As lawmakers debated a bill that would bar employers from forcing their workers to be microchipped, a certain skepticism hung over the idea. And those doubts — about whether a ban was premature, unnecessary or just a bit out there — prompted the House to narrowly reject the legislation last week.

Senate File 72 sponsored by Sen. Dan Laursen (R-Powell) failed on a 32-28 vote, despite some at-times dire warnings from proponents.

As the bill made its way through the Senate — where it passed 19-12 — and into the House, Laursen said he repeatedly heard the objection that “it’s not here in Wyoming yet. Why do we worry?”

But the senator argued it was better to be proactive against microchips, which have been growing in popularity and in use cases.

“We went through some mandates with Covid and we all said at that time, ‘You’re not going to have to have a mask; you’re not going to have to be injected,’” Laursen said at a House labor committee meeting last month. “So let’s get out in front of it [microchipping].”

Another backer, Rep. Tony Locke (R-Casper), asserted that “they were pushing very hard to force tracking your cellphones” during the pandemic and said microchipping could come with the next crisis.

“It’s easy for us to think it’s crazy,” Locke said. “It’s crazy until there’s enough fear that we go over the top and we go over the edge and then all of a sudden … we’re so afraid that we do something that invades our individual freedoms at that level.”

Later on the House floor, Majority Floor Leader Rep. Chip Neiman (R-Hulett) noted that efforts are already underway to microchip and track livestock.

“I don’t want to get crazy here,” Neiman said, but, he added, “don’t fool yourself to think that this is not in the wings.”

However, a majority of the House members were unconvinced of the need to act.

Rep. Dave Zwonitzer (R-Cheyenne) said he agreed with blocking businesses from mandatory implantations of always present, data-collecting chips. However, given that such a situation has yet to arise in the United States, the lawmaker said there are too many what-ifs. 

“I think we can just do a much better job legislating here in the state of Wyoming once we know what we’re up against,” Zwonitzer said.

He proposed removing most of the bill’s specifics and making it just a statement against mandatory microchips in Wyoming. However, his amendment failed and he later joined in the vote to kill SF 72.

Chips have various uses

Drafted by the conservative American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), versions of the bill have been passed in a dozen states. The legislation spells out various requirements that employers must meet if they start a voluntary chipping program — including making accommodations for workers who don’t want a chip.

The technology has yet to really catch on, but Laursen said employees at some companies can get the rice-sized chips implanted in a hand and then use them to activate things like computers, doors and vending machines; the capabilities of the chip vary. Laursen told the House labor committee last month that “some put it in their spouses.”

“[You] just want to keep track of where your spouse is going at times, and you agree to be microchipped?” asked a surprised Chairman Rep. Dan Zwonitzer (R-Cheyenne).

“Might be,” Laursen replied, adding that he would never want one.

At the Feb. 24 hearing, several citizens who were similarly opposed to chips urged lawmakers to pass the bill. Dan Sabrosky of Casper warned that what might start as a business policy could become a government requirement, saying that happened in the trucking industry with electronic logs.

Rep. Jeanette Ward (R-Casper) said big business and big government can be equally tyrannical. She went on to reference the end times described in the Bible’s Book of Revelation.

“We’re headed as a world into a society where power will be concentrated in the hands of one world leader who will ‘cause all small and great free and slave to receive a mark on their hand or their foreheads that no one may buy or sell except for one who has the mark,’” Ward said before her aye vote, quoting from Revelation 13:16. “If it quacks like a duck …”

Other tracking technology

Though she suggested that the legislation “touches on a little bit of, for lack of a better word, crazy,” Tammy Johnson of the Wyoming AFL-CIO also expressed general support for SF 72.

“We don’t want employees’ lives invaded, and we don’t want employers to have this control where they can work their workers to death on an assembly line or in a factory,” Johnson said, referring to tracking capabilities.

However, both she and Rep. Mike Yin (D-Jackson) opposed a section that said employers could continue to use “alternative, non-invasive technology.” Yin noted that apps and other devices “are tracking people all the time,” and he described that as the real issue.

“... There isn’t [mandatory] implementation of microchips; that doesn’t happen anywhere in the country,” Yin said. “So I’m not sure why we would solve the problem that doesn’t exist instead of solving the problem that does exist — which is, there is mandatory tracking by both government and employers.”

Yin tried to amend the bill to block employers from using any unreasonable tracking devices, but was unsuccessful. He ultimately voted no on the bill. Reps. David Northrup (R-Powell) and Sandy Newsome (R-Cody) also voted nay, while Reps. Rachel Rodriguez-Williams (R-Cody), Dalton Banks (R-Cowley) and John Winter (R-Thermopolis) voted yes.

In an interview, Sen. Laursen expressed frustration with Northrup’s and Newsome’s no votes. He described the 32-28 margin as reflecting the “conservatives against the liberals.”