10th Ammendment movement in Wy? (real estate, school districts, taxi)

[JordanJP]

I'm not a resident of WY, but I am watching the 10A situation with interest. Stay strong, Wyoming, set a precedent. You've got supporters in other states

[Happy in Wyoming]

Boston T. Party, aka Kenneth Royce, is a name well-known on this forum. He has written one work of fiction, a novel that describes a possible scenario leading to independence for Wyoming. It's worth reading if you are looking for solutions without a priori conditions.

Here's the link:

Amazon.com: Molon Labe! (9781888766073): Boston T. Party, Kenneth W. Royce: Books

There are seventy-one reviews, so take a look.

[BennyPhoenix]

That's a great book.
Life often imitates art. Maybe it will one more time.

[Ct_bow]

Product Description

After a decade of retaking their stolen freedoms, the people of Wyoming (many of them newcomers) are forced to finally confront their jealous masters in the U.S. Government. Can a lone, courageous state successfully resist federal tyranny, or has the Bill of Rights been reduced to a myth? Can an allegedly free people act free, or is our liberty just a 4th of July farce?
These issues weigh heavily on the shoulders of Governor James Wayne Preston, a decorated Desert Storm Marine helo pilot. Elected in 2014 on the Laissez-Faire Party ticket, he enjoys nearly full support of the legislature to return Wyoming to a long-lost era of liberty. But how far can he and the people of his state go before Washington, D.C. feels compelled to act? Will Wyoming's free and independent course reach actual secession? Will President Melvin Connor suppress the maverick Western state with federal troops? Will anybody come to Wyoming's aid? Molon Labe! is a fictional account of a real-world blueprint for a free state initiative focused on Wyoming. If enough freedom-loving individuals will relocate there under a useful pattern, they can "liberate" the Cowboy State on many levels. In Wyoming we could truly enjoy our rights of gun ownership, privacy, schooling, health and diet, unrestricted travel, and property. Boston shows us how it actually can be done!

</H3>

Wow. I have to get this book!

[Happy in Wyoming]

Has anyone here ever read Matt Bracken? His ideas are different from Royce's in that he sees a natural evolution of events based upon the present. As a writer, he's a far better stylist than Royce. I have read all three of his novels in one sitting each; and these are not short novels.

Most of the action takes place outside of Wyoming, but the "Free State of Wyoming" will fix itself in your mind as paradise compared to most of the rest of the country.

The three books are a trilogy. But I recommend that you read at least the first two in order for better continuity. The third could be read first, but I'd say read them in order.

Oh yes! If you like girl warriors, you'll positively fall in love with Ranya Bardiwell.

Amazon.com: Enemies Foreign And Domestic (9780972831000): Matthew Bracken: Books

You can read some of the above in Look Inside.

Amazon.com: Domestic Enemies: The Reconquista (9780972831024): Matthew Bracken: Books

http://www.amazon.com/Foreign-Enemie...0785346&sr=1-1

Enemies Foreign and Domestic Web Site

The War on Guns: "Domestic Enemies"--An Interview With Matthew Bracken

[molon labe]

Originally Posted by CptnRn

Wyoming has received more money back in Federal dollars then it has paid in income taxes.

I love this misleading assertion... 'income taxes' is much different than 'sources of income.' Tally up all the excise/severance taxes/land/minerals/etc the feds steal from us and come back to the discussion.



The biggest issue here is that our legislators in Wyoming (for the most part) have no spine. I've traded emails with several of them quite a few times. My favorite is Byrd, who does nothing but tell me how the feds have us by the short and curlies.

"Oh... oh... but we can't cut the feds off because they unconstitutionally made it illegal for us to.... oh, and we can't survive without federal money. Oh, those minerals and all that land? Oh, well the feds took 2/3 and 1/2 of that as well, so we don't have the money to survive on our own."

The bigger issue is that the guy doesn't seem to see the problem here... the states would be forced to survive on their own if they had nowhere to turn for money. All would be capable of surviving (some even in current form) if the feds hadn't stolen half the land and rights to begin with.

[CptnRn]

It is not "taking" when the income is from Federally owned land and mineral rights. The State of Wyoming never owned the lands to begin with.

There is no legal basis for claiming that all of the federal land and mineral rights in Wyoming ever belonged to the people who immigrated to the state. Native American Indians might be able to make a case for possession and ownership. But those Wyomingites who homesteaded in the state were given patents on specific pieces of land by the US Government. The land that no one wanted to homestead, remained in the possession of the government. So I don't see how the people who live here now can possibly make a legitimate claim on land they never owned.

The United States bought most of the Wyoming land in the Lousiana Purchase in 1803. The Territory of Wyoming did not even exist until 1868. The United States later acquired the remainder of the land in the Texas Annexation, 1845, and the Oregon Territory in 1846. Wyoming was so sparsely populated it did not even become a US Territory until 1868, well after the American Civil War (1861-1865). The state really did not even begin to attract many settlers until the United States built the Union-Pacific Railroad across it in 1868. By 1870 the US Census listed the population of the entire state as only 9,118, roughly 1 person per 11 square miles of land. The United States Government manned the Wyoming forts from around 1849, defending the territory and defeating the indians in the indian wars. Throughout history, that has been the measure used in determining ownership of a frontier, "who established forts and colonies and tamed the land". It was the Federal Government.

So I have a hard time seeing how anyone could refute the United States ownership of Wyoming. The remaining states have a huge investment in Wyoming through years of federal aid, not to mention that the rest of the country needs the natural resources in Wyoming and legally they belong to the Federal Government. There no conceivable way that they will ever give that up. Or any reason that they should.

[molon labe]

The fact that the federal government can own 1/2 the land in a state is a problem. That means that they can control the state, and that defeats the entire purpose of federalism. Just because Texas was bailed out by the militias of several other states and was able to defeat the Mexican army "independently" does not make it any different of a situation. If the feds owned 1/2 of Texas (something you guys are very proud isn't the case but didn't exactly do on your own either) I'm sure you would be saying the same thing...?

[CptnRn]

Obviously Texas is an entirely different situation. Texans owned the state and even part of Wyoming before becoming a part of the United States. It is historical fact that the US government owned all of the land in Wyoming before the State of Wyoming ever existed. It is a fact, just because the facts don't fit with the way you wish things were, doesn't change them.

[molon labe]

Originally Posted by CptnRn

Obviously Texas is an entirely different situation. Texans owned the state and even part of Wyoming before becoming a part of the United States. It is historical fact that the US government owned all of the land in Wyoming before the State of Wyoming ever existed. It is a fact, just because the facts don't fit with the way you wish things were, doesn't change them.

It doesn't change them at all. The "rest of the states" have very little investment in Wyoming... the federal government makes billions of dollars from the minerals that come out of this state. The federal government then wastes 80% of those dollars as they filter through the "system." They then claim that Wyoming receives $1.11 per $1.00 of tax paid. The feds currently owe us over $10B in severance taxes they have not returned. Wyoming's GDP, per-capita, is higher than that of California. We could survive perfectly well on our own if left alone.

Texas never "owned" part of Wyoming. The original territory had undefined northern boundaries that possibly stretched somewhere up to Wyo and possibly Montana, and it was Mexico at the time anyway. Texas would still be part of Mexico if several other southern states did not lend a hand during the conflict with Mexico. I love the history of Texas, but the truth of the matter is that the Texan revolutionaries were in poor shape (morale, supplies, etc) and would have quit if assistance in the way of trained troops and supplies had not come in from the States. I would say the US has a little "investment" in Texas as well.

Regardless of the history, the feds owning parts of the states undermines federalism. It gives them an "in" to control the states, and other than a few items outlined in the Constitution this is not acceptable.

Utah is currently looking at using the Emerson decision to take federal land through eminent domain. It's an interesting concept. The truth of the matter is that if half of the states stood up to the feds and cut off their money supply the central government would be forced to it's knees and forced to comply with the federalist concept.