HB0131

Why they voted this way

The lawmaker opposes the bill because she believes it removes free choice from tipped employees and is not a fair practice.

Why they voted this way

The lawmaker expresses concern that mandatory tip sharing dilutes rewards for individual performance, noting a preference to ensure tips go directly to the person who earned them.

Why they voted this way

The lawmaker supports the bill because it provides statutory clarity for employers regarding IRS reporting requirements and acknowledges the team-based nature of modern restaurant service.

Why they voted this way

The lawmaker supports the bill because it allows employers to manage tip reporting for the IRS effectively and ensures workers who support service but do not receive tips directly are compensated fairly.

Why they voted this way

The lawmaker supports the bill because it allows employers to set their own wage practices without government interference, even if he personally disagrees with such pay plans.

Why they voted this way

The lawmaker supports the bill based on testimony from restaurateurs who believe that tip sharing improves customer service and increases compensation opportunities for employees.

Why they voted this way

The lawmaker opposes the bill because she fears it will allow employers to classify more workers as tipped employees, enabling them to pay a subminimum wage.

Why they voted this way

The lawmaker supports the bill to ensure fair compensation for all staff members involved in food preparation and service.

Why they voted this way

The lawmaker opposes the bill because he believes it will allow employers to pay a subminimum wage to all employees and prefers voluntary tip sharing.

Why they voted this way

The lawmaker supports the bill because it helps employers comply with IRS reporting obligations by bringing tip sharing out of informal arrangements into official policy.

Why they voted this way

The lawmaker supports the bill based on personal experience where her daughter found that sharing tips with support staff was necessary to ensure timely service and overall success.

Why they voted this way

The lawmaker supports the bill because his son, a detective, identified investigative subpoenas as the most important tool needed by law enforcement agencies.

Why they voted this way

The lawmaker opposes the bill because he believes it removes constitutional protections by allowing government access to private records without a judge's probable cause determination.

Why they voted this way

The lawmaker opposes the bill because he believes it allows police officers to exploit citizens and obtain information without constitutional safeguards or probable cause.

Why they voted this way

The lawmaker opposes the bill because he sees no protection for ordinary citizens who cannot match their resources against those of the state.

Why they voted this way

The lawmaker opposes the bill because it acts as a shortcut that bypasses the necessary judicial filter for probable cause, endangering citizens' private information.

Why they voted this way

The lawmaker supports the bill based on her past experience as a peace officer and believes it will help Wyoming investigate crimes that cross state borders where search warrants are ineffective.

Why they voted this way

The lawmaker supports the bill arguing that it provides necessary tools for law enforcement to fight crime across borders and includes adequate protections similar to existing civil subpoenas.

Why they voted this way

The lawmaker opposes the bill because he believes it is too broad and fails to meet the constitutional requirement of being narrowly defined with a significant state purpose.

Why they voted this way

The lawmaker supports the bill because administrative subpoenas are already successfully used to track down child exploiters, and expanding this tool is necessary for other internet-related crimes.