Jarvis, Genital Police, Fraudulent Survey

Julie Jarvis, the Genital Police, and Her Fraudulent Survey

by Marla Singer

House Representative Julie Jarvis made the news last week for her push-back on HB0032 – What is a Woman Act – a bill that simply provides definitions and standards for biological female and male citizens. HB32 does not address any of the ideological genders included in the ever-growing list of LGBTQ++ (etc) categories.

Jarvis emphatically emphasized many times at the House podium that she was simply representing what the majority of respondents to her survey asked her to do. The survey she was referring to was sent out twice to all Natrona County registered voters in House District 57 during 2024 campaign season.

According to Jarvis, 37% of Participant Responses dictated that “Our state should not be involved” (No Government). This, she said, is why she would ultimately have to “vote No on HB32”.

THE GENITAL POLICE

Voting No, however, was not good enough for Jarvis. “Who is going inside my body, or my daughter’s body, to prove this?!” she exclaimed during Committee of the Whole debates (1/16/25).

Thus a straw man was quickly created: The Genital Police. This ‘genital police’ argument is a new Democrat Party tactic that claims “strangers will be examining girls genitalia to ensure compliance”, when the real threat is that safe and private spaces legally designated for biological women are being invaded by men who call themselves trans women. The usual Democrats jumped on board with Jarvis in an attempt to kill this bill because of this new fake boogeyman – WY Representatives Ken Chestek, Lloyd Larsen, Karlee Provenza, Trey Sherwood, Mike Yin, and newcomer Elisa Campbell.

Not to be hindered by her own dictate, during Second Reading (1/17/25) Jarvis marched back to the podium with a Second Reading amendment to define a woman and man by their birth certificates – which she had learned the previous day are increasingly being legally challenged and changed by trans identifying people.

To truly recognize Jarvis’ political position on what she categorizes as “GENDER” in her survey, it is necessary to go back and look closely at the multiple choice options from her original survey question (image above). There is no multiple choice option that applies to the two biological genders.

FACT: Jarvis’ “GENDER” question only applies to ideological genders.

JARVIS’ FRAUDULENT SURVEY

During 2024 campaign season Jarvis distributed her hard-copy survey twice to HD57 voters – the first version was delivered before the primary election, and a second version was delivered in November after the general election. A third version of her “publicly available” survey was published online at her campaign website with a current notation that it was last updated 1.12.25. Her online (third) version includes her own manufactured statistics. HD57 recipients never received a hard-copy of her third version.

Here is a pdf link of direct scanned copies of the first two surveys that were distributed by Julie Jarvis in 2024. (These two hardcopy surveys had three separate identifiable numbers tied the identity of the recipient. Those identifying numbers have been covered in the scanned images.) In the linked pdf: Version one is pages 1 through 6, and Version two is pages 7 through 12. A copy of her online third version can be found at http://www.jarviswyo.com/.

All three survey versions are different. Jarvis’ second and third survey versions never acknowledge any of the changes she deliberately made from her first and second versions. Jarvis’ deceptive attempt to demonstrate to the public, and other legislators, that her third version is an exact replica of the survey that she sent to HD57 voters is both fraudulent and manipulative.

FACT: Jarvis authored three separate versions of a survey, yet the public has been led to believe that her survey has remained unchanged and consistent in every way.

Primary differences between all three of Jarvis’ survey versions:

• Two questions were deleted from her first version.
• Five new questions were added to her second version.
• Numerical order of questions from the first version was completely deleted from her second and third versions.
• Coercive language from one question is deleted in her third version.
• A new multiple choice option is added for every single question in her third version.
• Topic categories of questions were deleted from her third version.
• Info links for some questions were added to her third version.

The questions removed from her first version were: 1. WYOMING PRESERVATION; and, 22. SCHOOL OF CHOICE. It is most likely that HD57 registered voters that filled out the second version never noticed those questions were removed.

Some of the new questions added to her second version were: LEGALIZATION OF MARIJUANA; IMMIGRATION; and ELECTION FRAUD. It is most likely that HD57 registered voters that filled out the first version never knew these questions existed on the second version.

FACT: HD57 registered voters in Natrona County received unreported alterations to their surveys from Jarvis.

One can deduce that the numerical order of questions was removed from her second and third versions in an attempt to hide the fact that the number and order of her survey questions had changed from her first version. The first version had 33 questions, the second version had 36 questions, and there is a total deviation of 7 questions that had been either deleted or added.

FACT: Jarvis’ deletion or addition of seven survey questions is concealed by removing the original numerical order from her first version.

The last multiple choice option (“No Response”) that Jarvis shows for every question on her publicly available online third survey version never occurred as a choice for HD57 recipients to mark on any survey they received.

FACT: After sending out hard copies of version one and version two to HD57 recipients, Jarvis later added an additional multiple choice option to every question on her online version.

One question, in the first and second versions, occurred under the heading NATIONAL TOPICS IMPACTING WYOMING, and appears as:

27. Church & State: When it comes to Church & State, our state should ______.

◻ uphold the Constitution by keeping Church & State separate
◻ support the integration of Church into State

The wording in the first choice is erroneous because the U.S. Constitution does not address the Church & State issue. But not to worry: Ms. Jarvis just removed the troublesome language later in her publicly available online third version. Yet how many respondents were coerced into choosing the first option because they assumed Jarvis knew what she was talking about?

FACT: Jarvis removed erroneous but coercive language to conceal her lack of constitutional knowledge.

Psychology is often applied to surveys to achieve a predetermined outcome. It is common knowledge for professional survey writers that when survey participants don’t want to commit to a definitive response in specific survey questions (such as decrease funding or increase control), they will instead try to find a middle-ground option, or opt to not answer at all (“No Response”). At least twenty-five of Jarvis’ ambiguous questions had a middle-ground option that used the word “balanced”. When responding to those 25 questions, HD57 respondents chose the option with the word “balanced” approximately 76% of the time. (If respondents had the multiple choice option “No Response”, that percentage would likely be lower.)

Aside from the above noted points, respondents in HD57 have no idea what “balanced” means to Ms. Jarvis in any of the extraordinarily broad and confusing questions she asked. Balanced is never in fact defined in any question. There is no doubt that she will work it in whatever direction she personally favors.

Jarvis did not define any terms she used. One question is labeled GENDER, and the following question is labeled SEXUALITY (see page 18 of her online third survey). We encourage WY citizens to look at these questions and see if you can determine what Jarvis’ definitions are. Our opinion is that these terms only refer to members of the LGBTQ++ population – which according to Jarvis is 3% of our population. If this is true, why did Jarvis choose to ignore the other 97% of her constituents?

FACT: Jarvis failed to define anything in both her questions and multiple choice answers.

Jarvis has been abundantly deceptive in her surveys to registered voters in her district. We feel certain that HD57 constituents, fellow legislators, or the public can find many more issues among the three survey versions that Jarvis has authored – if they actually wanted to spend the time.

A website called DemLabs provides a how-to called, Seven Ways Polling Is Manipulated to Produce Bogus Results. A similar article, How to Shape Survey Results and Trends: The Art of Manipulation is also noteworthy. Perhaps these are sources that Jarvis consulted to write her three survey versions. Or perhaps she came across similar literature while earning her Bachelor’s, Master’s or Doctorate. Whatever the case may be, Jarvis is intelligent enough to know exactly what she has been doing with these surveys to HD57 voters, fellow legislators and the Wyoming public at large.

Screenshot from County 17 (Wyoming) at:
https://county17.com/2024/09/24/the-takeover-a-reluctant-politician-a-far-right-firebrand-and-the-fight-for-wyoming-conservatism/