A political mailer attacking Sen. R.J. Kost, R-Powell, on a vote against legislation in the 2022 budget session that prohibits five drugs commonly used for abortion may be the opening salvo of an increase of national funds coming into play in local elections. 

The mailer sent out from a group called Students for Life Action, a group that states they are from Virginia, attacks Kost for both voting against Senate File 83 and for failing to return a survey the group sent out asking him to pledge to support pro-life legislation. 

Behind Students for Life Action is a super PAC which has spent $87,692 on federal races nationwide so far this year, according to OpenSecrets, a nonprofit organization that tracks super PAC funds nationwide. No figure is available regarding how much has been spent on state and local races.

A super PAC is a type of independent political action committee that may raise unlimited sums of money from corporations, unions and individuals without any need to report those who do contribute to their funds. Students for Life Action does not disclose its donors to the Federal Election Commission.

Kost responded to the mailer by adamantly proclaiming that the attack is disingenuous and that he has identified as pro-life throughout his life, but that he struggled with supporting Senate File 83 for two reasons.

The first, he said, was the assumption within the legislation that the five drugs identified are solely used for abortion. He remains unconvinced that claim is true.

“If these drugs have other uses in the medical profession, then the outlawing of them could create other problems. Many drugs have been found to be very good for other needs than just one use. Are these in that situation?” Kost said in a statement to the Lovell Chronicle. “I am sure not a doctor, and I don’t have those answers at my fingertips. In the future, are there implications we know nothing about? Perhaps in the future there could be uses for these drugs which would be beneficial. If we deem them illegal, how does that benefit our healthcare system?”

Kost said his second struggle was considering the position that the legislation might be an act of government overreach.

“I have always viewed government as not to be intruding into the individual lives of the people. How far do we go before we go too far? For two years I have heard that the government should not mandate to any of us what we do to our body. It is our body and our decision,” Kost said. “Now, considering abortion, the table has turned. It is accepted in this situation, and it is the legislators’ duty to tell you how to live your life and how you will make decisions in certain situations.”

Kost said he believes his primary mandate is to respect the freedom and independence of his constituents.

“The government is not the authority, and we need to give back to the citizens the ability to make those decisions,” he said. “We are not here to judge people and make sure everyone is doing what some legislators think is the only way to live our lives.”

Kost did vote yes on Senate File 92, the trigger bill which allows Wyoming to prohibit abortion now that the Supreme Court has overturned Roe V Wade, but he said in his statement he is prepared to withdraw his support if there is not a strong exemption within the law for those pregnant by rape or incest.

“I can’t believe that an evil act such as rape or incest would still remain as a ‘no abortion allowed’ act,” he said.

Both of Kost’s opponents, Ray Peterson and Dan Laursen, denied having any involvement in the political attack.

“I have heard this went out but know nothing about it,” Laursen said. “Like the card says, there was a candidate survey that went out. It also says who sent it out. And he did vote the way he voted... Votes are getting exposed for all of us.”

Laursen said he has not received similar attacks from national organizations, but said he does not have major concerns with national funds having a presence in the race.

“Votes and positions need to be exposed. Facts are facts,” he said. “Sometimes locals do not want to get involved in politics because of the backlash, but I am sure many donate to a national cause knowing that. Take the NRA (National Rifle Association) for example.”

Peterson also denied any involvement in the flyer, but staked a similar position in the ground to Laursen’s.

“That’s the challenge of the incumbent,” Peterson said. “You have to defend your voting record. You work hard, you vote your conscience and then you have to defend your vote.”

Peterson said that national funds are not as new in local races as they might appear. He referenced his candidacy being opposed by the Wyoming Education Association in 2018, which is funded by state and national funds.

“I agree with Kost’s concerns (about PAC spending) but you have to pull your big boy pants up and play ball,” he said. “The question still remains that he voted that way and he has to defend that vote. It’s a nasty little game.”

If Peterson or Laursen had anything to do with the mailer, it would be nearly impossible to tell, according to Sarah Bryner, research director at OpenSecrets. 

It’s illegal for super PACS to coordinate with candidates, Bryner said. That doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen. 

“There’s a lot of ways you can waltz around those regulations,” she said. “The candidate may use a talking point publicly and that same language is used in the attacks by the advertisements. In certain situations, super PACS and candidates are even allowed to share staff. There are all these ways super PACS can get around the rules. It’s a dangerous game, but everyone plays it.” 

Bryner said national money can often increase the negative tenor of the race, due to the majority of super PAC ads being negative in tone. 

“Typically, super PAC spending not linked to candidates have a negative tone. You’re going to have more attack ads and more negative campaigning by the non-candidate attached groups,” she said. “That way the candidates keep their hands clean. Who cares if an outside group is getting nasty? But once the attack is made, that means the attack is now available to the candidate.” 

Bryner, who grew up in Alaska, said she witnessed the change herself when vice-presidential candidate and former Alaskan governor Sarah Palin brought Alaska to the national stage in 2008.

“Once that national eye shifted to Alaska, the tone and conversation in races across the state really changed,” Bryner said. “Alaska used to view politics as a gentleman’s game just like many politicians in Wyoming, which results in substantial conversations about character and policy. When more negative attacks are prominent, that conversation doesn’t occur at the same level.”

Wyoming is seeing a similar ascension to the national stage right now, Bryner said, with U.S. Rep. Liz Cheney’s oppositional efforts to Donald Trump being watched nationwide. “I’ve never seen Wyoming on the news, and now the state is on Saturday Night Live,” Bryner said. “Once you’re on SNL, it’s the beginning of the end.”

There’s a second factor that may result in super PAC funds being far more prevalent in local Wyoming politics, she said. 

Super PACs can attain unlimited amounts of funds and have an abundant amount of resources. At the same time, federal polarization and factors such as gerrymandering have made federal races far less competitive.

All that money has to go somewhere, and once federal races have received their share, the remainder goes down to the state and local level.

There are larger benefits, as well, for anonymous big-money donors to want to focus on smaller voting districts. 

Bryner highlighted Shelby County in Alabama. The county only has a population of 216,350 residents, but efforts spurred by dark money in super PACs pushed that county to national prominence as a case challenging election law made it all the way to the Supreme Court in 2018.

That resulting case, Shelby County Vs. Holder, allowed the Supreme Court to toss out a significant portion of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

Small counties are often used as testing grounds by donors for campaign strategies or legal issues, Bryner said.

“PAC money is trickling downhill,” she said. “These groups have become more politically sophisticated, we’re starting to see them exert and flex into state and local races. Local office holders have the ability to influence and even control local election outcomes, really important nationwide races, like the presidency. The battleground has shifted.”

There is legislation proposed in Wyoming that aims to directly combat the presence of super PACs and dark money within Wyoming.

House Joint Resolution 8, the Free and Fair Election Act, would dictate the Wyoming Legislature to urge the United States Congress to “propose and send to the states for ratification an amendment to the United States Constitution consistent with the findings of this resolution clarifying the distinction between the rights of natural persons and the rights of corporations and other legal entities and providing that Congress and state legislatures may regulate all monies raised and spent for political purposes.”

The amendment would negate the 2010 Supreme Court decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission allowing corporations and outside groups to spend unlimited money on elections.

The legislation has yet to be voted on by the Wyoming Legislature.