Thomas Garvie
Tgarvie@uwyo.edu
Political races in Wyoming are different than in most states in that the winner of the Republican primary is essentially guaranteed a victory in the general election. This means that in each case, the two most prominent candidates will likely agree on most issues.
This holds true in the case of the race for Wyoming’s vacant seat in the House of Representatives. The seat is being left open by the retirement of long time Wyoming Representative Cynthia Lummis. Since Lummis’ retirement, two candidates have emerged as front-runners in the Republican Party.
The current leader is Liz Cheney, the daughter of former Vice President Dick Cheney. Cheney’s closest competitor is current state legislator Tim Stubson. These two candidates were spirited by leaps and bounds above others in the recent Laramie Boomerang poll, making them the two most viable candidates to discuss.
It is important to understand at the outset that the two candidates largely agree on many issues that are important to Wyomingites, and make similar use of buzzphrases guaranteed to put a smile on the faces of rural republicans. Each of them have expressed intentions of repealing ObamaCare (the Affordable Care Act), reducing the size the federal government, protecting the natural gas and coal industry and reforming immigration policy as well as the tax code.
Where the candidates differ is not in ideology, but in prioritization of particular issues. Stubson for example is focused on balancing the federal budget, and protecting second amendment rights. Cheney does not necessarily disagree with these positions, but simply does not have them prioritized as high as protection of agricultural industries, or the repeal of common core. When it comes down to the issues (which most voters don’t pay attention to anyway), you will find yourself splitting hairs with Wyoming republicans.
That then leaves each of us to create a new framework within which to judge these candidates. My framework for example is based on three key principles. The principles are legislative experience, ability in regard to national issues, and awareness of Wyoming’s unique issues.
The first obviously goes to Stubson who has eight years of experience as a state legislator in one of the most effective legislative systems in the U.S. He has served as both Majority Whip and Speaker Pro Tempore in the Wyoming House which are positions that demand an understanding of navigating the often complex legislative arena. While Cheney has experience in government, no aspect of government operates in quite the same nuanced way that the legislative branch does. The two may share policies, but Stubson’s legislative abilities make him most likely to make those policies reality.
On the issue of navigating national issues, Cheney has a significant advantage. Her time working in the U.S. State Department sets her apart on the national stage. Despite not being a legislator, Cheney certainly has experience dealing with national issues- especially those that deal with foreign policy. With issues like immigration and ISIS on every voters mind, Cheney seems to have an advantage in two of the nations most significant issues.
With each candidate carrying one of the first two essential paradigms, the third becomes paramount. When deciding which of these candidates is most aware of our issues as Wyomingites, the obvious answer is the daughter of our most prominent politician. Unless, of course, you consider the fact that Cheney has spent most of her professional career in Washington D.C. While this fact gives her the decided edge in national and foreign policy, it conversely deprives her of a real and calculated connection to Wyoming issues.
The tie breaker therefore goes to Tim Stubson, who has not only lived in Wyoming for his entire life, but who has also dealt firsthand with many of Wyoming’s contemporary issues as a member of the state legislature. Cheney may have the Wyoming name, but Stubson has the Wyoming tenure that makes him most capable of representing our state’s interests.
