By OBBM Network Editorial Staff

David Iverson

In the midst of a heated election season, a contentious issue has emerged in Wyoming’s Republican Party: the use of ‘purity tests’ to evaluate candidates’ adherence to the party platform. This debate has sparked tension among party members, with some arguing that such tests are necessary to ensure loyalty and others claiming they are overly restrictive. At the heart of the issue is a fundamental question: what does it mean to be a Republican?

The Platform Pledge

According to David Iverson, host of Cowboy State Politics, the party platform is a set of ‘timeless truths’ that define the Republican Party’s core values. The platform includes 23 planks, ranging from support for life from conception to natural death to advocacy for small government and lower taxes. Iverson argues that if a candidate disagrees with any of these planks, ‘there’s a serious problem.’ As he puts it, ‘if you’re a Republican and you look at that list and there’s anything on there that you disagree with, well, then you’re probably not a Republican.’

The Park County Republican Party has taken a step further by sending a letter to candidates warning them that they must commit to backing at least 80% of the party platform in order to receive endorsement or support. This move has been met with criticism from some, who argue that it is an attempt to ‘police’ who is ‘pure enough’ to participate in the party. As one critic, Sandbags Newsome, put it, ‘This isn’t about principles, it’s about control.’ However, Iverson counters that the goal of the platform pledge is not to exclude dissenting voices but to provide transparency and accountability. ‘The truth is, this is nothing new,’ he says. ‘Local parties have for years sent out various forms of a platform pledge to candidates.’ The Sheridan County GOP, for example, has a pledge that lists out the party platform and asks candidates to indicate their level of support.

Implications for Voters

The purity test debate has significant implications for voters in Wyoming. As Iverson notes, in a state where it is difficult to get elected without being a Republican, voters often take candidates at their word. However, with the rise of ‘redcoats’ – individuals who claim to be Republicans but may not adhere to the party platform – voters are faced with the challenge of discerning who is genuinely committed to Republican values. The platform pledge is one way to provide clarity, but it also raises questions about the balance between party loyalty and individual conscience.

A Private Entity’s Right to Choose

At the heart of the debate is the question of whether the Republican Party, as a private entity, has the right to determine who can participate in its ranks. Iverson argues that the party has a legitimate interest in ensuring that its candidates adhere to its core values. ‘We get together and we decide who we want to run to represent our position and our perspective, our worldview,’ he says. However, others counter that such an approach can be exclusionary and undermine the democratic process.

In conclusion, the purity test debate in Wyoming’s Republican Party reflects a deeper tension between principle and pragmatism. As voters navigate this complex issue, they must consider what it means to be a ‘true’ Republican and how the party’s values align with their own. The full episode of Cowboy State Politics is available on OBBM Network TV.

Watch Cowboy State Politics on OBBM Network TV: https://www.obbmnetwork.tv/series/cowboy-state-politics-208163