Thread by @IAmNickReynolds

In Sheridan this morning for a meeting on various election reform proposals. Very packed house.

A few GOP officials here, including some from as far as Uinta County. The @SheridanWYDems have worked to turn people out too.

If you couldn't make it, the livestream is here:

We're working through several draft changes to Wyoming's elections this morning.

An open primary: wyoleg.gov/InterimCommitt…
Ranked choice voting: wyoleg.gov/InterimCommitt…

And two runoff proposals. One bill draft, and one resolution to put runoff elections to voters.

If you're unfamiliar with the formats, open primaries essentially eliminate the requirement for candidates to declare a party at the primary stage, and the top vote-getters advance to the general election.

RCV lets you "rank" your favorite candidates in an 'instant runoff.'

In run-off elections, you could have multiple primary elections to determine the top vote-getters.

Basically, instead of one primary, you could have two primaries if no candidate gets more than half the vote in the first round. wyoleg.gov/InterimCommitt…

Right now, Democrats favor ranked choice voting after successfully using it in their caucuses last year. trib.com/news/state-and…

Republicans say the system is convoluted. And before the meeting, Sen. Scott mentioned he had concerns with issues in states like NY.

Run-off elections are favored by the GOP, and Republican lawmakers have been under a lot of pressure from the state party, lawmakers to their right, and even people like Trump to support it.

Clerks have previously said it can't be implemented by 2022, and could cost more money.

All of these election reforms have the same goal, however: ensuring that the winners of Wyoming's elections have clear, majority support.

Vote-splitting was a longstanding issue in Wyoming before this year. The risk of the field against Cheney splitting the vote was a catalyst.

For more background, see my previous coverage: wyofile.com/lawmakers-mull…

Very important to note: Only the open primary and ranked choice voting bills would take effect in-time for the 2022 elections as-drafted.

Runoff bill would not, and the constitutional amendment would not be voted on until the next election in 2024. wyoleg.gov/InterimCommitt…

Dave Holland, vice chair of the Wyoming GOP, is commenting now. Saying that overly complicated bills the average person can't understand aren't very good.

The open primary proposal impacts how precinct seats are selected. Said he prefers a closed primary due to party switching.

"I pray that none of the Republican members of this committee are sponsoring this," Holland said. "This is absolutely what is going on nationwide. There is an elected class that has contempt for the people who put them in office. And I pray that that doesn't apply to you."

.@GailSymons2 of Civics 307 said competition could benefit the system. Notes participation in the primaries is often quite low in comparison to the general election. More than one-third of registered Rs don't vote in primaries, she notes.

Said R concerns about open primaries are unfounded and that crossover doesn't happen.

Most register R and stay because they want their votes to count, and most elections are decided in the primary.

Said the real problem is precinct seats going uncontested, but added there should be a partisan precinct position ballot in addition to the open primary in order to address the state GOP's concerns.

TJ Marshall, a Sheridan County GOP precinct person, said that an open primary could "dilute" the market of ideas between Rs and Ds.

Alleges crossover voting impacted the governor's race. (Debatable: trib.com/news/state-and…)

Of course, the 2018 race was also arguably the beginning of this push for election reform. You can't ignore the influence of runner-up Foster Friess in that discussion. wyofile.com/friess-suggest…

Karl Allred, of the Uinta County GOP, says that the "R" and "D" next to candidates' names can help voters identify preferred candidates. Said the party was willing to perform elections themselves, but if they would do open primaries, they might as well eliminate primaries period.

"If you want to consider that type of process, then let's save the state a lot of money and just get rid of the primary and everybody go to the general, because there's no reason for a primary at that point," he said.

Patty Junek, an election integrity activist, is speaking out against things like same-day registration, same-day party change, and the open primary proposal.

Jackie McMahon, a Sheridan County resident, said that if voters can't identify people by their ideas, then they need a closed primary.

An open primary, however, would compel people to vote for candidates based on their ideas alone, she said.

Now moving to work the bills. Rep. Dan Zwonitzer (who teaches political science) notes Thomas Jefferson (whom Holland quoted in his testimony) didn't like political parties.

However he agreed with some open primary comments, particularly the concept of the marketplace of ideas.

Added that this idea resulted from concerns from the GOP, and was an immediate alternative to a concept (runoff elections) that was unworkable for the 2022 elections.

Sen. Cale Case said that open primaries sound like a lot of fun, but that this was too heavy a lift for the abbreviated 2022 Budget Session, which lasts just 20 days. Especially when so many people seemed opposed.

Comments on the GOP's approach: "I think if you want to win elections, you tilt things to win elections," he said.

"I'm looking at a Republican Party that wants to win, not to govern," he adds.

Sen. Charlie Scott said he agreed with most of what Case said, but that he objected to carving the major political parties out of the electoral process.

Said he believes the party system still has merit, and that this would dilute it. Wants to kill the bill.

Rep. Hans Hunt -- who brought the bill -- advising people not to kill the open primary proposal, and that he wants the Legislature to have as many options in front of them as possible.

Roscoe also speaking against tabling the bill.

Sounding like this option might go down. Sen. Brian Boner (R-Douglas) is usually for leaving numerous options on the table, but said he also believes parties do play a role in our current system and recommends they table the bill. (You can untable at any time.)

This is the main priority for the committee from management council, however, so Zwonitzer asks all options remain on the table.

And... looks like it has been tabled indefinitely. I counted nine in-favor.

Now we're moving on to ranked-choice voting.

Like the open primary (and my bad, I was wrong on this earlier), RCV would NOT be implementable by 2022 since it is not federally certified by the ECA, which we require in the state's Chapter 12 rules.

Zwonitzer noted we usually don't care about federal rules, and could change ours anytime. However SOS says they don't have the proper expertise in their division to ensure the security of RCV in-time for 2022.

Decent price tag too... not as much money as running another election in a run-off system, but the upfront cost is pretty close.

Per SOS, changes to the system will cost $860k plus an additional $10k per election, per county for the software.

Case said he's intrigued by this as an option and wants to develop a contingency plan with the Secretary of State and, potentially, look to take this up during the 2023 General Session, which is 40 days.

We're back after a half hour pause.

Frank Eathorne, Wyoming GOP chairman, is commenting in opposition of ranked choice voting. Said that opposing RCV and election integrity is the grassroots' number one issue this year.

"There is no support for ranked-choice voting," he said.

The only option they support, he said, is a run-off bill.

"We want to see 50% plus one, clear winners, to represent us in these offices."

Corey Steinmetz, WyoGOP's national committeeman, said that he connected with the ED in Maine. Hearing from a clerk there, was told the paperwork was overwhelming and that the people who struggle most with RCV are the elderly.

Added the clerk raised concerns about the financial cost too, and that it could sow distrust in elections by causing confusion.

"They do not bother to vote. I don't think that's our goal, to encourage people not to vote."

Driskill asks Eathorne to define "election integrity."

"Election integrity is defined as auditable elections, a paper trail," Eathorne said. No internet connectivity, no crossover voting. (We already use paper ballots, they're just counted using digital machines.)

I should note groups like FairVote -- which favor RCV -- cites numerous studies where RCV either increased or had no impact on turnout. fairvote.org/research_rcvvo…

Steinmetz's testimony is also partly true, according to a study of clerks themselves. liebertpub.com/doi/full/10.10…

Important to read the conclusion though. Exit polls indicated voters liked it but on the whole, municipal officials did not. The fiscal cost, they reported, was negligible.

Jim McMahon, of Johnson County: "Some would consider me in the elderly class, but I'm not confused by ranked choice voting."

Said if he's ranking people, he's going to "have a reason" to. And that means research. (Some argue people won't do that, anyone have research on that?)

Joey Correnti, Carbon County Chairman: Said parties are private organizations and, in the Equality State, said there's no reason parties shouldn't perform nominations similar to the way minor parties do. Questions the use of taxpayer dollars to do that.

Holland: "Ronald Reagan was a simple man, and said the simple solution was the best solution."

Said there was just a disastrous exit from Afghanistan "because an artificial deadline was set." Said we should angle for 2024 and "get it right."

Zwonitzer asks why we are now pushing this off when it was the party lobbying for immediate change.

"Is 2024 now okay?" he asks. "We were under the impression the grassroots wanted change by 2022."

GOP now seems to acknowledge the '22 deadline can't be met.

"Let's don't pass something that doesn't work just to meet a deadline," Holland said.

"That might be good advice for us all," Case said. "We can leave the election structure alone for the next cycle, and make changes down the road in every aspect, including runoff elections."

WyoDems' @ninashebert, who helped set up the Dems' RCV election last summer (and is from Louisiana, where runoffs are rule) now walking lawmakers through how RCV works in-practice.

"It's a caucus, but on paper," she said. Adds we already rely on voters to be informed.

Hebert says that runoff elections actually reduce turnout, increase the cost of government, and forces candidates to run yet another campaign, which means more money in politics.

On turnout (in LA, at least)... that's true. theadvertiser.com/story/news/pol…

Case said he's not certain it's implementable, but that it's the best option they have. Adds he's convinced it's a better way to do elections and has advantages to a runoff and open primary.

"This is the wave of the future, and it's a good one," he said.

[Immediately implementable, sorry.]

Boner advocates for a Utah-like system, where special districts and municipalities (which are already nonpartisan) can opt into an RCV system if they so choose. Pushes a "conceptual amendment" to offer that option.

Looks like that passes 8-5.

Ranked Choice Voting fails, 8-4. Will not be sponsored by the committee this session, though an individual could sponsor it.

Ayes: Boner, Case, Clausen, Hunt, Roscoe.
Nos: Nethercott, Scott, Blackburn, Duncan, Eyre, Macguire, Driskill, Zwonitzer.
Excused: Clifford.

The county clerks are now bringing forward a bill to make the COVID-era early processing of absentee ballots a permanent feature of Wyoming's elections.

Was needed because of high numbers of absentee ballots last year, and allowed results to come in quicker.

Julie Freese, Fremont County clerk, now giving a demonstration of how they process absentee ballots.

As she opens it, Case jokes: "It says 'Biden wins.'"

"If only those people could hear you," Freese responds.

The clerks are actively running a demonstration on how they tabulate ballots with an actual machine. And they are using paper ballots.

"So you guys have a paper trail," Rep. Shelly Duncan asks.

"Yes, you have paper right here," Freese said.

I couldn't get a good photo from behind them, but here's what it looked like:

Building on the absentee ballot processing legislation, lawmakers are now weighing imposing criminal penalties for tampering with voter equipment as an election judge.

SOS Ed Buchanan is pushing for a felony, but some limited concern this could deter people from becoming a judge

"It's got to be a heavy penalty," he said. The potential of someone tampering with gear or results is at the root of all their concerns. And while clerks say this doesn't happen (and would not allow anyone to work there who would) it's not in code.

Now back to the component regarding early processing Allred saying we shouldn't pass this bill because he believes absentee ballots should only be used by people who are not actually in the state.

But Zwonitzer says the horse "may be too far out of the barn" on this one.

Freese also notes that you need to request an absentee ballot to receive one, which is different from mail-in balloting, she said.

"Because they're lazy" is the rationale that was given to lawmakers.

https://twitter.com/itsmikeyin/status/1433496979598807064

We're now into the afternoon portion of the meeting, where we're talking a handful of runoff election proposals from Rep. Chip Neiman (R-Hulett).

Here's the video feed:

There are two bills in this package.

Runoff elections cannot be run in a redistricting year without an amendment to the constitution due to timing involved. This would fix that, should voters go for it: wyoleg.gov/InterimCommitt…

Then the bill itself wyoleg.gov/InterimCommitt…

Constitutional amendments are rare in Wyoming. To-date, we've had seven. ballotpedia.org/Number_of_stat…

A proposed amendment last year to raise the debt limit for sewer projects -- which cities wanted to have more options in financing infrastructure projects -- was narrowly defeated.

If a runoff bill is passed, it would move the date of the first primary to May, with the final date of the runoff election taking place in August should no candidate emerge with more than half the total vote.

Voters will not be able to change parties in-between those elections.

This won't take effect until '24 if passed. Session would potentially wrap up during the heat of campaign season (as @Victoria_Eavis pointed out) but campaigns have been getting longer. And you can always "campaign" from the floor, especially now that meetings are livestreamed.

per SOS Ed Buchanan, runoff elections would cost an additional $230,000 in administrative costs, $30,000 for additional absentee ballots, and $1.1 million to the counties.

Could be common. Buchanan adds we would have had runoffs in the last 5/6 primary elections.

Yes, there is a list:

The 2020 race for U.S. Senate
2018 for Governor
2016 for US Representative
2014 for Superintendent
2012 US Senate
2010 Governor

Plus seven legislative races in 2020.

"It will be utilized," Buchanan said.

(Sorry, I misheard, upon checking I can confirm the 2012 U.S. Senate race was a landslide win for John Barrasso.)

Mary Lankford, Sublette County Clerk, said they would have preferred an interim study for such a landmark piece of legislation. However, said they helped develop the language of the bill and are currently able to administer what is laid out in there.

Eathorne up to the mic. Reminds lawmakers that this is the number one "election integrity" issue they are currently dealing with from constituents.

Urges them to get it to the floor. Adds that the party will be watching which legislators are supporting and which are opposing.

Zwonitzer asks about changing attitudes within the party dating back to their requests several years ago.

Eathorne said that was a while ago under different leadership, and that numerous counties have voted in-support of resolutions backing a runoff election.

Gail Symons touches on the campaign issue: "You have the filing period overlap 100% with the legislative session. This is not good."

Zwonitzer: "You don't think I can get decent legislation in six weeks and campaign for re-election at the same time?"

Symons: "My personal opinion is there are some who can't whether there's a filing period or not." (That got some laughs)

Rep. Pat Sweeney (R-Casper) called in to oppose the bill. Concerned about crossover, as well as the likely heightened cost of campaigning.

Kris Korfanta : "I worry that this is just going to open it up to more money, a lot of it from out of state and from undisclosed means. It's also going to take representatives from the people's work." (1/2)

"They're going to be more concerned about raising money for the election, take us away from a citizen legislature, and it will prevent people from running who can't afford to get the money."

Note: She also works with Wyoming Promise, an anti-dark money group.

Correnti: "I don't think that the runoff election is the ultimate answer. I think it's the best answer for right now."

The ultimate answer: Get govt. out of the primaries, just like the minor parties. (The GOP is currently mired in two separate election integrity lawsuits.)

Sources:

Uinta: wyofile.com/state-passes-o…
Natrona: trib.com/news/state-and…

Asked by Case if the state parties should get out of filling vacancies, Correnti said he'd be open to that idea for non-policy, non-partisan focused jobs.

Bruce Burns, former longtime Republican lawmaker, also concerned about the prospect of campaigning in March or April. Said it could lead to increased turnover for lawmakers who don't live in Cheyenne.

"We've been away from our families. We've been living out of motels and rentals. We're sleep-deprived, and frankly we get sick of it," he said. "And that's one of the beauties of being a citizen legislator, you're, you're not a full time, politician."

"I get concerned when I see the chairman of the Republican Party sit up here and tell you that they're going to see who's for it and who's against it."

"Any legislator who is craven enough to change their vote because of intimidation tactics doesn't deserve to be reelected."

Eathorne returns to the mic to clarify he was not making threats -- he was relaying messages from the party.

But Zwonitzer -- a onetime "RINO" of the month -- says he was duly elected too.

"There seems to be no acknowledgement that we represent these same people as well."

Now onto legislator conversation. Sen. Charlie Scott is opposed to this bill, saying it creates a number of new problems, including the impacts to legislators and the expense.

Nethercott also notes only 10 states have runoffs. Only four with models like we're considering.

S. Dakota also does runoffs, Nethercott notes, but their threshold to avoid a runoff is 35% -- not the 50% we're proposing.

Nethercott and Case sound like they may want to "put this to the people."

Driskill and Hunt also, the latter encouraging this bill to advance as a constitutional question for the voters in the next election for 2024.

Zwonitzer raises concerns about the prospect of "earned media." Said he's worried about campaigning during session itself, people trying to get into their hometown press and doing daily radio updates each morning, which could pose an unfair advantage.

In that dynamic, "It fundamentally alters how the budget session operates," he said.

As you know, budget sessions -- which happen in election years -- are short. And because of this, leadership tries to avoid hot button issues. Does that change?

And the runoff proposal will to advance to the next meeting, where they will decide whether this will be sponsored by the committee.

Ayes: Driskill, Blackburn, Nethercott, Duncan, Hunt, Boner.

Would have died 6-6, but Zwonitzer was a reluctant 7th to break the tie.

On the constitutional amendment bill to change the deadline for apportionment -- which is needed to resolve problems with a potential run-off -- Scott is concerned about the possibility of creating less than adequate district lines.

The constitutional amendment bill also passes. (It kind of needed to, anyway.)