The late Sen. Robert H. Johnson, a Rock Springs Democrat, was a force in the Republican-dominated Legislature.
We — the three of us normally working in the Senate — in the 1970s were The Associated Press, Wyoming Tribune and myself from the Casper Star-Tribune were amazed at his at his stamina and persistence in presenting a cascade of amendment to one bill or another.
He set records.
The Johnson Approach
A lawyer and newspaper publisher, Johnson was a very intelligent guy and used a cascade of amendments as a tool to kill bills.
He also used the rules, I think, to show how out of date they were at that time.
The usual process was for the reading clerk to read the introduction of a bill; then a senator was to stand up and make a motion to stop the reading of the bill.
One day, Johnson also stood up and objected to the motion.
He said he wanted to hear the bill read to him, and he said it could be understood better if someone read it, too.
The poor reading clerk read the bill until she was interrupted by Johnson, who said that was enough.
One of Johnon’s Irritants was the rules that state government agencies adopted to fill in the details of laws the Legislature adopted.
He claimed the agencies were essentially taking law and writing rules that gave them more authority than the Legislature intended.
What he wanted was a review to make sure the Legislature was not overreaching and had followed the intent of the lawmakers.
So, this began the bothersome rule review process that was put in effect at that time.
Nobody seemed to like it.
But it was another step for the new Legislature to have more power over ow the laws they passed are put into effect.
The idea was for the Legislative Service Office to get a crack at the rules to see if they conform with the intent. They did that, then the governor got his turn.
Take This Past Session
Senate Bill 127, the bill passed this 2025 session, went way beyond just a legislative review of a law passed.
It could have been worse if the lawmakers adopted this other version. The bill when it left the Senate called for essentially a new state office with a director and a chief economist no less, to evaluate the cost of the new law — whatever it was.
The House got rid of that.
The bill that passed, however, still called for a $400,000 study to see how much these programs are like many others in government. It was supposed to be simple, and then it gets more and more complicated and perhaps forgets why it was created in the first place.
Gov. Mark Gordon, a Republican, vetoes it, and I say good for him. The bill went way behind its original purpose.
Maybe if they had it read to them in a different voice? The late Democratic Sen. Robert Johnson would be disappointed.
Contact Joan Barron at 307 632-2534 or jmbarron@bresnan.net.
