Darin Smith

The lawmaker opposes the bill because he believes it adds burdens and penalties to hospitals, particularly smaller ones trying to serve their communities.

The lawmaker supports the bill because they believe local law enforcement needs clear guidelines to enforce existing laws, citing a specific case of an immigrant who murdered a jogger.

The lawmaker supports concurrence because he believes the amendment falls within the realm of acceptable scope despite being a stretch.

The lawmaker supports the bill because extensive work was done to ensure protections are in place for electric cooperatives serving over 104,000 homes and businesses across the state.

The lawmaker encourages support for the bill, stating that traditions bind people together and describing this as a good tradition.

The lawmaker supports the amendment based on their personal observation of schools being top-notch and deserving full support.

The speaker supports the amendment because the body is already fiscally committed to the project and failing to act would be a double standard.

The lawmaker supports the bill because he believes government spending has grown too large relative to inflation and incomes, placing a heavy burden on people.

The lawmaker supports the bill as a necessary measure to protect women from being oppressed, citing specific examples of unfair competition and lack of recourse in locker rooms.

The lawmaker supports the bill as a fun theme and argues that having many existing days does not preclude creating another day for Wyoming.

The lawmaker supports the bill, asserting that being illegal should have consequences and that enforcing laws vital to national security is necessary.

The lawmaker supports the amendment because it addresses critical road needs specifically, rather than providing a general increase without planning for ongoing obligations.

The lawmaker opposes the bill because it interferes with free trade, which contradicts their core beliefs.

The lawmaker supports concurrence because the amendment prevents adding housing mitigation fees, which they view as a tax that hinders construction and affordable housing.

The lawmaker supports removing means testing because it discriminates against families who do not qualify based on income, and believes competition improves educational outcomes.

The lawmaker supports the bill to level the playing field between private trade schools and community colleges, which already receive tax exemptions.

The lawmaker supports the bill to protect parents from being silenced or bullied by school policies, providing them with a cause of action and putting school boards on notice.

The lawmaker supports the amendment to provide necessary employees, choosing to overlook procedural disputes in order to do what he believes is right for business growth.

The lawmaker supports the bill because school boards are already engaging in political indoctrination, and voters need to know candidates' positions to fight against it.

The lawmaker supports the bill as it upholds constitutional rights to work without impediment, arguing that non-competes have become tools for corporations to oppress individuals.

The lawmaker states that supporting the amendment is the only way they can support the bill, reversing their previous opposition in committee.

The lawmaker supports moving forward with the amendment on second reading to allow time for further information gathering while still addressing local government needs.

Senator Smith urges support for Committee of the Whole Amendment One because it limits subsidies to one line per location and raises the benchmark price from $30 to $40, which has not been updated in five years.

The lawmaker supports the bill as a necessary countermeasure because opposing cultural influences are already present in schools, and these organizations teach physical strength and moral values.

The lawmaker supports the amendment because it restores current standards for specific situations, allowing families to protect their neighborhoods from developments like halfway houses.

The speaker opposes the bill, believing it was written by big insurance companies and blocks real competition.