Hearken back to high school chemistry class, when your teacher informed you that a catalyst is a substance that speeds up a chemical reaction but isn’t part of that reaction.
That’s exactly what debate does in our Great Experiment in democracy.
The debate among candidates for Governor of Wyoming on Wednesday night was a case in point, and I watched it as would a student, curious to see what would happen when everything was tossed into the test tube and heated up.
Wyoming PBS served as host, and the moderator and panelists acted as catalyst and stayed out of the way.
The ingredients – the candidates – reacted with each other pretty much as I expected. There was heat and a lot of smoke, but light at the end.
The ingredients were Sen. Eric Barlow, Republican nominee; Ken Casner, Democrat nominee; and Rebecca Bextel, Constitution Party nominee.
Two of them demonstrated that they are woefully unsuited to be governor of the State of Wyoming.
As the debate concluded, I found myself cringing at the prospect of either Casner or Bextel delivering the State of the State address for the next four years.
Casner seemed unprepared to debate any topic other than varying amounts of money hidden somewhere, out of the reach of the people of Wyoming.
His grasp of the facts of governance seemed tenuous, and he often resorted to the populist dog-whistle of “we the people.”
I have no problem with a Democrat as governor, I’ve worked for two of them and they both served Wyoming ably.
But Ken Casner is not cut from the same cloth as Ed Herschler and Mike Sullivan.
Bextel left the GOP to run on the Constitution Party ticket solely to oppose the Republican nominee Eric Barlow.
That begs the question, if she opposes Barlow so strongly then why didn’t she run against him in the GOP primary?
Be that as it may, she calls herself an “insurance policy against Barlow” like one of those scam insurance companies that gobble up premiums but never pay out on a claim.
The kindest thing that can be said of her debate performance is that her hair never really ignited, it just smoldered several times.
Bextel revealed that she has less of an understanding of the role of governor than does Casner.
She frothed and railed against swamp monsters, Colorado, short people and deep-state bureaucrats.
Checkgate Becky promised to take a baseball bat to the lot of ‘em, and to spend her first two years in office vetoing anything that crosses her desk.
While that promise might tickle her Freedom Caucus pep squad, I’m not sure she understands that, by so doing, she’d doom Wyoming to two years without a budget.
And she’d create a veto-proof legislature when that branch of government concludes that the only way to deal with a Governor Becky is to override her veto at every turn.
Bextel should read the Wyoming Constitution again (or for the first time) and understand that the role of governor is not that of some wild-eyed lone gunslinger bent on cleaning out Dodge, but rather that of a stable public servant with clearly circumscribed responsibilities.
Eric Barlow understands that, and his debate performance is ample proof.
In contrast to Casner and Bextel, his answers to the questions came from a deep understanding of Wyoming and her governance.
They came from logic and reason, not from emotion and populist fervor.
When mixed in with his two opponents and the catalyst of political debate, Barlow rose to the top of the test tube.
Keeping in mind that, for every mile of road there are two miles of ditch, I believe that Governor Eric Barlow will keep Wyoming on the road and out of the ditch.
Rod Miller can be reached at RodsMillerWyo@yahoo.com
