Wyoming panel backs resolution asking Congress for amendment to curb dark money influence

The House Travel, Recreation, Wildlife & Cultural Resources Committee voted to advance Senate Joint Resolution 8 on a roll call, asking Congress to consider a constitutional amendment that would give states greater authority to regulate money in political campaigns.

Supporters said the resolution responds to the effects of large, often out‑of‑state campaign expenditures and court rulings that limit state-level regulation. ‘‘This amendment is addressing a very specific problem,’’ said Brian Boyle, general counsel and chief program officer for American Promise, which mobilizes support for a federal amendment. Boyle warned that state laws aimed at limiting outside or foreign spending have repeatedly been enjoined in federal court, citing examples from Alaska, Maine and Ohio.

Why it matters: Backers argued the measure would restore policymaking to elected officials after decades of Supreme Court decisions that they say constrain states’ options. Opponents and some members raised practical questions about enforcement and how the amendment would be crafted if sent to Congress.

Committee discussion focused on the local effects of outside spending and on transparency. Representative Wharf said she has been targeted by “bogus” mailers and described the difficulty of tracing their funding: "I guess I kinda get a little muddy to me how how we track these dollars...I don't know the answer to that question." Senator Cooper suggested publicity by targeted candidates can mitigate unsolicited mailers: she said she publicly disavowed a favorable mailer that she did not solicit. Public commenters and local activists said outside spending discourages citizens from running for office; Vicki Swenson of Laramie said outside money is “destroying Wyoming government.”

American Promise’s Boyle told the committee the federal courts should not be the arbiter of these policy choices: ‘‘The point is it actually shouldn't be courts deciding these questions because the questions involved in these laws are policy questions that should be subject to the reasonable judgment of lawmakers like yourselves.’’

Formal action: The committee recorded a roll call vote on Senate Joint Resolution 8. The clerk read nine aye votes: Representative Campbell (aye), Representative Connolly (absentee aye), Representative Harshman (aye), Representative Jarvis (aye), Representative Provenza (aye), Representative Store (aye), Representative Thayer (aye), Representative Wharfe (aye) and Chairman Byron (aye). The committee chair recorded the motion as approved.

Next steps: The committee advanced the resolution to be scheduled for further consideration. Committee members said they expect the coalition of states and constituents pushing the amendment conversation to continue and that any eventual proposed amendment would be developed by delegates and caucuses in Congress or a national convention, not dictated by this committee.