Wyoming Voters Air Election Frustrations, Affordability Concerns, Project Opposition in Letters to Oil City News
As Wyoming voters headed to the polls for the primary election, Oil City News published a collection of letters to the editor that captured the raw, often sharply divided mood of the 2026 campaign season. The letters, submitted by residents from Casper and Cheyenne, addressed a range of anxieties: misleading campaign mailers, outside money in local races, the rising cost of basic goods, a controversial hydroelectric project on the North Platte, and the increasingly combative tone of political discourse. In its introductory note, Oil City News reminded readers that it publishes letters, cartoons, and opinions as a public service, and that the content does not necessarily reflect the views of the newspaper or its employees. That disclaimer was fitting, because the letters could not be more different in tone, ideology, or conclusion. One writer demanded that political action committees prove their claims about a candidate; another called for independent audits and spending cuts to restore affordability; a third implored the congressional delegation to stop a federal energy project that threatens wildlife and a way of life; and an incumbent state representative accused a rival campaign of twisting facts and eroding trust in representative government. The headline chosen by Oil City News for the batch — “Election misinformation, affordability, Bien support and a Jeske mailer” — neatly summarized the range of topics, though it captured only part of the emotional intensity on display. Together, the letters form a snapshot of Wyoming at a moment of decision, when voters are not only choosing candidates but also debating the standards by which public life should be conducted. Whether the subject is a mailer, a deficit, a dam, or a tax, the underlying demand is the same: listen carefully, demand evidence, and honor the values of honesty, independence, and stewardship.
Ralph Mikels of Casper opened his letter with a plain expression of relief: “The primary is today and I’m glad.” He said he was tired of unsolicited mailers spreading “falsehoods and untruths” about candidates he knows personally. In a letter titled “Glad mailers will be over,” Mikels specifically challenged two groups — PAC For A Better Wyoming and WYO for Business — to prove their claims about state Rep. Tony Locke. He then turned the tables on the outside groups, noting that PAC For A Better Wyoming took money from donors in California, Pennsylvania, and Washington, D.C. “So who is catering to outside interests?” he asked. The implication was unmistakable: if a PAC is funded by out-of-state interests, it is the one out of step with Wyoming, not the candidate it attacks. Mikels did not stop at questioning the source of the money. He leveled a broader political accusation, writing, “You are either socialists or Democratic socialists. In my opinion, we should run you out of the state.” That inflammatory conclusion underscores the deep anger that campaign attacks can provoke, especially when they target candidates with strong local reputations. It also illustrates how national political language, including terms like “socialist,” has seeped into local debates. For Mikels, the issue was not simply whether the claims about Locke were true or false; it was that outside money and messages were being used to deceive voters in a small, interconnected state where many residents know candidates personally. His letter was a demand for accountability, framed in the stark language of political banishment, and it captured a broader weariness with mailbox flooding and negative advertising that has come to define modern election seasons.
Chris Willis, also of Casper, offered a more analytical approach to a different but equally pressing issue: affordability. His letter, “Let’s talk affordability,” began with the observation that candidates aligned with the Democratic Socialists of America are winning elections throughout the country, and that the issue they are winning on is the cost of basic things — housing, food, utilities, and medicine. Willis credited DSA candidates and “Common Sense Republicans” such as state Sen. Eric Barlow with talking about this issue because it is real. However, he argued, their proposed solutions do not solve the core question: Why is stuff too expensive in the first place? Willis identified two significant contributors. First, he cited massive federal deficit spending, which has resulted in $2 trillion in newly printed dollars every year. He called out an inconvenient fact for conservatives: President Donald Trump is responsible for 40 percent of the total U.S. debt. “He’s a spendaholic, too,” Willis wrote. He linked deficit spending to federal grant programs such as the Casper North Platte “bridge to nowhere,” arguing that the City Council is happy to do its part to ensure the national debt remains unsustainable. Every deficit dollar printed by the Federal Reserve dilutes the purchasing power of the dollars in workers’ paychecks and savings accounts, he explained; more dollars chasing the same amount of real goods means people pay more for the same stuff with no increase in their own budgets. The second contributor, in Willis’s view, is the heavy regulatory burden imposed by government. Some regulation is necessary to protect citizens, he allowed, but when excessive red tape and cronyism add 40 percent to the price of Wyoming-raised beef, there is a problem. Willis dismissed both liberal proposals to grow government and the crony capitalism that exists in Wyoming, arguing that both see government as the solution when, in fact, it is the problem. That is why he supports Brent Bien, who he said is the only candidate in the race who talks as if he understands the issue. Willis highlighted Bien’s proposals: true independent audits of state government, reducing business-strangling regulations, and cutting spending to ease the inflationary death spiral and enable the private sector to create wealth without fear of increased taxes or money printing. “If we do this, affordability will come. This is change I can believe in,” he concluded, signing the letter “as a free citizen for an unburdened Wyoming.”
James Schick of Cheyenne wrote with a very different concern: the proposed Seminoe Pumped Storage Project. In his letter, “Stop the Seminoe Pumped Storage Project,” Schick said he learned about the project in March 2025 and has already submitted comments to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, or FERC. At first, he considered sharing deeply personal stories: harvesting his first elk below Kortes Dam, casting into the North Platte River, experiencing the quiet beauty of the landscape. But he realized those stories are not uniquely his. “They’re ours,” he wrote. Thousands of Wyoming residents have stood in those same places, created memories, and formed a connection to the landscape. That is why concern over the project lingers — because it touches on the relationship between people and the places that shape them. The project would put the Miracle Mile, the North Platte River, Seminoe State Park, and the Ferris-Seminoe bighorn sheep herd at risk. It is moving through a federal process, Schick acknowledged, but Wyoming would live with the consequences. He pointed out that FERC itself acknowledges pumped storage projects are energy losers, using more energy to pump water uphill than they generate when it flows back down. The project appears to depend on federal tax subsidies and a waiver of seasonal wildlife protections in order to pencil out, he said, meaning Wyoming would carry the risks while broader electricity markets get the benefits. Schick argued that responsible energy development should be well-sited, protect fish and wildlife, respect communities, and benefit Wyoming. He acknowledged that life is rarely as simple as progress versus preservation; thoughtful people can reach different conclusions from sincere convictions. He urged readers to raise their voices with humility and respect, and he asked decision-makers to listen to experts, stakeholders, and the people whose lives are rooted in this landscape. Schick expressed gratitude that U.S. Sen. John Barrasso has already raised concerns with FERC, and he hopes Wyoming’s full congressional delegation keeps pressing. Most of all, he hopes whatever decision is reached, this generation can defend it with integrity and future generations won’t look back asking, “What were they thinking?” He directed readers to wyomingwildlife.org/stopseminoepumpedstorage/ and asked them to join him in urging the delegation to oppose the project and stand with Wyoming’s hunters, anglers, communities, fish, wildlife, and outdoor way of life.
The only letter from an elected official came from state Rep. J.R. Riggins of Casper, who used his column to respond to a campaign mailer that had attacked a rival candidate. The mailer, which highlighted “Neil Jeske’s Plan,” reportedly painted Wyoming government as a hostile force, called taxation “violent extraction,” and promised to “dismantle” the system rather than manage it. Riggins countered that such a claim may sound bold, but it is not a plan. “It’s a rejection of the very institutions he wants to belong to,” Riggins wrote. He defended taxation, explaining that Wyoming’s tax revenues fund public safety, roads, water systems, schools, senior programs, veteran services, and the infrastructure that makes the state livable. Calling that “theft” dismisses the concerns of thousands of Wyoming citizens who reach out to their representatives, as well as the hard work of local officials, first responders, and educators who serve residents every day. Riggins also said the mailer misrepresented legislative records. He singled out SF0126, which the mailer reportedly claimed “shipped cash to Ireland” or allocated $10 million in taxpayer funds to a foreign trade commission. According to Riggins, the bill actually concerned trade promotion opportunities, not direct overseas transfers, and the most important omission was that it did not pass. He reminded readers that Wyoming’s legislative process is transparent and documented; anyone can verify the facts through the official state legislature website. Riggins framed his response around a belief in pragmatic leadership — people who listen to testimony, weigh evidence, and make decisions that reflect their constituents’ needs. Dismissing that process as “dependency” or “bureaucracy,” he argued, undermines the principle of representative government itself. He closed by affirming his support for limited, efficient government, but also for honest debate, factual accountability, and respect for the people who make Wyoming work. “Our citizens deserve leaders who build, not dismantle; who solve problems, not inflame them,” Riggins wrote. His letter served as both a defense of the legislature’s record and a warning about the appeal of anti-government rhetoric during election season.
Taken together, the four letters illustrate a defining feature of Wyoming’s civic life: a fierce insistence that residents, not outsiders, should determine the state’s direction. Whether the issue is a campaign PAC with out-of-state donors, a federal energy project, a deficit-funded bridge, or a legislative bill misrepresented in a mailer, the underlying demand is the same — that facts be checked, that consequences be considered, and that Wyoming’s interests come first. The writers differ sharply on philosophy. Mikels sees socialism lurking behind outside money. Willis sees spendthrift politicians and crushing regulations as twin threats. Schick sees a proposed dam as a risk to irreplaceable resources. Riggins sees a rival campaign poisoning the well of public trust. Yet each letter offers a version of the same warning: if Wyoming voters are not vigilant, decisions will be made by people who do not share their values. The letters also show that the language of politics has become sharper, more ideological, and more emotional. Words like “socialist,” “theft,” “dismantle,” and “run you out of the state” are now part of the debate. That can be uncomfortable, but it reflects the intensity of the moment. As Wyoming moves from the primary to the general election, these letters serve as a reminder that governing is not just about winning races. It is about maintaining institutions that can withstand the fury of the moment, and making decisions that will be defensible to the next generation. The voters and officials who wrote to Oil City News may not agree on the answers, but they all insist that the conversation must continue. Can Wyoming maintain a civil public square while outside groups pour money into races? Can the state address affordability without accepting the false choice of either more government or no government? Can it protect its wild places while still developing energy? And can elected leaders explain their actions clearly enough to overcome the distrust that has grown during campaign season? There are no easy answers in the letters, but the questions themselves are valuable. In the end, the most important message may be this: Wyoming’s future belongs to those willing to engage in it, even when — especially when — the debate becomes difficult. Oil City News, by providing a public forum for these voices, is helping to ensure that no one who cares about the state is left unheard.
