House rejects amendment to return budget to governor’s recommendation after hours of debate
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
Representative Yin offered a 16‑page amendment to the general government budget bill to restore the governor's recommendations as a starting point; after extended floor debate about committee transparency and long‑term fiscal impacts, the amendment failed on a 20–35 roll‑call vote.
Representative Yin moved second‑reading amendment number 1 to House Bill 1, describing the 16‑page change as a "clean return to governor's rec" that would restore the governor’s recommended appropriations as the starting point for third‑reading action. "I called it the 1 big beautiful amendment," Yin said while laying out the measure, which she said restores items removed by the Joint Appropriations Committee (JAC) except for a specific permanent savings item.
The amendment prompted more than an hour of floor debate. Supporters argued returning to the governor's recommendation would allow the full House to consider targeted third‑reading amendments rather than accept broad JAC cuts. Representative Larson said the amendment “is the simplest way just is just to start over and take us back to where we were in the beginning,” while Representative Nicholas said the change would restore funding including IT projects and the University of Wyoming.
Opponents, including multiple members of the JAC, urged caution and defended the committee’s work. Representative Baer and other members said JAC conducted lengthy hearings and that returning wholesale to the governor’s rec would amount to abdicating legislative responsibilities. Several members—Representative Lawley, Representative Lolli and others—said they had concerns about transparency in the JAC process and asked for clearer records and justification for specific cuts before final votes.
Speakers on both sides cited specific dollar figures that framed the debate: Representative Bair said recent actions reduced available general‑fund balance by about $34,000,000; the House Appropriations materials cited $44,348,131 for LISRA and $5,120,945 remaining in another line item; committee members referenced a recalibration figure and a roughly $100,000,000 per‑year estimate if consultants’ evidence‑based recommendations were fully adopted. Opponents warned that restoring governor’s recommendations would add back roughly $334 million into the budget, requiring identification of offsets.
After extended debate the chief clerk called the roll on the amendment. The recorded result was 20 ayes, 35 noes, 1 excused; the amendment did not pass.
The House then recessed until 2 p.m.; committee chairs subsequently announced meeting times for a range of bills the House will hear in the afternoon and the next day.