That was a bill I ran in 2010 and then again in 11, you know, and all those things.

So it's just, the work is fascinating.

You learn a tremendous lot, a tremendous amount, I should say and the people, that's what this is about.

I mean, the people of Wyoming and you meet so many people and you get to hear from so many people.

So it's really a blessing and Wyoming's got a beautiful thing going.

We've got a great citizen legislature set up.

We've got money in the bank.

We don't owe anybody anything.

And we have the lowest tax burden in the United States and got the greatest schools, community colleges, you know, and our university.

So I just think it's all these things though, these debates we're having about healthcare they had in 1890.

And water, we had a debate about water, 1890, education, so these things never go away.

It's just our little sliver of time, why we're here to work on these issues.

- Tell me what committees you're serving on this session.

- So this term I am on the Judiciary Committee again, so that's a return for me.

I'm serving on the Revenue Committee as the Vice Chair.

So that's a fun new way to learn and experience committees.

And also, I'm on the Rules Committee, so I should have paid more attention to the rules last time.

But I'm learning quickly.

- Now, I'll ask your colleague here.

Those are three significant committees for a second term- - They are.

- Lawmaker to be on.

She's doing well.

- Doing really well, yeah.

I think she's worked really hard and, but I think she's been recognized by her peers too.

She's working hard and smart and doing a great job.

So those are two really important committees.

- You're chairing revenue?

- Yes.

- And what's your other committee assignment?

- Corporations, yeah and I've served on Capital Finance, which is a great committee and then School Facilities.

- We just have another minute or so.

Anything coming up on either of your committee dockets, for example, that you think are gonna be high interest issues in the next couple of weeks?

- Well, Revenue, we've got just a couple other little kind of process bills that will work quickly, but then it's property tax.

That's a big issue for Wyoming and we're gonna look at relief bills.

We're gonna look at, you know, changing the Constitution, which is serious business.

We're gonna give those a lot of study and then we'll finish up House bills here in another week and cross 'em over and we'll get all those Senate bills coming on our side.

- How about Judiciary?

- And so, obviously, I'll be working the property tax and I think that'll be a really interesting, hopefully comprehensive conversation there in the Revenue Committee.

And then in judiciary, I guess, talking about myself specifically, I've brought some criminal law bills.

I'm a prosecutor in my other job, in my other world.

And so with knowledge of that, I'm working some of those criminal law.

We're starting to see a lot of an increase in fentanyl in our state and certainly and in my county of Fremont so we're looking at making sure that the proper criminal statutes are in place for that.

Things like that.

- Well, thanks to you both, Representative Harshman, Representative Oakley, good to have you with us today on "Capital Outlook".

- Well thanks, tanks for having us.

- Thank you Steve.

- Stay with us on "Capital Outlook" for a conversation with the President of the Wyoming Senate.

- Welcome back to "Capitol Outlook" We're joined now by the President of the Wyoming Senate, Senator Ogden Driskill.

Senator, thanks at the end of a long day for being with us.

I know we are nearing the end of the third week of the session now.

Things are getting a bit more specific, maybe a bit less general.

You've just run through a pretty long slate of bills on the Senate floor today.

What's your sense of how things have been going so far in the session?

- You know, the Senate's just been unbelievable.

They've been really well oiled.

You know, we're pushing 180 bills.

We're gonna get 'em all out easily.

Tomorrow's last day for introduction of bills.

We've got just a handful of 'em laying in the bottom of my desk.

So we're kinda bringing out the tail end of the bills that maybe are bills that we're kind of working with some sponsors on, or maybe think got some problems with.

But all in all, the Senate's just really worked very well.

We've had, as you saw today, very vigorous debate on bills, passionate debate.

The civility we talked about early has been...

I can't tell you how proud I am of the body.

Everybody has argued issues and not argued personalities and that shows in our business.

- You've taken a stand on that as a leader.

And I'd say that's paying off.

- I think it has, and you know, I was very hard line about it.

And I took quite a lot of hits over it.

And you know, I think they found out that I treat people fairly, as long as they wanna act in a proper decorum and way.

And in a way, I think it shows if you look at our debate.

It's robust and honest.

And I think our guys have really responded to the fact that somebody's gonna make sure that everybody treats everybody fairly.

And I'm really happy with it.

- Very glad to hear that.

Why is there a limit?

Or why is there a deadline set for the introduction of new bills?

- Well, if we just kept going, they'd just keep going forever.

And of course, we have crossover coming up, so- - [Host] Crossover, you mean?

- When the bills crossover from the Senate to the House.

And that comes up.

So you've gotta have a hard cutoff date.

And then we'll really change our focus starting Monday.

We'll just be working a handful of these last bills.

But we actually go into the supplemental budget on Monday.

It will be read in tomorrow, I believe.

The public and everybody will have a chance through the weekend to kinda adjust it.

Monday, the Appropriations Committee will present what Joint Appropriations came up with on the Governor's budget.

And there's some fairly substantial changes there.

Tuesday, we take kind of a break and do some bills.

And then Wednesday, we'll come back and do the second reading of the budget.

And at that point, the entire body is allowed to run amendments on it.

And those amendments may increase amounts.

It may be something they want at home that they wanna see if the floor will go for.

It may be, they think the Appropriations Committee spent too much money somewhere, and they're gonna take it down.

So we do that on Wednesday.

Thursday, we take another break.

Thursday night, they have a chance to put amendments in again.

And then next Friday is the third reading.

We do the amendments all day, and then we pass the budget.

And then the real hard work comes, 'cause never do they totally match.

So for the public, matching amendments from the House and Senate automatically go into the budget.

Offsetting amendments go to a conference committee, so- - Explain just quickly, what a conference committee is.

- So after the budget's done on both sides, there'll be differences.

And the conference committee, the Speaker of the House Sommers will appoint three people to a conference committee.

Myself, I'll appoint three people to a conference committee.

Those people will go to a room, it's public.

So if the public would like to watch the hamburger being made.

We sit actually in a room, and decide where we agree and where we disagree, and how we're gonna get together, and- - And this happens a lot, doesn't it?

- It happens every year, it happens with the budget- - Lots of bills go to conference?

- They do, it's very common to happen.

Your conference people tend to be your best negotiators outta your body the more important it is.

When you watch what Representative Sommers sends over, that's gonna be his A team, mine will be the A team as well.

They sit and they make the hard decisions.

They have to stay between the upper and lower limits.

So if the House has come with an amendment that adds a hundred million to the budget, and the Senate cuts it to zero, the conference committee can only go between the zero and the 100, so- - So nobody's gonna win exactly what they came in with by design.

- Does not, it's absolutely a trade off of values.

It's part of what people have a hard time understanding.

It doesn't seem fair, but it's really the only way you can reconcile the differences between the two bodies, without just getting nowhere, and works well.

- I looked over the list of bills yesterday.

Between the two houses, we're up over close to 500 now.

What is your rationale as a leader for deciding, or recommending which bills come forward and which don't?

- So almost all the bills come forward.

My kind of criteria for the bills that won't come forward, and there'll be a few, is if I think they're gonna damage the state of Wyoming in some way, that they're really just not good policy, and that we can't fix 'em with debate, then I'm probably gonna sit on 'em.

You also will find with me.

And this wasn't the first times this has happened.

We did one of the abortion bills today.

They tend to be a little bit passionate.

I have held back the gun bills and abortion bills 'til after the budget 'cause we tend to get upset where people are really passionate.

You know, money's one thing.

But when you start getting into guns, and your personal issues, they tend to get really passionate and people get upset.

And so we're waiting until towards the end.

So everybody can kinda go through on a steady keel.

And we've really been level and steady, including today on, we had the chemical abortion bill today, which it's a tough bill.

Very different viewpoints on people, healthy debate.

And we came out of it with everybody feeling like they'd been treated fairly.

- This is a general session, as compared to the shorter budget sessions which happen in even-numbered years.

But realistically speaking, every session's a budget session, isn't it?

- It is nowadays, it didn't used to be in the old days.

You know, we used to have the budget session, where you set the biannual budget.

And the truth is, our ups and downs have been so big in the state of Wyoming.

And everybody thinks the supplemental is a year like this year.

And we've actually got a couple billion dollars out there.

Surplus.

- Yeah.

- About three short years ago, we had a billion dollar shortage.

And the supplemental at that point in time, was not to spend money, it was how do we cut $400 million to 500 million out of the budget.

Those are tough ones.

But they are defacto budget bills in a non-budget year.

- Do you find in a way, or that maybe you or some legislators do, that in some ways, when there's a shortfall, and there's really no choice but to cut, that somehow that can be almost an easier process than if you have a lot of extra money, and so many options to spend it?

- So the shortfalls have been easier, I will tell you that.

They're not easy in a fact that, I can tell you from a legislative standpoint, when you have to look a state employee in the eye and say... And by the way, we've cut very few live positions.

But we cut pieces out of working parts of agencies.

It's difficult, but in a way, it's easier.

Now we're down to the point is how much do we save?

How much do we allocate to schools?

What do you do for short term?

And then the other one is, is what are your optics going forward of the budget?

'Cause we actually have to look and say, do we think the good times will continue?

And if we think that's true, then you probably invest a little more into some maybe a little less serious projects that could help.

Or if you think we're going into tough times, it may mean that we put a few less dollars into long-term savings, and a few more that we kinda stash it away that we can get to it in case we have to.

And I can tell you, I'm one of the ones, I'm very concerned when you look at national trends.

Wyoming's economy right now, so our budget is roughly 25 to 28% of our general fund comes off investment income.

That leaves the state incredibly vulnerable to a downturn.

That if you roll the stock market back with $25 billion, you can lose a lot of money in a hurry.

And it affects our savings.

Usually at the same time that happens, it's when our coal sales drop, oil and gas go down.

So Wyoming tends to hit perfect storms.

When they hit going up, this year, they're crazy up.

And when they're down, they're crazy down.

So it leaves it really hard, 'cause we don't have the stability that some states do, that their tax revenue just does this.

- Sure, and we probably won't.

- I don't think that's gonna change, at least for the foreseeable future, no sir.

- I've noticed in watching some committee hearings, that occasionally there'll be more than one bill addressing essentially the same topic.

When something like that happens, what is the procedure that eventually pares it down to one, if that's what happens?

- So at least what's happening on our side.

So for me, the President of the Senate assigns those bills.

And for me, the example I'm gonna use, it's near and dear to everybody in Wyoming, is property taxes.

- Right.

- I think we have to the tune, I hate to misquote, but probably six or seven property tax bills.

Those have all gone to Senator Biteman's committee, that's committee number three, Revenue.

And so I have trusted Senator Biteman to allow him to stack those bills in order he thinks they make the most sense.

And ironically, the first bill that came up just happened to be one of Senator Biteman's bills today.

It's a good bill, it's a simple bill.

And I think it's gonna come out of the Senate favorably.

It'll have some amendments on it.

We're gonna work it through.

Then you're gonna find the other five or six bills are behind.

Probably for me, I'm gonna ask him to go ahead and sit on those bills 'til the end of session.

We'll see what happens with his bill.

But there's no reason to bring out big numbers competing bills.

The only thing that happened is if a Senator came and he was very passionate, he wanted to see it, I'd probably ask Senator Biteman to bring it up so we could have it debated so we could compare the two.

- You rely a lot on these committee chairs, don't you?

- I do, you know, I took a lot of heat.

I put a lot of new people in chairs.

Senator Biteman was one of 'em.

And you know, I'm really proud of my chairs.

They've carried an incredible workload.

A lot of 'em are doing committees they've never done before.

I think they're doing really high-quality work.

And it shows on the floor.

Their bills are debated good.

The floor trusts the people.

And yeah, your chairs are the heart.

You know, the president really sits there, and he's just a leader that puts things together and helps other people.

Your chairmen are down in the trenches.

And they're doing the day-to-day work and make it happen.

- I heard you say close to the end of the session today that some of the bills that the committees are gonna be getting in the next few days are not bills that that committee normally would expect to get.

And the committees have names, Judiciary and Revenue and Appropriations, that have to do with general topic areas.

But there's nothing that says, especially if one committee might be carrying a bigger load than the other, and it sounds like possibly Senator Biteman's committee might be, that you could move a bill to a different committee.

- And we will, so we have three committees that are virtually out of bills.

They've worked good.

Their committees didn't have full workload.

Those three are Transportation, Travel Recreation and wildlife, and...

Trying to think, but we had three of the committees.

And so I made an announcement publicly so we don't have people feeling like I'm playing games.

And you can play games as President of the Senate.

If I've got a bill that, particularly a bill that I'm passionate about, and I know a committee's gonna kill the bill and it won't get a fair hearing, you'll see me send it to another committee.

Not to make it pass, but to make it get to the floor so we can have the honest debate.

If you've got chairman that hates a bill, we know they're out there, I want that fair debate.

I want the people and the senator that brought it to be able to have a chance to have his bill have a fair hearing.

The other reason you do it is workload.

And so you'll see some bills that really...

Probably normally, Judiciary handles all the court bills and all of it.

All your voter bills tend to go to Corporations, tax bills go.

So we're gonna shuffle some of those bills.

And the process I used for that was I took the list and I actually took it to the chairmen of the ones that were short and said, "Take a marker and show me which ones you think should go "to your committee and tell me why."

And so tomorrow morning you'll hear me read in, they'll be 15 bills that get moved to other committees.

And that's so our workload can get done.

Everybody's bill gets heard.

And instead having bills die because they don't get heard, they all get a chance to get heard.

- Let me ask you a bit about this.

And we're down to a couple of minutes left.

About some differences of opinion on remote participation, in a committee hearing, especially.

I've attended some where we're seeing people who are not in the capitol, who are some location miles, hundreds of miles away sometimes, commenting on a bill.

And other chairs of the committees don't want that to happen.

That's at the discretion of the chair?

- It is, you know, we're in a new era.

When we went through the covid was the advent of remote testimony.

Knowing had even thought about considering it, particularly for the Senate itself, or House body.

Now we've left it to chairs.

And I think you'll find over the next three or four years we'll firm up a policy.

You know, part of the problem we're having is you may have a hundred comments from outta state on a bill.

And I'll be honest with anybody, I'll look in the audience, and we're openly biased towards Wyoming people.

That's who we represent.

So someone in Iowa or Washington or Illinois shouldn't have the same voice as someone from Wyoming.

And I'm one of the personal ones.

I'm kind of a stickler, that I like seeing good dress in front of 'em.

So you know, I wish if we were doing remote participation, that you dress appropriately.

- Just as you would if you were there in the committee room.

- And I always give a preference to those who show up.

If you wanna make the effort to drive to Cheyenne, it says volumes about how passionate you are about the bill.

If you wanna sit in your house and kinda do it at your convenience, I'm guessing it's not quite the same.

That being said, it's really important we get testimony from all areas.

So you know, we're trying to accommodate.

And we're learning how to do it in a better fashion.

- Yeah, I think a lot of things coming out of the covid situation, things we did by necessity, 'cause there really was no choice, now that we no longer must do it that way, there are things that are worth considering, that are maybe worth keeping from that time, and others maybe there are, this sounds like one of those.

- Unbelievable what's changed.

You know, the transparency's crazy.

So I've been in a pretty short 12 years.

When I went in, there was no recording of any of the debates on the floor.

None of the committees had anything.

You just got a vote tally read out.

And now in this 12 years, every committee is recorded.

You can go back and actually, if your representative or your senator tells you, this is what I said, and you don't believe it, you can actually go to the state website, Wyoming Legislature, look it up.

You can pull up that day, you can watch the video and the audio, you can listen to live floor debate on the floor.

We've never had a time that the public's been more involved, and had more ability for direct participation ever than this.

And it will change how the legislature works going forward.

- For the better, do you think?

- Oh, much more for the better.

You're gonna be clear and honest, 'cause you're gonna get called.

In the old days, it was, well I really didn't say that.

And today it's, I really didn't say that, and they picked their phone up and hand it to you and say, well, yes sir, you did say that.

- Oh, I guess I did say that.

- Yeah.

- And it's understandable.

Sometimes in a a long legislative session, maybe you don't remember everything you said.

So it could be of use to the lawmakers themselves.

- There's no doubt, and it also makes you be more careful.

And I can tell you, for me, I've always been one of the ones that's took pride.

We all misspeak on the floor.

When you're talking numbers, you transpose, you make mistakes.

And I've always, when someone calls me up and says, you made a mistake, I stand up on the floor and apologize and state it, but not everyone does that.

And this keeps you a lot more honest.

And there's nothing worse than to have one of your bills be killed by testimony that's not true.

And so you know, what we all want is honest, passionate debate using actual facts.

- I would think maybe in terms of these decorum issues that you've stressed so much, I wonder what the effect of remote participation, number one, and recording of every moment, number two, might have on the personal decorum, behavior comportment of the legislators.

You suppose it makes them, the more volatile ones behave a little more calmly?

Or do you know for sure?

- I would hope so.

You know, obviously, if you're doing something that's bad, it's gonna be on live video.

And it's pretty hard to refute when you get up and act like a horse's something or other.

It's pretty easy for people to understand that's the way you're acting.

And I think you'll find nearly always your good, effective legislators really operate in a very, without doing gender specific, gentlemanly way, they act like statesmen.

And those people tend to be listened to better and get by better.

And I think as we go through that, you're gonna find we of way more statesmen.

They figure out that through good behavior you're a more effective legislator than you are through trying to use force or intimidation.

- Senator Driskill, I appreciate your time here at the end of a long work day.

Many more of those to come.

We'll have you back on "Capitol Outlook" again, I hope.

For now, thanks for being with us.

And good luck with the session.

- 30 days and 60 nights.

(laughs) Thank you.

- That's it.

- Welcome back to "Capital Outlook."

Most Wyoming residents are proud of our state's official motto, the equality state, owing to Wyoming's position as the first state, actually in territorial days before statehood, to grant women the right to vote.

And as the first state of the union to elect a woman as governor.

At the Wyoming Supreme Court in Cheyenne, Chief Justice Kate Fox often points visitors to a portion of the building dedicated to commemorating historic, pioneering women in Wyoming government and jurisprudence.

Chief Justice Fox, where are we now and who are we looking at?

- This is the Equality Hall in the basement of the Wyoming Supreme Court.

And this is a portrait of Marilyn Kite who was the first female Wyoming Supreme Court Justice.

I think she started on the court in 2000.

She was also the first Chief.

Here is Betty Kail, the first female county court and district court judge.

Then we get into history.

This is Nelly Tayloe Ross, the first female governor.

- In the nation, not just Wyoming.

- Correct.

- Yes.

- Correct.

And then I think the rest of these women are first in the nation as well.

So Grace Hebard first female member of the State Bar.

Esther Hobart Morris, most people have heard of her.

She was the first female Justice of the Peace.

- She has a statue at the state capitol now.

- She does.

Louisa Gardner Swain, the first female voter.

And Martha Symons Boies, first female court bailiff.

And then we have Eliza Boyd, first female juror.

And you'll see here we have a mirror with the robe, so that the people who come through here can see themselves as our next female judge or justice.

- When the legislature is in session the Chief justice delivers her annual State of the Judiciary Address.

This year that happened on January 11th.

- We're never just talking about the judicial branch, we're talking about all the people of the state of Wyoming and all the branches, because they're interrelated.

And it's true, lean is good.

We like lean in the judicial branch as well, but we don't like crippled.

We still need to be able to do our work - As the least visible branch of the three branches of state government.

The judicial is prone to misunderstanding.

Again Chief Justice Fox points to a fun and engaging learning resource in her own building.

- Certainly there are things that we wish people understood better about the judiciary and that's why we have the Judicial Learning Center in the basement of the Wyoming Supreme Court, because we encourage, not just school kids, but everybody to come and understand better how we function and what the parameters are within which we function.

- Unlike the federal courts the system for selecting new judges in Wyoming is kept separate from the legislature.

Something Chief Justice Fox thinks is a good thing.

- That I think is one of the great aspects of how we choose judges here, it's called the Merit Selection System.

All judges, Circuit Court, District Court, and Supreme Court are selected the same way.

There's a judicial nominating commission, made up of three attorneys, three non attorneys, who are selected by the governor, and the Chief chairs it.

So yes, first the person has to express their interest and submit, it's called an expression of interest, but it's an application.

And along with that, a writing sample and three references from judges, three from attorneys, two personal references.

So there's a lot of material.

The commission reviews it all, decides who to interview, conducts interviews, sends three names to the governor.

Then the governor has 30 days to choose.

This is another beautiful thing about our system.

There's a really strict timeline in the Constitution.

The commission has 60 days to get three names.

The governor has 30 days to pick.

So it isn't like the federal system where they have vacancies forever, because they have whatever political wrangling going on.

I say, if your shortstop is no longer available you just don't wait to get another one, right?

- [Host] We play with eight.

- You gotta get out on the field and keep playing.

So we, so we pick 'em fast and there's no legislative involvement.

- Fewer than 25% of Wyoming's elected legislators are women, but the number is growing.

At the federal level, two of Wyoming's three delegates to the United States Congress are women, US Senator Cynthia Lummis and US Representative Harriet Hageman.

And in Wyoming, in the judicial branch, an important milestone finally has been reached.

The Wyoming Supreme Court now is majority women.

How significant is that?

Is it... - Oh, I think it's significant.

What it stands for is the fact that we now have a lot of really accomplished female attorneys in Wyoming, because that's where the judges come from.

You know, Marilyn Kite was the first woman on the Supreme Court, and then the first Chief.

I was the second woman and I thought that was a big deal.

And we had a pretty short period of time during which we were both on the court that there were two women.

And then she retired.

And I thought, well, I'll be the only one for a while.

And then blam- - [Host] Two since then.

- Yeah, now we have three very accomplished jurists and it's really impressive to have three women sitting at a bench with two other men.

And I think the significance too is that, you know when we talk to these students who come in, the young people and law students and young lawyers who say, wow, that's possible for us.

(triumphant music) - Thanks for being with us on "Capital Outlook" and join us again next week.

(triumphant music) - [Announcer] This program is supported in part by a grant from the BNSF Railway Foundation, dedicated to improving the general welfare and quality of life in communities throughout the BNSF Railway service area.

Proud to support Wyoming PBS.

- [Announcer] And by the members of Wyoming PBS.

Thank you for your support.