The Wyoming House and Senate began amending their respective versions of the identical budget bill on Tuesday.
As of Wednesday, they arrived at markedly different versions of the bill – and the House is still at it.
The Senate passed an amendment sponsored by Sen. Ogden Driskill (R-Devils Tower) that largely, though not entirely, restores Gov. Mark Gordon’s original budget proposal. That amendment passed by a vote of 20 to 11.
However, the House rejected a similarly lengthy amendment sponsored by Rep. Mike Yin (D-Jackson) that would’ve restored all of the governor’s recommendations.
The lower chamber saw a record number of amendments filed by lawmakers that would alter that chamber’s bill: 122 second reading amendments, the largest number of second reading amendments in either chamber in at least 20 years.
After Yin’s amendment died by a 26 to 35 vote, House lawmakers began a marathon debate that wrapped up by around 1:30 a.m. on Feb. 18. At that time, the House was a little less than halfway through debate and votes on their amendments. They continued to debate second reading amendments into Wednesday.
Both chambers are working off a draft bill forwarded to them by the Legislature’s budgeting arm, the Joint Appropriations Committee (JAC), which spent weeks in December and January hearing from state agencies about their funding needs for the next two years.
The JAC’s draft bill significantly whittled down the governor’s proposal, which was also informed by agency requests.
Senate rejects JAC budget
In the Senate, debate centered on the first budget amendment, brought by Driskill. Driskill’s amendment, which he referred to as “The BBA” or “The Big Beautiful Amendment,” reverses the JAC’s budget proposal to the governor’s original budget proposal, with three major changes, according to the senator.
“One, we went back to the last biennium. We've always had to carry through pieces of legislation. We added that back in, which makes our government stay contiguous from last biennium to this one,” said Driskill. “[Two]...We took the savings back out of the balance, and I'm trying to be transparent, as we use those savings to balance the budget out.”
The senator then explained that they added the items that were supported by both chambers from the failed 2025 supplemental budget, harkening back to last year’s unsuccessful budget deliberations between the House, Senate and governor.
Sen. Lynn Hutchings (R-Cheyenne), the first to directly comment on the budget in the chamber, voiced her fear that they were heading down a similar road as last year if they passed Driskill’s amendment.
“Yes, we have the right to go in and make this budget whatever we want. But we have to remember that the other side [the House] has to agree,” said Hutchings, “Ok, we’re not gonna give you everything you want, maybe half of it. And then kind of spread it over a couple of years. I think that's wise, I think that's prudent.”
Some other senators agreed with Hutching’s position, like Sen. Laura Pearson (R-Kemmerer), who believed it looked bad on the body to move away from the JAC’s bill. Sen. Bob Ide (R-Casper) said increases in government spending gives citizens “less” of the economy.
But more senators spoke up in support of the first budget amendment. While members were grateful to the JAC for its work, some, like Sen. Tara Nethercott (R-Cheyenne), were deeply concerned by the decisions made by that committee.
“The sponsor of that [Driskill’s] amendment, and the people of Wyoming, have spoken. And they said fund our future,” said Nethercott. “And they said fund our only state university. They said these cuts were punitive and retaliatory.”
The attempted removal of the Wyoming Business Council and the defunding of the University of Wyoming were primary concerns with the JAC’s proposal, according to a handful of senators, including Sen. Tim Salazar (R-Riverton), the Senate chair of the JAC. Despite voting against the first amendment, he told the floor, “I think everyone here understands my views on the Wyoming Business Council. I’m flexible, but there are things I do not believe in.”
The Senate’s passage of Driskill’s amendment led to the withdrawal of 10 other amendments, since the passed amendment already addressed their concerns.
Seven additional amendments, not originally in the governor’s proposal or the JAC budget, were adopted.
One would fund sign language interpreters under the state Department of Family Services. Another would ensure that funding from the Tourism Board goes to accounts for the construction of the state shooting complex. And another would narrow the use of certain funds under the state attorney general’s office for litigation of water rights along the Colorado River.
After the Senate adjourned on Tuesday, Sen. John Kolb (R-Lander) said he hopes they made the right choice in restoring the original budget over the JAC’s mark up.
“But that was my belief, it was better to go that direction than to negotiate back to, you know, a conference committee position between the two bodies,” he said.
Kolb added that the funding of the Wyoming Business Council “would probably be an interim study.”
Sen. Chris Rothfuss (D-Laramie) expects the House to be concerned with the Senate’s budget. But he said he felt this was a reasonable move.
“As far as I’m concerned, I’d vote on it right now,” said Rothfuss. “But at the end of this all, we can’t just be looking at compromise for the sake of compromise. If they [the House] can’t justify a cut, we shouldn't be cutting it.”
Rothfuss added if the Legislature ends up in a special session, “I’m in.”
The Senate will convene for a third reading of the budget on Thursday. Senators will discuss and vote for more amendments.
House keeps going, going, going, going
The lower chamber debated second reading amendments for over 10 hours beginning on Tuesday, most of which sought to restore Gordon’s budget blueprint. Most were killed, though lawmakers were still debating second reading amendments by publication time.
Among the amendments that were killed were:
- An amendment that would’ve restored funding for SUN Meals, which are lunches distributed to K-12 students in the summertime.
- One that would’ve restored increased funding to the state Department of Health’s community choices waiver program, a long-term care Medicaid program for seniors and adults with disabilities.
- One that would’ve added an attorney to the state attorney general’s office to help fight natural resources lawsuits.
- And another that would’ve added funding for rural hospitals’ birth centers.
But at the beginning of the process, some lawmakers called out the sheer number of amendments filed.
”I know in my committee, when a bill comes before me that has an inordinately high number of amendments, that's a red flag,” said Rep. Art Washut (R-Casper). “And we have a record number of amendments on this bill.”
Washut argued the deluge of amendments suggests there’s “an issue with the bill.”
Rep. John Bear (R-Gillette), a member of the Wyoming Freedom Caucus and chair of the JAC, said during the debate on Yin’s amendment that he was disappointed by the Senate’s decision to adopt Driskill’s similar amendment.
“I think that is selling our constituents short,” said Bear. “That's what I think of [Yin’s] amendment. We are not doing our work if we just abdicate to the executive and let their budget department decide how we're going to start things.”
The Freedom Caucus has a majority on the JAC between members and endorsees. They’ve said they’re trying to slow the growth of government through budget cuts.
But Rep. Martha Lawley (R-Worland) said she believed the JAC hadn’t provided House members with enough reasoning for why they made cuts.
“There's numerous times that they [JAC members] didn't have any conversations with agencies about the cuts they planned, or listened to agencies about the impact,” said Lawley. “That's what I needed to know. That's the kinds of things for me to evaluate the cuts that I didn't get. Public testimony was so isolated … by the JAC, and extremely limited in time, and it made it extremely difficult for these concerns that other people might have to arise so we could consider them.”
The point of going back to Gordon’s original budget proposal, Yin told the House, was to give lawmakers a better starting point than what the JAC proposed.
“Where should the starting point be? Should it be one where we've cut in half bits and pieces over here, and then we take the knife and we stab the university and we stab the [Wyoming] Business Council, or should we take a scalpel as the body and figure out –”
“Point of order, Mr. Speaker?” said Rep. Tony Locke (R-Casper). House Speaker Rep. Chip Neiman (R-Hulett) asked Locke what his point was.
“That's exactly what I'm talking about,” Locke said. “Do we stab this person? Do we stab this person? If you disagree with policy, representative, argue the policy. You can stay away from the name calling and the fingerpointing in the way that you've done it.”
Speaker Neiman concurred with Locke and reprimanded lawmakers about their debate style, saying, “Ain't nobody stabbing nobody around here.”
As of 1:40 p.m. on Wednesday, the House was a little over halfway done with the 122 second reading amendments. As of publication time, 44 amendments had been killed, while six had been adopted.
House rules dictate that debate on third reading amendments must be pushed to Friday at the earliest, instead of on Thursday as was originally planned.
Rep. John Bear (R-Gillette) told his colleagues that the Legislative Service Office had received over 126 third reading amendments to the House budget bill thus far, which would be another record.
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.
