Posts Tagged ‘10th Amendment’

Ron Micheli for governor endorsed by state sovereignty advocate

June 9, 2010

Ron Micheli has picked up the endorsement from former Sheriff Richard Mack a State Sovereignty Advocate.

This comes as most are starting to take notice of Micheli as a solid defender of State Sovereignty, specifically the Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

According to a press release from the Micheli campaign-
“The reason I’m supporting Ron is that he understands the issues that really are pertinent to the state of Wyoming, and first and foremost is State sovereignty”
– Sheriff Richard Mack

To watch video of Sheriff Mack’s endorsement click here

SOURCE

Fast Tracks, Federal Slaps, Tabor and More

April 2, 2010

The Coming Battle is, well, Coming….  We are being swamped by questions about our hopeful ballot initiative to defend Colorado from Obama Care.  The short answer is we are going through the very bureaucratic process with the state before we can hit the streets with petitions.  We should be able to get petitions out there in early April, and WE NEED HELP!  If you can volunteer to gather signatures please give us your contact information here. And if you’d like to give some cash for our fight go here.

If you help, we are going to make Colorado a sanctuary state for quality health care.

Fighting Obama Care in the Courts – Must Hear Podcast: Colorado Attorney General John Suthers joins our Research Director Dave Kopel to discuss the lawsuit he and 12 others State Attorneys General have jointly filed, that claims the health care bill recently signed by President Obama is unconstitutional because it violates the 10th Amendment. AG Suthers makes a good point: if Obama Care is allowed to ride, it will be a dangerous precedent – one from which we can never return. As the AG puts it, if the Feds can punish you for NOT engaging in commerce, is there any limit to their power? To get the whole scoop, listen to the podcast on iVoices.org.

Attacking TABOR “for the kids”?: The usual suspects have lined up to float a proposal that would exempt our state legislators from having to ask voters before raising taxes to fund education. Policy Analyst Ben DeGrow explained the problem with the proposal on a recent Colorado Springs TV news story. As a result, our young blogging prodigy Eddie added in his two cents worth, too.

Unintentional Comedy at 70 mph: As Yogi Berra once said, “It’s deja vu all over again.” Remember those FasTracks lies we’ve been told for 30 years? Well, a new report from the Rocky Mountain Rail Authority makes RTD’s distortions look like child’s play. The report claims that “high speed” rail lines between Fort Collins and Pueblo, and Denver International Airport and Eagle County – I-25 and I-70, respectively – would cost over $21 billion AND not need a dime of taxpayer money. I’ll let you finish laughing before I go on….

Further, the study claims, “for every dollar of capital and operating costs, the project creates economic benefits greater than one dollar.” If true, that begs the question: Why on earth would we need government to do it if the project is both economically feasible and profitable? The fact that entrepreneurs are not jumping all over this alleged gold mine is proof enough it’s a money loser. Obviously, I don’t even need to rely on any sort of theoretical argument here. Look at the history! Look at the empirical evidence right in front of our eyes! We’ve got a FasTracks project underfunded, over-budget, and largely unbuilt that is already over 30 years in the making.

For your viewing pleasure, an additional assortment of unbelievable claims and interesting tidbits:

  • We’re supposed to believe that this passenger rail system can be maintained without taxpayer money, while Amtrak is subsidized by taxpayers to the tune of $50 per ticket.
  • The study was funded by a firm that designs rail projects and manages construction projects.
  • That people would be willing to pay $80 round trip to Vail just to go as fast as they would in their cars.
  • That $40 ticket each way is the low cost estimate. As in, “could be as low as $40 per ticket.” Wow.
  • It projects ridership upwards of 35 million passengers a year. The Boston to Washington, D.C., corridor carries around 10 million per year.
  • About that last figure, the 35 million one, Amtrak carries around 10 million per year as well. That math just doesn’t add up.
  • These great facts and figures were brought to my attention through this fantastic Denver Post editorial and Denver Daily News piece. The DDN article features our very own Senior Fellow in Transportation Randal O’Toole. Randal has been waging a war on the bogus claims made by RTD over the years and pulled no punches on this outrageous report saying, “They’re using the most optimistic assumptions imaginable and then relying on compounded optimistic assumptions.” Yeah, kind of like compounded interest. Except with compounded optimism you don’t make money, you lose a ton and go deep into debt.

    If you haven’t had the chance to hear Randal, take a few minutes and listen. His recent appearance on my TV show Independent Thinking was an opportunity to say “I told you so” with Denver Post columnist Chuck Plunkett. Randal also presented to an audience for an event here at the Institute a little while ago titled, “Mobility vs. Gridlock: Colorado’s Transportation Future.” You can view that event via YouTube playlist here.

    Leave Our State Alone: A Constitutional Path to Prosperity: It’s no secret that University of Colorado economics professor and senior fellow Barry Poulson is a prolific writer. The man cranks out a consistent bevy of works that are both substantive and interesting (the latter being something you almost never get from an economist). His latest piece is no exception. In “Restoring Federalism and State Sovereignty: A Constitutional Path to Prosperity,” Barry gives a brief overview of how we got to where we are – states becoming more and more subservient to Federal power – and the important role the Judiciary played in steering us in that direction. (I say “steering,” but Barry would probably say “pushing.”) After years of judicial abdication bolstering Federal powers and all but eviscerating Constitutional constraints, what can we do to turn the ship around? Is it too late?

    Are teachers unions to blame?: On March 16 in New York City, a panel of three union officials and supporters (including American Federation of Teachers president Randi Weingarten) debated a panel of three union critics (including former Secretary of Education Rod Paige) on whether teachers unions are to blame for our nation’s failing schools. Watch the revealing two-hour event, and see for yourself why most of the audience ended up agreeing that unions bear the blame. If you don’t have enough time, please read our own Ben DeGrow’s insights on the Ed News Colorado blog.

    The State Board of Ed… According to Bob: Ever wonder what the Colorado State Board of Education does? I was curious myself, so I tuned in to this two- part iVoices.org podcast between Fiscal Policy Center Director Penn Pfiffner and former Congressman and current State Board of Education Chairman Bob Schaffer. In the first installment, Bob gives listeners news from the Board – what’s going on, what they’re planning, and information regarding the “Race to the Top” funds. In the second installment, Bob goes over what the Board does, its functions, its impact, and how it shapes policy for all of Colorado’s schools.

    Must See TV: It’s Obama Care and medical privacy on this week’s Independent Thinking as the Independence Institute’s Health Care Policy Center Director Linda Gorman and Colorado Transparency Project Director Amy Oliver-Cooke join me to discuss the political and policy implications for Colorado of the recently passed federal health care reform bill (otherwise known as Obama Care), and the implications for medical privacy in Colorado should the state legislature pass House Bill 1330, the All-Payer Database, which would allow the state to collect and store your personal health care information without your consent. It’s a health care double whammy this Friday at 8:30 PM on KBDI Channel 12. Re-broadcast the following Monday at 1:30 PM.

    Perspective: In this week’s op-ed, Jessica Corry takes CU to task for not exploring all options before making their decision to raise tuition rates by the maximum 9% allowed by law. If Colorado citizens have to tighten the ol’ belt, why not CU?

    Until next week…

    Straight on

    Jon Caldara

    www.independenceinstitute.org


    Rejecting Federalism is Not Amusing

    March 8, 2010

    Re-posting this with permission. Perhaps the impostor in chief should have read it prior to throwing his temper tantrum today? While this directly addresses Texas it should be a concern by every American everywhere.

    I wanted to share the following commentary written by Commissioner Michael Williams on the subject of federalism and renewed commitments to the 10th amendment.

    It is posted online:

    http://www.williamsfortexas.com/posts/49

    I have also pasted the text below. Let me know if you have any questions.

    Thank you,

    ———————–

    Rejecting Federalism is Not Amusing

    By Michael Williams

    All across Texas citizens are calling for a renewed commitment to the 10th amendment and a reinvigorated adherence to the principle of Federalism and the doctrine of enumerated powers.

    These Texans believe they were created in the image and likeness of God and endowed by Him – not Washington, not Austin — with certain inalienable rights. They believe that governmental power properly resides, first, with the people, who then grant or delegate their power, reserve it, or prohibit its exercise. They believe the Constitution assigns the federal government specific, but limited powers, and that most government functions are left to the states. They believe the doctrine of enumerated powers is the principal line of defense against an overreaching federal government and that the Bill of Rights, added two years after the Constitution was ratified, provides further protection. They believe the principal role of government is to advance the cause of individual liberty.

    For them the Constitution is not just some document. And the Tenth Amendment means something. The strength of the words, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people” cannot be overstated. They are central to determining the legitimacy of the exercise of federal power.

    At the heart of conversations around water coolers, dinner tables, blogs, Twitter, Facebook and Tea Parties is this simple question – by what authority is the federal government doing what it’s doing? What’s the basis for the out-of-control spending, the bank and auto bailouts, the proposed takeover of healthcare, the specter of new taxes, and the vast and unchecked expansion of federal power?

    Some seem not to realize that federal tax dollars do not grow on trees or fall from the sky; they come from taxing the American people. But hard-working Americans are already taxed too much, are struggling to reduce their debt and balance their budgets, and are wondering when their elected leaders will force the federal government to do the same.

    Telling the people that all federally funded programs can and must eternally increase in funding and size, and that we need more of them, like nationalized healthcare, is proposing an economically unsustainable course, which is the polite expression for what it really is, which is fiscal insanity.  The American people already understand this; they want politicians who understand it, too.

    Casting false and malicious aspersions of racial motives on those who are decrying today’s out-of-control federal government is plainly disingenuous, and unjustifiably incendiary. Moreover, making such fallacious racial accusations—which we also hear in the attacks on the Tea Partiers—distracts from and trivializes the serious issues we need to face as a nation.

    Never should we forget the sorry compromise made by the Framers that allowed slavery to exist or the invocation of “states rights” to promote its continuation and the reign of Jim Crow. But there is nothing in current efforts to revive the Tenth Amendment and the doctrine of enumerated powers that is intended to return to such inglorious times. The promise of the Civil War Amendments to ensure equal rights to all can be best realized, not in opposition to federalism, but in harmony with it.

    Coming to YOUR State soon!: The epic fail Obama’s minions are hard at work!

    February 28, 2010

    It has been said that California leads the way when it comes to social change. Usually for the worse… I would however submit that as distorted and stupidly off course as my home state  most often is? New York is just as much a leader in the destruction of freedom and Liberty. I mean think about it? This is a State that continually elects people like the straw purchase felon Michael Bloomberg, and the overtly treasonous to his oath to uphold the Constitution Charles Schumer!

    New York, the State, is actually pretty conservative, if not outright Libertarian. However, democracy, being what it is? New York City rules the entire state. That’s a fact Jack! I think that is pathetic. Further, I think that the rest of New York should just pull up stakes, and secede from the city. Tell them to go take a hike,and form their own state. Much as my home state of California should be split into three entities… Or become parts of Nevada or Arizona…

    Take a look at just what the minions of epic fail obama are trying to pull off in New York… As pissed as I get at the NRA? This should have been FRONT page at Gun Owners of America!

    Read on faithful readers…

    Laundry List of Anti-Gun Bills Introduced in the Empire State
    Friday, February 26, 2010
    Please contact your lawmakers and urge them to oppose the laundry list of anti-gun bills pending consideration in Albany prior to the Assembly’s annual “gun day.”  The package includes the following bills:

    • Assembly Bill 801A and its Senate companion, S 1598A, would require five-year renewals on pistol licenses.
    • Assembly Bill 1093 and its Senate companion, S 1715, would create liability for legal firearm retailers when criminals misuse firearms.
    • Assembly Bill 1275 and its Senate companion, S 1712, would outlaw the private sale and transfer of long guns.
    • Assembly Bill 1326 and its Senate companion, S 5228, would outlaw the sale of all handguns not equipped with so-called “child proofing” devices.
    • Assembly Bill 2881 and its Senate companion, S 2379, would ban the sale of common self-defense and hunting ammunition.
    • Assembly Bill 2884 would prohibit gun shows on public property.
    • Assembly Bill 2885 and Assembly Bill 2910 would establish standards for guns sold in the state and would allow the state police to prevent ANY firearm they deem unsafe from being transferred into the state.
    • Assembly Bill 3200 and its Senate companion, S 2953, would require ammunition coding or bullet serialization.
    • Assembly Bill 3346 would outlaw affordable handguns commonly used for self-defense.
    • Assembly Bill 3477 and its Senate companion, S 1188, would expand the failed 10-year-old ballistic imaging program to include even more firearms.
    • Assembly Bill 4441 and its Senate companion, S 4338, would prohibit the manufacture, sale or transfer of handguns not equipped with so-called “smart gun” technology.
    • Assembly Bill 5844 and its Senate companion, S 3098, would prohibit keeping firearms available for self-defense in the home.
    • Assembly Bill 6157 and Assembly Bill 6294 and their Senate companion, S 4084, would drastically expand the state’s ban on so-called “assault weapons” to include virtually all semi-automatic rifles and pistols that can accept detachable magazines.
    • Assembly Bill 6468B and its Senate companion, S 6005, would outlaw the sale of all semi-automatic handguns not equipped with so-called “microstamping” technology.
    • Senate Bill 4752 would ban certain firearms based upon bore diameter.

    As the anti-gun agenda awaits activity, a few other measures deserve our support. They include Assembly Bill 5118A and its Senate companion, S 2430A, which would grant a tax exemption to conservation clubs and rod and gun clubs owning land having an assessed value of $500,000 or less. These bills are in the Assembly Real Property Tax Committee and the Senate Local Government Committee respectively.

    NRA-ILA also supports Assembly Bill 7463A and its Senate Companion, S 3299A, which would expand hunting opportunities by allowing the use of a rifle to hunt deer or bear in certain parts of Chautauqua County.  These bills are pending in the Assembly and Senate Environment Committees, respectively.

    Please contact your lawmakers and urge them to oppose the anti-gun bills pending in the Assembly and to support AB5118A/S 2430A, AB7463A/S 3299A in both the Senate and Assembly.

    State Assembly Members can be reached by phone at (518) 455-4100.  To find your Assembly Member, please click here.

    Your State Senator can be contacted through the Senate switchboard at (518) 455-2800. To find your State Senator, please click here.

    Chi Town and Thuggery verses The People of America!

    February 26, 2010

    Back when the Heller vs D.C. ruling came down the masses were thrilled. I warned back then that this battle was far from over, as did Gun Owners of America, The N.R.A. and every other reputable group that supports the Bill of Rights.

    The anti Liberty and Freedom crowd find themselves in a precarious position as I see it. They are claiming that local rule should prevail. That sounds a lot like a Tenth Amendment argument to me. In other words, they are talking out of both sides of their faces. Incorporation either works for everything or the entire theory falls apart at the seams.

    The same people are also using the old, tired, and utterly stupid argument that firearms kill people. They don’t, people kill people.

    Should Otis McDonald prevail I submit that while it would be a major step forward in the cause of Liberty and Freedom the battle will still be far from over. The Supreme Court has, after all affirmed that ex post facto law is not un-Constitutional which is beyond comprehension. If, in fact there is a “win.” You can bet that there will be wiggle room left for the purveyors of despotism to impose their agenda upon the unwashed that are the people that they Laird it over.

    Full Story

    WYOMING ALERT! : HB-95/HB-113

    February 15, 2010

    HB-95/HB-113 Committee Times

    Judiciary Committee hearing on both HB-28 and HB 95 – will be tomorrow at 8am Tuesday the 16th of February at the Capitol.

    Judiciary Committee hearing HB-113 “Alaska-Carry Legislation” – will be later the same day at Noon.

    Please be there and plan on attending both meetings.

    If you haven’t sent your “formal” Letter of support for HB-95 to the Judiciary Committee do so by clicking here

    To Real Liberty in Wyoming,

    Anthony Bouchard
    Executive Director
    WyGO – Wyoming Gun Owners
    Http://Wyominggunowners.Org/

    1-866-970-1890

    Wyoming Representative Allen Jaggi HB 95 firearms freedom act with “teeth”

    February 11, 2010

    Hot on the heels of Utah the Cowboy State looks to wrestle the steer that is the Federal Government. This is about States Rights, pure and simple!

    STOLEN FROM

    rep_allen_jaggi

    HB 95 Wyoming Firearms Freedom Act -2

    Don’t be confused by similar legislation, Miller HB 28 just doesn’t go far enough.

    To see a comparison between HB 28 and HB 95  click here you will see Representative Jaggi (pronounced Ya-Gee) has introduced legislation with “real teeth”.

    “As gun guy and someone that believes the federal government is out of control, I wanted to introduce legislation fitting to Wyoming” said Representative Allen Jaggi.

    HB 95 Wyoming Firearm Freedom Act – 2 click here

    This legislation is a combination of Alaska and New Hampshire’s Firearms Freedom Act containing both a penalties clause like New Hampshire as well as a defense clause like Alaska.

    HB 95 has strong “Legislative findings and declarations of authority”. Also it amends the preemption to say “no other entity”, in essence backing up this legislation with law.

    Email your legislator–
    Place the following in subject line  – “YES on Jaggi HB 95 Firearms Freedom Act-2″

    Join WyGO Today – Wyoming’s Fastest Growing Gun Rights Organization

    10th Amendment on steroids

    February 11, 2010

    The state of Utah isn’t passing toothless resolutions they are taking on the federal Government over states rights with a vengeance. I must say that several others have similar things on the board, however, the Utah position appears to be a no holds barred, knees and elbows approach to a fight that everyone knows will be coming.

    Read on

    SALT LAKE CITY — Guns made and kept in Utah would be exempt from federal regulations under a measure passed by the Utah Legislature Wednesday, despite concerns over an expensive legal fight at a time when the budget is already stretched thin.

    Senate Bill 11 was passed by the Utah House 56-17.

    The proposal mirrors one Montana signed into law last year that’s intended to trigger a federal court battle. The measures would allow guns made in the respective states to be exempt from federal gun registration rules like background checks and dealer-licensing.

    The goal is to circumvent federal authority over interstate commerce, the legal basis for most gun regulation in the U.S.

    In the process, it could lead to small arms dealers in the state operating with little to no oversight.

    Sen. Margaret Dayton, an Orem Republican, has said her bill is part of a broader effort to send a message to Congress that the federal government is overstepping its bounds.

    Rep. Stephen Sandstrom, R-Orem, said the bill isn’t just about guns. It’s also about state’s rights, he said.

    The House sponsor of the proposal, Sandstrom said other states have similar bills in the works and he’s been speaking with legislators across the nation who are actively involved.

    The bill now goes to Utah Gov. Gary Herbert. Spokeswoman Angie Welling said Herbert supports legislative efforts to reaffirm states’ rights, but is concerned about the possible legal costs that would go with constitutional challenges.

    Full Story

    FEDS RESPOND TO FIREARMS FREEDOM ACT

    January 21, 2010
    FEDS RESPOND TO FIREARMS FREEDOM ACT LAWSUIT MOTION TO DISMISS “EXPECTED”
    MISSOULA – The United States has made its first response to a lawsuit filed in federal district court in Missoula to test the Montana Firearms Freedom Act (MFFA), passed by the 2009 Legislature and signed into law by Governor Schweitzer.

    The MFFA declares that any firearms, ammunition or firearms accessories made and retained in Montana are not subject to federal regulation under the power given to Congress in the U.S. Constitution to regulate commerce “among the several states.” The MFFA is a states’ rights challenge on Tenth Amendment grounds, with firearms serving as the vehicle for the challenge.

    This lawsuit to validate the MFFA was brought by the Montana Shooting Sports Association (MSSA) and Second Amendment Foundation (SAF). The suit names U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder as defendant, and is referred to as MSSA v. Holder.

    The first response to the lawsuit by the United States is a Motion to Dismiss, submitted January 19th and considered to be a standard procedural maneuver in lawsuits against the U.S government . This motion seeks to avoid the legal merits by asserting that the Plaintiffs lack standing to sue, that a justiciable controversy does not exist, and that prevailing case law is against Plaintiffs.

    MSSA President Gary Marbut, also a Plaintiff in the lawsuit explained, “The first import of this response is that the legal game is now on. There was some concern that the defendants would forfeit the game with no response in an effort to prevent this important issue from being adjudicated properly. We are now beyond that hurdle.” However, the Motion to Dismiss by Washington also seeks to sidestep proper adjudication.

    SAF Founder Alan Gottlieb said, “We are disappointed but not surprised that the government would try to kill this suit on standing, rather than arguing about the merits of the case.”

    The MFFA concept has gained traction across the Nation since its passage in Montana. Tennessee has enacted a clone of the MFFA, and other clones have been introduced in the state legislatures of 19 other states, including: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington, and Wyoming. . Ten or more additional states are expected to introduce yet more MFFA clones in the next few weeks. (See: http://www.FirearmsFreedomAct.com)

    The U.S.’s Motion to Dismiss and Brief in Support are viewable at: http://FirearmsFreedomAct.com/montana-lawsuit-updates/

    MSSA and SAF have assembled a litigation team for this effort consisting of three attorneys from Montana, one from New York, one from Florida and one from Arizona. Lead attorney for the Plaintiffs is Quentin Rhoades, partner the Missoula firm of Sullivan, Tabaracci and Rhoades. Other interested parties from both in and out of Montana are preparing to weigh in on this issue of national interest and national importance as amicus curiae (friends of the court).

    Marbut commented, “The FFA concept has created a firestorm of interest nationwide. Lots of people and other states are watching carefully to see how Montana fares in this challenge to overbearing federal authority and to Washington’s attempt to control every detail of commerce in the Nation, especially including activity wholly confined within an individual state. That level of micro management certainly was not the intent of our founders when they gave Congress limited power in the Constitution to regulate commerce ‘among the states’.” (See: http://FirearmsFreedomAct.com/what-is-the-commerce-clause/)

    MSSA is the primary political advocate for gun owners and hunters in Montana, having gotten 54 pro-gun and pro-hunting bills through the Montana Legislature in the past 25 years. SAF is a pro-gun foundation in Bellevue, Washington, established to press the rights of gun owners primarily in judicial fora. SAF has been a party to numerous lawsuits to assert the rights of gun owners across the Nation.

    The Second Amendment Foundation (www.saf.org) is the nations oldest and largest tax-exempt education, research, publishing and legal action group focusing on the Constitutional right and heritage to privately own and possess firearms. Founded in 1974, The Foundation has grown to more than 650,000 members and supporters and conducts many programs designed to better inform the public about the consequences of gun control. SAF has previously funded successful firearms-related suits against the cities of Los Angeles; New Haven, CT; and San Francisco on behalf of American gun owners, a lawsuit against the cities suing gun makers and an amicus brief and fund for the Emerson case holding the Second Amendment as an individual right.

    Wyoming10A Project — Sheridan Kickoff Event

    January 18, 2010

    The Tenth Amendment protects the states from federal oppression, or at least it is supposed to.

    Wyoming10A Project — Sheridan Kickoff Event
    In Sheridan – Downtown Area

    Sheridan Senior Center
    211 Smith Street
    Date: Saturday, January 23rd
    Time: 3:00pm

    We have been told that all we can do is enact sovereignty “resolutions” to push back at an over reaching central government. That doing any more will be a sign of waging war.

    In light of the fact that these House Joint Resolutions will do absolutely nothing and many of the same legislators that will support such a resolution actually voted “yes” to a over reaching federal mandate called Real ID. Proving that these politicians are bought and paid for by federal money. These same politicians want us to believe that the following words are without meaning!  I believe we can come to an entirely different conclusion.

    From the Declaration of Declaration of Independence– July 4, 1776
    When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

    We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

    From the Wyoming Constitution– September 30, 1889

    97-1-001. Power inherent in the people.
    All power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority, and instituted for their peace, safety and happiness; for the advancement of these ends they have at all times an inalienable and indefeasible right to alter, reform or abolish the government in such manner as they may think proper.

    97-1-007. No absolute, arbitrary power.
    Absolute, arbitrary power over the lives, liberty and property of freemen exists nowhere in a republic, not even in the largest majority.

    The truth is — All power belongs to “we the people” and this power is inseparable from us, the government is a republic founded on the authority of the governed (us) and we are to remain free from absolute, arbitrary power over our lives, liberty and property. Government is instituted for our own peace, safety and happiness. Whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it.

    Tea Time Is Over!  —  it is up to us to alter the course we are on and put a stop to the Kingship Rule of the government.

    If you agree, join me and others at the Wyoming10A Kick Off in Sheridan, see you there!

    SOURCE

    Used with the authors permission.


    %d bloggers like this: