Gary Brown

The speaker opposes the bill because it adds a misdemeanor penalty that criminalizes employees for certain actions.

The lawmaker opposes the amendment because it includes requirements regarding veterans benefits that are outside the scope of state agency authority and focuses on national rather than Wyoming issues.

The lawmaker opposes the bill because providing lump sums immediately upon graduation would create a significant financial hit to the trust fund, making it actuarially unsustainable without massive new appropriations.

The lawmaker opposes the amendment because he views it as a threat to cut funding if cost savings are not achieved, rather than a true compromise, and states his constituents do not support cutting $40 million.

The lawmaker supports the amendment to send a message of good faith to retirees who have been on fixed incomes for too long.

The lawmaker supports the amendment because general fund dollars should be reserved for educational purposes rather than paying student athletes, who have other funding sources available.

The lawmaker supports the amendment by arguing that there is sufficient excess budget money available to invest in community colleges without needing a specific slush fund.

The lawmaker opposes the bill, viewing it as government overreach that prevents adults from voluntarily having money deducted from their paychecks to support organizations representing them.

The lawmaker supports striking the language about reducing waiting lists because he believes it is a policy decision that cannot be magically achieved if providers are not available, even though he likes the intent.

The lawmaker opposes selling a jet because studies show it is fiscally responsible to keep them, as they save time and money compared to driving executives across the state.

The lawmaker supports the amendment because, based on his experience working in healthcare where staff face daily threats, he believes all healthcare workers need protection, not just those at pregnancy centers.

The lawmaker urges a no vote because reporting requirements in the bill would involve the government with private organizations, despite agreeing that the general intent is good.

The lawmaker argues that Ivermectin is a safe medication developed in 1970 that has been effective against human parasites and river blindness.

The lawmaker opposes the bill because it functions as another property tax cut, which would remove $30 million from local government funding.

The lawmaker urges a no vote because the state lacks regulatory authority over railroads, meaning passing this bill would require expanding government power which is not currently appropriate.

The lawmaker argues for the bill as a way to ensure people who reasonably defend themselves can move on with their lives without being destroyed by legal processes, noting that investigations still occur before charges are filed.

The lawmaker argues that hand-marked paper ballots are the gold standard for election integrity because they cannot be altered digitally without physical access and provide a durable record voters can verify directly.