Hageman’s Policies, Not What They Seem

Rep. Harriet Hageman’s track record on issues like federal land control, transparency, and tribal consultation raises significant questions about her commitment to Wyoming’s best interests. While some of her policies, like advocating for state sovereignty over federal lands, appear beneficial for local control, there are critical concerns about their broader impact and her approach.

Hageman’s support for transferring federal lands to state and local control, including Utah’s lawsuit against federal land ownership, is framed as a push for equal representation and land autonomy for Western states. The Supreme Court case State of Utah v. United States argues that federal land ownership denies states like Wyoming fair representation and policy consistency. Hageman and other proponents claim state control would allow for more tailored management and economic growth.

However, there are notable drawbacks. Tribal communities, environmental groups, and some local leaders fear that shifting land control to states could lead to privatization or reduced conservation efforts. The Eastern Shoshone Tribe, for example, has strongly opposed the transfer of a hydroelectric plant and surrounding land within the Wind River Reservation to a local irrigation district. Tribal leaders argue that Hageman and other lawmakers have advanced these plans without consulting them, perpetuating a long-standing disregard for tribal sovereignty. For many, Hageman’s lack of transparency and collaboration in these decisions reflects a concerning trend of advancing legislation without adequate public discourse or respect for tribal and environmental priorities.

While proponents see state control as a means to empower Wyoming, the reality may be more complex. Concerns from tribal communities and the potential risks of inconsistent policies across states indicate that Hageman’s approach could destabilize local resources and undermine public trust. By not consulting all affected parties and lacking transparency, Hageman’s actions may ultimately align more with her political agenda than the collective interests of Wyoming’s diverse communities.