Wyoming voters deserve elections that are open, fair, and truly representative of the people who call this state home. Yet a growing combination of closed primaries and runoff elections risks moving us in the opposite direction — toward a system that narrows participation, limits choice, and quietly concentrates power long before most voters ever see a ballot.

This isn’t about party labels. It’s about how election systems work, who they reward, and who they leave out.

What Closed Primaries Really Do

A closed primary limits participation to voters who are registered with a specific political party. Independents and unaffiliated voters — a fast‑growing share of Wyoming’s electorate — are excluded from the most important phase of the election: deciding which candidates advance.

By design, this means:

• Fewer voters participating early
• A smaller, more ideological electorate
• Candidates selected by party insiders rather than broad community support

By the time the general election arrives, many Wyomingites are left choosing between candidates they had no role in selecting.

How Runoff Elections Add Another Barrier

Runoff elections are often sold as a way to ensure a “majority winner.” On paper, that sounds reasonable. In practice, runoffs almost always result in:

• Lower voter turnout than the initial election
• Greater influence from organized party structures
• Higher costs for taxpayers

Instead of expanding participation, runoffs shrink it. Fewer people return for a second election, and those who do tend to be the most politically connected and highly motivated voters.

The Hidden Truth: Runoffs and Ranked-Choice Voting Use the Same Logic

Here’s a fact that rarely gets discussed honestly:

Runoff elections and ranked-choice voting are built on the same core idea — eliminating candidates in rounds until someone reaches a majority.

The difference isn’t philosophy. It’s mechanics.

• Ranked-choice voting allows voters to rank preferences in one election
• Runoffs require voters to return for a second election

Political scientists often describe ranked-choice voting as an “instant runoff.” That isn’t a slogan — it’s a technical description. Both systems aim to solve the same problem, but runoffs do it by adding time, cost, and turnout loss.

In other words, runoffs are a delayed version of the same elimination process, just stretched out into multiple elections.

Why Closed Primaries Plus Runoffs Hurt the People

When these two systems are combined, the impact is clear:

• Voters are filtered out twice
• Party rules matter more than public support
• Independent and non‑aligned candidates are pushed aside early
• Incumbents and party‑approved candidates gain structural protection

This doesn’t create better representation. It creates safer outcomes for institutions, not freer choices for people.

Even voters who strongly identify with a major party should be concerned. A system that limits participation today can just as easily limit your voice tomorrow.

Free and Fair Elections Start at the Beginning

If elections are publicly funded and decide public offices, then the public should be able to participate from the start, not just after choices have already been narrowed behind closed doors.

Real accountability requires:

• Broad voter participation early
• Competition based on ideas, not party loyalty
• Election systems that reward trust from people, not compliance with insiders

Wyoming has a long tradition of independence and civic responsibility. Our election systems should reflect that — not quietly move us toward fewer voices and fewer real choices.

A Better Way Forward

This conversation isn’t about copying another state or pushing a single solution. It’s about being honest about tradeoffs, incentives, and the growing burden of political rulemaking that keeps voters at arm’s length.

A better way forward starts with removing unnecessary, burdensome election rules that restrict participation and protect institutions instead of people. Wyoming should move toward an election system that trusts citizens more — not one that layers rule upon rule in the name of control.

That means:

• Letting people, parties, and civic groups support who they want, when they want
• Ending rules that hold endorsements and participation hostage until after primaries
• Allowing voters to engage early, openly, and honestly — without jumping through partisan hoops

The truth is simple: politicians created this mess by adding more and more layers to elections over time. Every new rule was sold as a solution, but the cumulative effect has been fewer choices, fewer voices, and fewer voters who feel represented.

If the goal is majority support, transparency, and public trust, then participation must come before process. Systems that narrow the electorate before the public can engage don’t strengthen democracy — they distance people from it.

Wyoming has a long tradition of independence and civic responsibility. Our election system should reflect that spirit by opening doors, not closing them.

Because real freedom doesn’t need permission.