Showing posts with label law. Show all posts
Showing posts with label law. Show all posts
Monday, March 4, 2024
Saturday, March 2, 2024
March 2, 1824. Gibbons v. Ogden.
The United States Supreme Court issued its opinion in Gibbons v Ogden, a major case establishing Congress' supremacy over states, something that will nonetheless be challenged from time to time today by far right state politicians.
GIBBONS v. OGDEN
22 U.S. 1 (1824)
March 2, 1824
APPEAL from the Court for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors of the State of New-York. Aaron Ogden filed his bill in the Court of Chancery of that State, against Thomas Gibbons, setting forth the several acts of the Legislature thereof, enacted for the purpose of securing to Robert R. Livingston and Robert Fulton, the exclusive navigation of all the waters within the jurisdiction of that State, with boats moved by fire or steam, for a term of years which has not yet expired; and authorizing the Chancellor to award an injunction, restraining any person whatever from navigating those waters with boats of that description. The bill stated an assignment from Livingston and Fulton to one John R. Livingston, and from him to the complainant, Ogden, of the right to navigate the waters between Elizabethtown, and other places in New-Jersey, and the city of New-York; and that Gibbons, the defendant below, was in possession of two steam boats, called the Stoudinger and the Bellona, which were actually employed in running between New-York and Elizabethtown, in violation of the exclusive privilege conferred on the complainant, and praying an injunction to restrain the said Gibbons from using the said boats, or any other propelled by fire or steam, in navigating the waters within the territory of New-York. The injunction having been awarded, the answer of Gibbons was filed; in which he stated, that the boats employed by him were duly enrolled and licensed, to be employed in carrying on the coasting trade, under the act of Congress, passed the 18th of February, 1793, entitled, 'An act for enrolling and licensing ships and vessels to be employed in the coasting trade and fisheries, and for regulating the same.' And the defendant insisted on his right, in virtue of such licenses, to navigate the waters between Elizabethtown and the city of New-York, the said acts of the Legislature of the State of New-York to the contrary notwithstanding. At the hearing, the Chancellor perpetuated the injunction, being of the opinion, that the said acts were not repugnant to the constitution and laws of the United States, and were valid. This decree was affirmed in the Court for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors, which is the highest Court of law and equity in the State, before which the cause could be carried, and it was thereupon brought to this Court by appeal....
Mr. Chief Justice MARSHALL delivered the opinion of the Court, and, after stating the case, proceeded as follows:
The appellant contends that this decree is erroneous, because the laws which purport to give the exclusive privilege it sustains, are repugnant to the constitution and laws of the United States.
They are said to be repugnant--
1st. To that clause in the constitution which authorizes Congress to regulate commerce.
2d. To that which authorizes Congress to promote the progress of science and useful arts.
This instrument contains an enumeration of powers expressly granted by the people to their government. It has been said, that these powers ought to be construed strictly. But why ought they to be so construed? Is there one sentence in the constitution which gives countenance to this rule? In the last of the enumerated powers, that which grants, expressly, the means for carrying all others into execution, Congress is authorized 'to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper' for the purpose. But this limitation on the means which may be used, is not extended to the powers which are conferred; nor is there one sentence in the constitution, which has been pointed out by the gentlemen of the bar, or which we have been able to discern, that prescribes this rule. We do not, therefore, think ourselves justified in adopting it.... As men, whose intentions require no concealment, generally employ the words which most directly and aptly express the ideas they intend to convey, the enlightened patriots who framed our constitution, and the people who adopted it, must be understood to have employed words in their natural sense, and to have intended what they have said....
The words are, 'Congress shall have power to regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian tribes.'
The subject to be regulated is commerce; and our constitution being, as was aptly said at the bar, one of enumeration, and not of definition, to ascertain the extent of the power, it becomes necessary to settle the meaning of the word. The counsel for the appellee would limit it to traffic, to buying and selling, or the interchange of commodities, and do not admit that it comprehends navigation. This would restrict a general term, applicable to many objects, to one of its significations. Commerce, undoubtedly, is traffic, but it is something more: it is intercourse. It describes the commercial intercourse between nations, and parts of nations, in all its branches, and is regulated by prescribing rules for carrying on that intercourse. The mind can scarcely conceive a system for regulating commerce between nations, which shall exclude all laws concerning navigation, which shall be silent on the admission of the vessels of the one nation into the ports of the other, and be confined to prescribing rules for the conduct of individuals, in the actual employment of buying and selling, or of barter....
The subject to which the power is next applied, is to commerce 'among the several States.' The word 'among' means intermingled with. A thing which is among others, is intermingled with them. Commerce among the States, cannot stop at the external boundary line of each State, but may be introduced into the interior.
It is not intended to say that these words comprehend that commerce, which is completely internal, which is carried on between man and man in a State, or between different parts of the same State, and which does not extend to or affect other States. Such a power would be inconvenient, and is certainly unnecessary.
Comprehensive as the word 'among' is, it may very properly be restricted to that commerce which concerns more States than one. The phrase is not one which would probably have been selected to indicate the completely interior traffic of a State, because it is not an apt phrase for that purpose; and the enumeration of the particular classes of commerce, to which the power was to be extended, would not have been made, had the intention been to extend the power to every description.... The genius and character of the whole government seem to be, that its action is to be applied to all the external concerns of the nation, and to those internal concerns which affect the States generally; but not to those which are completely within a particular State, which do not affect other States, and with which it is not necessary to interfere, for the purpose of executing some of the general powers of the government. The completely internal commerce of a State, then, may be considered as reserved for the State itself.
We are now arrived at the inquiry-What is this power?
It is the power to regulate; that is, to prescribe the rule by which commerce is to be governed. This power, like all others vested in Congress, is complete in itself, may be exercised to its utmost extent, and acknowledges no limitations, other than are prescribed in the constitution.... The power of Congress, then, comprehends navigation, within the limits of every State in the Union; so far as that navigation may be, in any manner, connected with 'commerce with foreign nations, or among the several States, or with the Indian tribes.' It may, of consequence, pass the jurisdictional line of New-York, and act upon the very waters to which the prohibition now under consideration applies....
In argument, it has been contended, that if a law passed by a State, in the exercise of its acknowledged sovereignty, comes into conflict with a law passed by Congress in pursuance of the constitution, they affect the subject, and each other, like equal opposing powers. But the framers of our constitution foresaw this state of things, and provided for it, by declaring the supremacy not only of itself, but of the laws made in pursuance of it. The nullity of any act, law. The appropriate inconsistent with the constitution, is produced by the declaration, that the constitution is the supreme law. The appropriate application of that part of the clause which confers the same supremacy on laws and treaties, is to such acts of the State Legislatures as do not transcend their powers, but, though enacted in the execution of acknowledged State powers, interfere with, or are contrary to the laws of Congress, made in pursuance of the constitution, or some treaty made under the authority of the United States. In every such case, the act of Congress, or the treaty, is supreme; and the law of the State, though enacted in the exercise of powers not controverted, must yield to it....
This act demonstrates the opinion of Congress, that steam boats may be enrolled and licensed, in common with vessels using sails. They are, of course, entitled to the same privileges, and can no more be restrained from navigating waters, and entering ports which are free to such vessels, than if they were wafted on their voyage by the winds, instead of being propelled by the agency of fire. The one element may be as legitimately used as the other, for every commercial purpose authorized by the laws of the Union; and the act of a State inhibiting the use of either to any vessel having a license under the act of Congress, comes, we think, in direct collision with that act.
As this decides the cause, it is unnecessary to enter in an examination of that part of the constitution which empowers Congress to promote the progress of science and the useful arts....
Powerful and ingenious minds, taking, as postulates, that the powers expressly granted to the government of the Union, are to be contracted by construction, into the narrowest possible compass, and that the original powers of the States are retained, if any possible construction will retain them, may, by a course of well digested, but refined and metaphysical reasoning, founded on these premises, explain away the constitution of our country, and leave it, a magnificent structure, indeed, to look at, but totally unfit for use. They may so entangle and perplex the understanding, as to obscure principles, which were before thought quite plain, and induce doubts where, if the mind were to pursue its own course, none would be perceived. In such a case, it is peculiarly necessary to recur to safe and fundamental principles to sustain those principles, and when sustained, to make them the tests of the arguments to be examined.
Friday, March 1, 2024
The 2024 Wyoming Legislative Session. Part 4. Oedant Arma Toga.
.jpg)
February 26, 2024
The start of week three.
February 27, 2024
Given the huge differences between the House and Senate versions of the budget, a special session is being discussed.
The legislature just passed the halfway mark last Friday.
The much talked about tax restructuring House Bill 203 was heavily amended yesterday so that the $1,000,0000 home value exemption was dropped to $200,000 and the sales tax from 2% to 1%, effectively eliminating the real structure of the bill.
I earlier predicted it would die, and this is, unfortunately, a new bill. It'll still die, but for the overwhelming majority of Wyomingites, all this would do is create a new tax. Changing the $1,000,000 to, perhaps, $500,000 would have made sense, but probably most Wyoming homes now have a $200,000 value.
The Senate passed SF 105 which bans credit card tracking of firearms purchased, a totally non-existent problem that even an interview from a local sporting goods store was baffled about.
February 27, cont:
Not really legislative, but:
Governor Gordon Issues Line-Item Vetoes to Secretary of State’s ESG Investing Rules
CHEYENNE, Wyo. – After careful review of a rules package proposed by Secretary of State Chuck Gray on Environmental, Social, and Governance (“ESG”) investment disclosure and consent, Governor Mark Gordon has determined that parts of the rules go beyond the Secretary’s legal authority. As a result the Governor issued line item-vetoes of portions of the rules.
The Governor has long-opposed any artificial implementation of ESG factors in investment strategies.
“While I agree that ESG investment guidance is improper and misleading, the answer to too much government interference in our lives is not more government,” Governor Gordon said. “No government should have the right to direct people’s personal investment strategies.”
In a letter sent to Secretary Gray, Governor Gordon notes that by law he can only approve rules within the bounds set by statute. In the case of the proposed rules addressing ESG investing, the statute does not allow the government to tell individuals how they must invest their dollars. The consumer protection required by Wyoming and federal law speaks to transparency and disclosure only. Informed consumers should have the freedom to make their own investment choices.
“To be clear, I agree with your efforts to better illuminate investment practice and strategy through disclosure. Properly informed investors are always better able to make good decisions for themselves,” Governor Gordon wrote.
“Our appetite to oppose radical and misguided ESG initiatives in Wyoming does not justify implementing rules beyond the scope of statutory authority or interfering in the personal investment choices of Wyoming citizens. Personal responsibility and liberty are sacred principles that are all too often usurped by government mandate,” he added.
In the letter, the Governor also noted that federal securities laws expressly prohibit state conflicts “in the regulation of (1) federally covered securities, (2) broker dealers, (3) federally covered investment advisors, (4) investment advisor representatives, and (5) securities agents.”
The Governor’s letter to the Secretary of State may be viewed here. A copy of the Governor’s line-item vetoes can be found here.
And:
Secretary Gray Expresses Disappointment in Governor's Line-Item Veto of Rules to Protect Investors from ESG Investments through Increased Disclosure; Secretary Gray Reiterates Need to Protect Investors from Radical ESG Investments
CHEYENNE, WY – On February 27, 2024, Governor Mark Gordon line-item vetoed amendments to Chapters 2, 4, 5, and 10 of the Wyoming Secretary of State’s Securities Rules, which required disclosure and consent to Environmental, Social, and Governance (“ESG”) investment strategies by requiring investment advisers, broker-dealers, and securities agents to disclose to their customers or clients whether they are incorporating a social objective, i.e. whether they are considering social criteria, in the investment or commitment of customer or client funds, and obtain their consent. Following the Governor’s line-item veto, the rules limit the definition of a social objective, and will require written disclosure for some ESG-related investments, but will not require customer or client consent.
“I am disappointed in and disagree with Governor Gordon’s decision to line-item veto key portions of our proposed Securities Rules,” Secretary of State Chuck Gray said in a statement. “From the beginning of this rulemaking, we addressed concerns raised by Governor Gordon. We underwent a thorough public comment period, and fully considered all feedback received. As I wrote previously in my letter dated July 19, 2024, and again in my letter dated January 16, 2024, the Wyoming Uniform Securities Act clearly allows Wyoming to protect customers and clients from the harmful effects of ESG investments. I am disappointed to see the Governor’s rationale has adopted the recycled talking points of the radical left and Wall Street elites, rather than sound legal arguments. We must take concrete, proactive action to protect our state and consumers from the dangers presented by ESG investments maliciously targeting our core industries.”
“Although the Governor’s line-item veto weakened the amount of protections we attempted to provide to customers and clients to protect them from the dangers of ESG investment strategies, I believe the final rules offer a necessary starting point to protect Wyomingites from social ideologues imposing their radical, clown-show agenda on our state.”
Cont:
Passed Senate, on to House:
SENATE FILE NO. SF0094
An act regarding compelled speech and state employers.
Sponsored by: Senator(s) Hutchings, French and Ide and Representative(s) Styvar and Ward
A BILL
for
AN ACT relating to the administration of government; prohibiting the state and its political subdivisions from compelling speech as specified; authorizing a civil remedy; providing an exception to the Wyoming governmental claims act; and providing for an effective date.
Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Wyoming:
Section 1. W.S. 9‑14‑301 is created to read:
ARTICLE 3
COMPELLED OR PROHIBITED SPEECH
9‑14‑301. Compelled speech; civil action.
(a) The state and its political subdivisions shall not compel or require an employee to refer to another employee using that employee's preferred pronouns:
(i) As a condition of continuing or commencing employment or contracting with the state or a political subdivision;
(ii) As a condition to receive a grant, contract, license or other benefit afforded by the state or a political subdivision; or
(iii) Under threat of adverse action by the state or a political subdivision, including but not limited to an adverse employment action, exclusion, sanction or punishment.
(b) Any person aggrieved by a violation of subsection (a) of this section may file a civil action in any court of competent jurisdiction against the state or any political subdivision, and its employees acting in their official capacities, responsible for the violation to recover appropriate relief, including injunctive or declaratory relief, compensatory damages, reasonable attorney fees and court costs.
Section 2. W.S. 1‑39‑104(a) is amended to read:
1‑39‑104. Granting immunity from tort liability; liability on contracts; exceptions.
(a) A governmental entity and its public employees while acting within the scope of duties are granted immunity from liability for any tort except as provided by W.S. 1‑39‑105 through 1‑39‑112 and 9‑14‑301. Any immunity in actions based on a contract entered into by a governmental entity is waived except to the extent provided by the contract if the contract was within the powers granted to the entity and was properly executed and except as provided in W.S. 1‑39‑120(b). The claims procedures of W.S. 1‑39‑113 apply to contractual claims against governmental entities.
Section 3. This act applies to civil causes of action that are initiated on or after the effective date of this act.
Section 4. This act is effective July 1, 2024.
Passed House, on to Senate, and totally ineffectual due to the Supremacy Clause:
HOUSE BILL NO. HB0036
Natural Resource Protection Act.
Sponsored by: Select Federal Natural Resource Management Committee
A BILL
for
AN ACT relating to protection of constitutional rights; providing a declaration of authority and policy; prohibiting the enforcement of federal rules or regulations regarding federal land management as specified; providing an exception; and providing for an effective date.
Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Wyoming:
Section 1. W.S. 9‑14‑301 through 9‑14‑303 are created to read:
ARTICLE 3
NATURAL RESOURCE PROTECTION ACT
9‑14‑301. Short title.
This article shall be known and may be cited as the "Natural Resource Protection Act."
9‑14‑302. Declaration of authority and policy.
(a) The Natural Resource Protection Act is enacted under the authority of the tenth amendment to the United States constitution and Wyoming's agreement with the United States that the state adopted when it joined the union under the United States constitution's system of dual sovereignty.
(b) The legislature finds and declares:
(i) The federal government shall comply with federal law when administering federal lands;
(ii) The federal government arbitrarily restricting significant amounts of federal lands from public use is contrary to managing federal land under principles of multiple use and sustained yield;
(iii) Any failure by the federal government to abide by the law undermines the rule of law that is vital to our system of government.
9‑14‑303. Prohibiting the enforcement of federal regulation regarding federal land management; penalty.
(a) Upon a determination by the governor, with advice from the attorney general, that an executive order, final rule or regulation of the federal government does not comply with federal laws regarding federal land management and upon providing notice, this state and all political subdivisions of this state shall not use any personnel, funds appropriated by the legislature or any other source of funds that originate within the state of Wyoming to enforce or administer that federal executive order, final rule or regulation. The governor shall not revoke a valid primacy agreement with a federal agency over the regulation and enforcement of a federal law or program until a court of competent jurisdiction determines the federal executive order, final rule or regulation is unlawful.
(b) Nothing in this act shall limit or restrict a public officer, as defined by W.S. 6‑5‑101(a)(v), from providing assistance to federal authorities for purposes not specifically identified in subsection (a) of this section. Nothing in this act shall be construed to prohibit any governmental entity from accepting federal funds for law enforcement purposes.
Section 2. This act is effective July 1, 2024.
February 28, 2024
The Joint Conference Committee was picked to work out the $1B difference between the House and the Senate budgets. The members are Sens. Dave Kinskey, R-Sheridan, Tim Salazar, R-Riverton, Sens. Anthony Bouchard, R-Cheyenne, Dan Laursen, R-Powell, and Troy McKeown, R-Gillette. Three of the members are extremely conservative.
This signals there's going to be a lot of cutting in the Senate version of the budget.
Chloe's law passed the Senate. The bill bans sexual mutilation of children, something that should simply be overall outright banned.
SENATE FILE NO. SF0099
Chloe's law-children gender change prohibition.
Sponsored by: Senator(s) Bouchard, Biteman, Boner, Brennan, Dockstader, French, Hicks, Hutchings, Ide, Kinskey, Kolb, Laursen, D, McKeown, Salazar and Steinmetz and Representative(s) Andrew, Davis, Heiner, Hornok, Jennings, Knapp, Locke, Neiman, Niemiec, Ottman, Pendergraft, Penn, Rodriguez-Williams, Slagle, Strock, Styvar, Trujillo and Winter
A BILL
for
AN ACT relating to public health and safety; prohibiting physicians from performing procedures for children related to gender transitioning and gender reassignment; providing an exception; providing that gender transitioning and reassignment procedures are grounds for suspension or revocation of a physician's or health care provider's license; providing definitions; specifying applicability; requiring rulemaking; and providing for effective dates.
Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Wyoming:
Section 1. W.S. 35‑4‑1001 is created to read:
ARTICLE 10
GENDER‑RELATED PROCEDURES
35‑4‑1001. Gender transitioning and reassignment procedures for children prohibited.
(a) As used in this section:
(i) "Child" means a person who is younger than eighteen (18) years of age;
(ii) "Health care provider" means a person other than a physician who is licensed, certified or otherwise authorized by Wyoming law to provide or render health care or to dispense or prescribe a prescription drug in the ordinary course of business or practice of a profession;
(iii) "Physician" means any person licensed to practice medicine in this state by the state board of medicine under the Medical Practice Act.
(b) Except as provided in subsection (c) of this section and for purposes of transitioning a child's biological sex as determined by the sex organs, chromosomes and endogenous profiles of the child or affirming the child's perception of the child's sex if that perception is inconsistent with the child's biological sex, no physician or health care provider shall:
(i) Perform a surgery that sterilizes the child, including castration, vasectomy, hysterectomy, oophorectomy, metoidioplasty, orchiectomy, penectomy, phalloplasty and vaginoplasty;
(ii) Perform a mastectomy;
(iii) Provide, administer, prescribe or dispense any of the following prescription drugs that induce transient or permanent infertility:
(A) Puberty suppression or blocking prescription drugs to stop or delay normal puberty;
(B) Supraphysiologic doses of testosterone to females;
(C) Supraphysiologic doses of estrogen to males.
(iv) Remove any otherwise healthy or nondiseased body part or tissue.
(c) This section shall not apply to:
(i) Procedures or treatments that are performed with the consent of the child's parent or guardian and are for a child who is born with a medically verifiable genetic disorder of sex development, including 46, XX chromosomes with virilization, 46, XY with undervirilization or both ovarian and testicular tissue;
(ii) Any procedure or treatment that is performed with the consent of the child's parent or guardian and is for a child with medically verifiable central precocious puberty.
Section 2. W.S. 33‑21‑146(a)(xi), (xii) and by creating a new paragraph (xiii), 33‑24‑122(a)(intro), (ix) and by creating a new paragraph (xi) and 33‑26‑402(a) by creating a new paragraph (xxxvi) are amended to read:
33‑21‑146. Disciplining licensees and certificate holders; grounds.
(a) The board of nursing may refuse to issue or renew, or may suspend or revoke the license, certificate or temporary permit of any person, or to otherwise discipline a licensee or certificate holder, upon proof that the person:
(xi) Has failed to submit to a mental, physical or medical competency examination following a proper request by the board made pursuant to board rules and regulations and the Wyoming Administrative Procedure Act; or
(xii) Has violated a previously entered board order;. or
(xiii) Has violated W.S. 35‑4‑1001.
33‑24‑122. Revocation or suspension of license and registration; letter of admonition; summary suspension; administrative penalties; probation; grounds.
(a) The license and registration of any pharmacist may be revoked or suspended by the board of pharmacy or the board may issue a letter of admonition, refuse to issue or renew any license or require successful completion of a rehabilitation program or issue a summary suspension for any one (1) or more of the following causes:
(ix) For senility or mental impairment which impedes the pharmacist's professional abilities or for habitual personal use of morphine, cocaine or other habit forming drugs or alcohol; or
(xi) For violating W.S. 35‑4‑1001.
33‑26‑402. Grounds for suspension; revocation; restriction; imposition of conditions; refusal to renew or other disciplinary action.
(a) The board may refuse to renew, and may revoke, suspend or restrict a license or take other disciplinary action, including the imposition of conditions or restrictions upon a license on one (1) or more of the following grounds:
(xxxvi) Violating W.S. 35‑4‑1001.
Section 3. W.S. 35‑4‑1001, as created by section 1 of this act, shall apply only to conduct or procedures occurring on and after the effective date of this act.
Section 4. The department of health, state board of medicine and state board of pharmacy shall promulgate all rules necessary to implement this act.
Section 5.
(a) Except as provided in subsection (b) of this section, this act is effective July 1, 2024.
(b) Sections 4 and 5 of this act are effective immediately upon completion of all acts necessary for a bill to become law as provided by Article 4, Section 8 of the Wyoming Constitution.
The bill restructuring Wyoming's tax system died, as we predicted.
A bill eliminating gun free zones in Wyoming passed the House. My prediction is that it shall die in the Senate.
February 28, cont:
The Senate has voted to defund gender studies and the diversity office at the University of Wyoming. This is not a surprise,
Right wing populist Senator Bob Ide, on the action, stated:
I think we have a real opportunity to set University of Wyoming apart as a grassroots, traditional-value university.
This was done by way of a footnote in the budget, and it's far from certain that the footnote will survive budget resolution.
February 29, 2024
A bill to require abortion clinics to be licensed pass the House and is through a Senate committee. It provides:
HOUSE BILL NO. HB0148
Regulation of surgical abortions
Sponsored by: Representative(s) Lawley, Bear and Washut and Senator(s) Biteman, Boner, Brennan, Hutchings, Salazar and Steinmetz
A BILL
for
AN ACT relating to public health and safety; requiring the licensure of surgical abortion facilities as specified; requiring licensed physicians to perform abortions after an ultrasound; providing criminal penalties for violations; specifying civil liability for damages resulting from abortions; providing definitions; making conforming amendments; specifying applicability; requiring rulemaking; and providing for an effective date.
Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Wyoming:
Section 1. W.S. 35‑6‑201 through 35‑6‑205 are created to read:
ARTICLE 2
REGULATION OF SURGICAL ABORTIONS
35‑6‑201. Definitions.
(a) As used in this article:
(i) "Abortion" means the act of using or prescribing any instrument, medicine, drug or any other substance, device or means with the intent to terminate the clinically diagnosable pregnancy of a woman, including the elimination of one (1) or more unborn babies in a multifetal pregnancy, with knowledge that the termination by those means will, with reasonable likelihood, cause the death of the unborn baby. "Abortion" shall not include any use, prescription or means specified in this paragraph if the use, prescription or means are done with the intent to:
(A) Save the life or preserve the health of the unborn baby;
(B) Remove a dead unborn baby caused by spontaneous abortion or intrauterine fetal demise;
(C) Treat a woman for an ectopic pregnancy; or
(D) Provide treatment for a pregnant woman when a medical procedure or treatment is necessary, based on reasonable medical judgment, to save or preserve the life of the pregnant woman.
(ii) "Hospital" means those institutions licensed by the Wyoming department of health as hospitals;
(iii) "Physician" means any person licensed to practice medicine in this state;
(iv) "Pregnancy" or "pregnant" means the human female reproductive condition of having a living unborn baby or human being within a human female's body throughout the entire embryonic and fetal stages of the unborn human being from fertilization to full gestation and childbirth;
(v) "Reasonable medical judgment" means a medical judgment that would be made or a medical action that would be undertaken by a reasonably prudent, qualified physician who is knowledgeable about the case and the treatment possibilities with respect to the medical conditions involved;
(vi) "Surgical abortion" means an induced abortion performed or attempted through use of a machine, medical device, surgical instrument or surgical tool, or any combination thereof, to terminate the clinically diagnosable pregnancy of a woman with knowledge and the intent that the termination by those means will cause, with reasonable likelihood, the death of the unborn child;
(vii) "Surgical abortion facility" means any facility, other than a hospital, that provides a surgical abortion to a woman and performs not less than three (3) first‑trimester surgical abortions in any one (1) month or not less than one (1) second‑trimester or third‑trimester surgical abortion in any one (1) year.
35‑6‑202. Surgical abortion facilities; licensure requirement; prohibitions; penalties.
(a) Each surgical abortion facility in Wyoming shall be licensed as an ambulatory surgical center in accordance with W.S. 35‑2‑901 through 35‑2‑914 and the rules of the department of health. Each surgical abortion facility performing surgical abortions shall have a separate license.
(b) No surgical abortion facility shall provide surgical abortions to any pregnant woman without first being licensed as an ambulatory surgical center.
(c) Each surgical abortion facility shall comply with all rules of the department of health concerning the operation and regulation of ambulatory surgical centers. No license issued to a surgical abortion facility shall be transferable or assignable to any other person or facility.
(d) Each licensed physician performing at least one (1) surgical abortion at a surgical abortion facility shall:
(i) Report each surgical abortion to the department of health and shall attest in the report that the physician is licensed and in good standing with the state board of medicine;
(ii) Submit documentation in a form and frequency required by the department of health that demonstrates that the licensed physician has admitting privileges at a hospital located not more than ten (10) miles from the abortion facility where the licensed physician is performing or will perform surgical abortions.
(e) Any person who violates this section shall be guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by a fine not to exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000.00). Each calendar day in which a violation of this section occurs or continues is a separate offense.
35‑6‑203. Abortion facilities; surgical abortions; requirements; rulemaking.
(a) Any surgical abortion performed at a surgical abortion facility in the state shall only be performed by a physician licensed in the state of Wyoming.
(b) Any person who performs in the state any surgical abortion at a surgical abortion facility in violation of subsection (a) of this section is guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment for not less than one (1) year nor more than fourteen (14) years.
(c) No person shall perform a surgical abortion at a surgical abortion facility in Wyoming who is not a licensed physician with admitting privileges at a hospital located not more than ten (10) miles from the abortion facility where the surgical abortion is performed.
(d) Any person who violates subsection (c) of this section or if a pharmacist or physician violates W.S. 35‑6‑205 shall be guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of one thousand dollars ($1,000,00). For purposes of this subsection, each surgical abortion at a surgical abortion facility shall constitute a separate offense of subsection (c) of this section.
(e) The department of health shall promulgate rules necessary to regulate surgical abortion facilities as ambulatory surgical centers under W.S. 35‑2‑901 through 35‑2‑914, provided that the rules:
(i) Applicable to surgical abortion facilities are not less stringent than those rules applicable to ambulatory surgical centers;
(ii) Provide for the physical inspection of surgical abortion facilities by the department of health every three (3) years.
35‑6‑204. Applicability; effect.
If any provision of this article conflicts with the Life is a Human Right Act or W.S. 35‑6‑139, the provisions of the Life is a Human Right Act and W.S. 35‑6‑139 shall control over this article to the extent that the Life is a Human Right Act and W.S. 35‑6‑139 are enforceable.
35‑6‑205. Abortion facilities; licensure requirements verification; prohibitions; penalties.
Not less than forty‑eight (48) hours before a pregnant woman procures the drugs or substances for a chemical abortion, before a physician or pharmacist dispenses the drugs or substances necessary for a chemical abortion or before a pregnant woman undergoes a surgical abortion, the physician or pharmacist shall ensure that the pregnant woman receives an ultrasound in order to determine the gestational age of the unborn child, to determine the location of the pregnancy, to verify a viable intrauterine pregnancy and to provide the pregnant woman the opportunity to view the active ultrasound of the unborn child and hear the heartbeat of the unborn child if the heartbeat is audible. The provider of the ultrasound shall provide the pregnant woman with a document that specifies the date, time and place of the ultrasound.
Section 2. W.S. 35‑2‑901(a)(ii) is amended to read:
35‑2‑901. Definitions; applicability of provisions.
(a) As used in this act:
(ii) "Ambulatory surgical center" means a facility which provides surgical treatment to patients not requiring hospitalization and is not part of a hospital or offices of private physicians, dentists or podiatrists. "Ambulatory surgical center" shall include any surgical abortion facility as defined by W.S. 35‑6‑201(a)(vii);
Section 3.
(a) Nothing in this act shall be construed as creating an individual right to abortion.
(b) It is the intent of the legislature that this act shall not be construed as holding abortion as lawful in the state pending a decision from a court of competent jurisdiction on the current state of the law.
(c) It is the intent of the legislature that this act shall not recognize or define abortion as a health care decision under Article 1, section 38 of the Wyoming Constitution.
Section 4. The department of health shall promulgate all rules necessary to implement this act.
Section 5. This act is effective immediately upon completion of all acts necessary for a bill to become law as provided by Article 4, Section 8 of the Wyoming Constitution.
This may seem like an odd bill in that the legislature has outlawed abortion already, although the disposition of that law is in peril due to a poorly thought out paranoid Wyoming Constitutional amendment that was aimed at the fictional threat of Obamacare "death panels", a good example of paranoia in operation combined with the Law of Unintended Consequences. Those who backed that law should be ashamed of themselves. Anyhow, this bill seeks to regulate infanticide abattoirs if they're allowed to exist, and during the period in which the issue is pending in what seems like a glacially slow Teton County proceeding.
It might be questioned why no effort has been made to repeal the silly Obamacare Paranoia Amendment, but none has. Probably "They're Going To Make Me Vaccinate" paranoia has something to do with that.
March 1, 2024
A bill to relocate bighorn sheep from Sweetwater Rocks has gotten through a House Committee after passing the Senate. The measure is designed to protect domestic sheep.
SENATE FILE NO. SF0118
Bighorn and domestic sheep relocation-federal action.
Sponsored by: Senator(s) Hicks and Representative(s) Western
A BILL
for
AN ACT relating to wildlife and livestock; providing legislative findings; requiring the game and fish department to relocate or remove bighorn sheep from the Sweetwater Rocks cooperative review area in response to specified federal action; providing for the reimbursement of costs for relocation or removal of bighorn sheep; requiring and authorizing attorney general action as specified; amending the duties of the wildlife/livestock research partnership board; providing appropriations; and providing for an effective date.
Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Wyoming:
Section 1. W.S. 11‑19‑605 is created to read:
11‑19‑605. Wyoming bighorn/domestic sheep relocation and removal; legislative findings; reimbursement; attorney general action.
(a) The legislature finds and declares that it is the state's policy to vigorously defend its interests in maintaining and enhancing viable livestock grazing operations on public lands in conjunction with the conservation and maintenance of healthy bighorn sheep populations in the state of Wyoming. These two (2) policies are mutually compatible as demonstrated since the adoption of the collaboratively developed Wyoming bighorn/domestic sheep plan in 2004, which was codified into law under W.S. 11‑19‑604 in 2015. The legislature further finds and declares that:
(i) Reintroduction of bighorn sheep and management action to protect existing populations of bighorn sheep on federal public lands has been effectively accomplished in conformance with the Wyoming bighorn/domestic sheep plan;
(ii) All wildlife in the state of Wyoming is the property of the state, and it is the policy of the state to provide an adequate and flexible system for control, propagation, management, protection and regulation of all Wyoming wildlife;
(iii) Any removal of bighorn sheep from the Sweetwater Rocks cooperative review area under this act shall not be attributable to domestic livestock grazing on federal bureau of land management administered lands. Rather, the removal of bighorn sheep shall be directly attributable to:
(A) Onerous federal regulation that unduly impedes the state of Wyoming's ability to manage wildlife and domestic livestock grazing in conformance with the Wyoming bighorn/domestic sheep plan;
(B) Third‑party litigation designed to use bighorn sheep as a means of eliminating domestic livestock grazing on bureau of land management administered lands in and adjacent to the Sweetwater Rocks cooperative review area.
(iv) The provisions of this section shall be enforced by the state.
(b) In conformance with the Wyoming bighorn/domestic sheep plan in W.S. 11‑19‑604 and pursuant to W.S. 23‑1‑103, the game and fish department shall relocate or remove bighorn sheep from the Sweetwater Rocks cooperative review area if any federal judicial action or federal agency action requires or could require the following:
(i) The elimination or suspension of domestic sheep grazing or trailing; or
(ii) Any changes to a United States bureau of land management resource management plan, grazing allotments or livestock grazing agreements due to the presence of bighorn sheep in the Sweetwater Rocks cooperative review area or any adjacent grazing allotment that is not in a designated bighorn sheep herd unit after July 1, 2024 without the consent of the grazing permittee.
(c) Any relocation or removal of bighorn sheep from the Sweetwater Rocks cooperative review area required by subsection (b) of this section shall commence as soon as practicable but not later than six (6) months after the Wyoming department of agriculture certifies to the governor that a condition specified in subsection (b) of this section is met. The governor shall notify the game and fish department that the removal of bighorn sheep from the Sweetwater Rocks cooperative review area shall commence in accordance with this section.
(d) The game and fish department shall be responsible for the expedient removal of bighorn sheep that stray outside the Sweetwater Rocks cooperative review area if that straying or foray is not into another designated herd unit.
(e) The state and its agencies shall coordinate and assist the Wyoming congressional delegation in pursuing changes to federal law, rules and policies in order to bring them into conformance with the Wyoming bighorn/domestic sheep plan created under W.S. 11‑19‑604.
(f) The Wyoming game and fish department shall not seek to change, alter or otherwise affect changes to domestic livestock grazing authorization on public and state lands due to the presence of bighorn sheep in the Sweetwater Rocks cooperative review area or adjacent grazing allotments that are not within an existing bighorn sheep herd unit.
(g) The game and fish department shall be reimbursed for the costs of relocation or removal of bighorn sheep pursuant to subsection (b) of this section from any available funds in the wildlife/livestock disease research partnership account created by W.S. 11‑19‑603.
(h) With the approval of the governor, the attorney general shall seek to intervene in any lawsuit if a federal action is contrary to the state's policy regarding Wyoming bighorn/domestic sheep set forth in subsection (a) of this section or that is inconsistent with the Wyoming bighorn/domestic sheep plan.
(j) With the approval of the governor, the attorney general shall file an action against any federal agency to stop the enforcement, administration or implementation of any federal agency rule, instructional memo, handbook or other action taken by a federal agency if the rule, instructional memo, handbook or other action is contrary to the Wyoming bighorn/domestic sheep plan or is otherwise contrary to law.
Section 2. W.S. 11‑19‑602(b) by creating a new paragraph (vii) and 11‑19‑603 are amended to read:
11‑19‑602. Wyoming wildlife/livestock disease research partnership board created; membership; duties; purposes.
(b) The board shall:
(vii) Allocate funds for monitoring, tracking and conducting disease surveillance before and following the introduction of bighorn sheep in the Sweetwater Rocks cooperative review area.
11‑19‑603. Account created.
There is created a wildlife/livestock disease research partnership account. Funds from this account shall be used only for purposes specified in W.S. 11‑19‑601 through 11‑19‑604 11‑19‑605. Any interest earned on the account shall remain within the account.
Section 3.
(a) There is appropriated one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000.00) from the general fund to the wildlife/livestock disease research partnership account for purposes of reimbursing the game and fish department for the costs of relocation or removal of bighorn sheep under this act. This appropriation shall be for the period beginning with the effective date of this act and ending June 30, 2030. This appropriation shall not be transferred or expended for any other purpose. Notwithstanding W.S. 9‑2‑1008, 9‑2‑1012(e) and 9‑4‑207, this appropriation shall not revert until June 30, 2030.
(b) There is appropriated fifty thousand dollars ($50,000.00) from the general fund to the department of agriculture for the rangeland health assessment program to conduct rangeland monitoring of the United States bureau of land management grazing allotments in or adjacent to the Sweetwater Rocks bighorn sheep cooperative review area. This appropriation shall be for the period beginning with the effective date of this act and ending June 30, 2030. This appropriation shall not be transferred or expended for any other purpose. Notwithstanding W.S. 9‑2‑1008, 9‑2‑1012(e) and 9‑4‑207, this appropriation shall not revert until June 30, 2030.
Section 4. This act is effective July 1, 2024.
The area is near Agate Flats in Fremont County.
March 1, cont:
Governor Gordon Signs First Bills of 2024 Legislative Session
CHEYENNE, Wyo. – Governor Mark Gordon signed the first bills of the 2024 Legislative session at the Capitol today.
The first bill to be signed by the Governor was Senate File 0004 Rehiring retired firefighters-continued retirement benefits. Sponsored by the Joint Labor, Health and Social Services committee, the bill allows retired firefighters to be rehired while continuing to receive retirement benefits, including a pension.
The Governor signed the following bills into law today:
Enrolled Act # Bill No. Bill Title
SEA0001 SF0017 Plane coordinates system-amendments.
SEA0002 SF0015 Acceptance of retrocession-federal military installations.
SEA0003 SF0004 Rehiring retired firefighters-continued retirement benefits.
Last Prior Edition:
The 2024 Wyoming Legislative Session. Part 3. The start of the budget session.
Appendix:
Monday, February 26, 2024
The 2024 Election, Part XIII. The storms of never satisfied greed edition.
[An elected official] should never put holding his office above keeping straight with his conscience…he should be prepared to go out of office rather than surrender on a matter of vital principle.
Theodore Roosevelt, 1911
If you could show the cabbage that I planted with my own hands to your emperor, he definitely wouldn't dare suggest that I replace the peace and happiness of this place with the storms of a never-satisfied greed.
Diocletian
February 6, 2024
Presidential Race.
Trump has been advancing towards prison, albeit slowly given the current glacial pace of American criminal justice, as he's also been advancing in the polls.
February 6, 2024
No immunity.
Of course, who really thought there was?
Unfortunately, the delay in issuing the opinion has resulted in the postponement of the trial originally scheduled for March.
Cont:
Matt Gaetz and Elise Stephanik have co-sponsored a resolution that Donald Trump did not engage in insurrection or rebellion against the United States on January 6, something that clear is an attempt to address the 14th Amendment in that insurrection may be excused under it.
Having said that, a resolution that it didn't occur will not excuse it, and this will not get through the Senate.
Trump, who has avoided debating his Republican challengers, stated on Monday:
I’d like to debate him (Biden) now because we should debate. We should debate for the good of the country,
Biden responded:
Immediately? Well, if I were him, I’d want to debate me, too. He’s got nothing else to do,
Biden won the Nevada Primary. In the GOP Primary, which doesn't decide anything as their caucus does (much like Wyoming in this regard) "None of the above" won, an embarrassing defeat for second place finisher Nikki Haley.
State Races
Republican (yes, I know that this is blue, we're going with the international color standards, not the moronic US ones)
Harriet Hageman. Only Hageman has announced, and she'll win in the primary and general absent something massively bizarre happening.
No Democrats have announced.
U.S. Senate
Republican.
John Barasso. He's the incumbent and will win.
Reid Rasner. Ranser is a challenger from the far right whose campaign will go nowhere.
No Democrats have announced.
Some information:
Candidate Filing Period ……………………………………………………………………. May 16-May 31, 2024
Minor and Provisional Party Candidate Deadline ………………………………………… August 19, 2024
Independent Candidate Deadline ……………………………………………………………….. August 26, 2024
3,891 Signatures Required for Statewide Races
February 8, 2024
While almost nobody cares, Marianne Williamson dropped out of the Democratic race for the Oval Office.
February 9, 2024
Trump won the GOP Nevada Caucus.
Biden will not be charged for retaining classified documents, but the report that was released regarding it calls his mental status into question.
Biden probably does have some cognitive decline. Trump, I'm guessing (without a medical license) may be showing the early signs of some species of dementia, which is why he forgets, is childish, and mean. Two candidates in their 80s, effectively, is absurd. And to keep the grip of American power in such an aged group (McConnell and Schumer aren't youngster, nor was Pelosi), seems to be based on the assumption that nobody under 60 years of age is qualified to do anything, which is insulting really (and I'm 60).
The one thing both parties agree on is that, in spite of their pathetic performance, that no voter may ever look at a third part, and that the election is, and must be, binary. No matter what else is the case, the voters must never ever look at any choice other than the Democrats or the Republicans. Effectively, Democrats would rather have voters look at Trump than a third party, like the American Solidarity Party The GOP holds the same, and would rather have voters look at the Democrats than a third ticket made up of something like Manchin/Cheney, or Christie/Manchin. Pathetic.
February 10, 2024
In spite of the fact that it's well demonstrated that machines are more reliable than hand counted ballots:
Park County Citizens Push To Ditch Voting Machines In Favor Of Hand-Count Ballots
The angst that's been falsely introduced into elections has to stop. This would be unreliable, result in multiple hand counted recounts, and be slow.
February 11, 2024
Trump is attacking Biden's cognitive status, Biden is defending his, and Haley is attacking both of theirs, even using a "Grump Old Men" theme in a major way.
Trump spoke at an NRA Presidential Forum at the Great American Outdoors Show in Pennsylvania.
Biden has declined a pre Super Bowl interview for the second time in a year, something that has caused political functionary and sometimes advisor James Carville to comment that Biden's administration doesn't have enough confidence in him to allow him to do an interview.\
February 12, 2024
Trump made a comment late last week that if President, he'd cause the US to dishonor its NATO commitments and refuse to defend any country that was delinquent in its defense contributions.
This provoked a reaction from NATO's Secretary General.
He also in a rally asked where Haley's husband, who is a deployed National Guardsman, was, an odd question for a man whose "wife" is often not present.
In a Truth Social post, Trump claimed that Taylor Swift voting for him would be disloyal, in light of his actions as President having resulted in her making a lot of money.
This may all be an interesting look into a portion of Trump's mind, as it seems that money is central to it, which given his life, from birth to his now, given his age, near death, has been central to it.
Cont:
Nikki Haley's husband posted a reply to Donald Trump's childish "where's her husband" comment with the following:
February 13, 2024
Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.'s Super Bowl advertisement strongly recalling JFK's television ad made members of the Kennedy family and some members of the general public angry.
Kennedy apologized to the family.
Frankly, in an election cycle when the leading GOP candidate says something insulting, and often outright stupid, on a constant basis, this is a bit over the top. Kennedy stands little chance, but the controversy probably aids him.
February 15, 2024
V. Putin oddly announced that he prefers Biden to Trump as he's "more predictable" but that Russia will work with anyone the US chooses.
The Kremlin is likely concerned that Putin's recent interview with Lord Haw Haw is having negative impacts in the U.S.
February 16, 2024
Donald Trump is attempting to replace Rona McDaniel, who had been a loyal laky, with Lara Trump, his daughter-in-law as Republican National Committee chair. McDaniel is accused of suddenly showing a spine and no longer being as supportive of Trump as she once was.
McDaniel will likely step down this month.
If this all occurs, one of the interesting things is that McDaniel, a political insider, was an earlier post insurrection supporter of Trump who read the winds correctly. If she's doing that again, it may mean that Trump's fortunes are flagging according to insiders.
If Trump does cause his daughter-in-law to become the RNC head it's likely that some remaining real Republicans will abandon ship at that point.
Cont:
Manchin bows at, but condemns both parties:
February 18, 2024
From the AP:
PHILADELPHIA -- As he closes in on the Republican presidential nomination, former President Donald Trump made a highly unusual stop Saturday, hawking new Trump-branded sneakers at “Sneaker Con,” a gathering that bills itself as the “The Greatest Sneaker Show on Earth.”
Trump was met with loud boos as well as cheers at the Philadelphia Convention Center as he introduced what he called the first official Trump footwear.
What the crud.
A thought from here:
Why isn't anyone suggesting that Tammy Duckworth replace Joe Biden on the Democratic ticket?
February 23, 2024
Trump's daughter-in-law who is campaigning for appointment to the RNC declared that Republican voters would likely welcome using RNC funds to support his legal battles.
I'd strongly question if this was legal, and frankly it likely opens the RNC up, in my view, to a Rico charge.
February 25, 2024
Trump took South Carolina yesterday, as he was expected to do. Absent the intervention of an exterior force, such as the Court (unlikely), perhaps criminal conviction, a really shocking revelation, or old age mortality, he will be the GOP nominee.
NPR ran an interesting pre-election edition of its Politics podcast, in which it was revealed that many South Carolina Republican voters felt Trump was "the only person who can save the Republic". "From What" might be the logical followup. He seems ill-suited to take on any of the really serious problems of the day, and there are many really serious problems.
What that reveals is the extent to which rank and file Republicans feel that leftward social drift is destroying the Republic, something that's been going on since at least the Civil War, if not the founding of the Republic itself. Of interest, I read a comment by one of Trump's backers and former staffers who now works at the Heritage Foundation to the effect that governmental developments dating back to Woodrow Wilson need to be more or less fully reversed.
.jpg)
Woodrow Wilson, President from 1913 to 1921.
Of course, Wilson wasn't nearly as left wing as Republican daring, Theodore Roosevelt.
Interestingly, Lindsey Graham was booed by a crowed after being introduced by Trump at a victory rally.
February 26, 2024
The Kochs have ceased funding Haley.
Sen. John Thune, the GOP number two in the Senate, has fallen in line and endorsed Trump.
Authoritarian El Salvadorian President Nayib Bukele received a standing ovataion at CPAC.
Related Threads:
Lex Anteinternet: Why isn't anyone suggesting that Tammy Duckworth r...
Why isn't anyone suggesting that Tammy Duckworth replace Joe Biden on the Democratic ticket?
Last edition:
The 2024 Election, Part XII. The March To Moscow
Saturday, February 24, 2024
The 2024 Wyoming Legislative Session. Part 3. The start of the budget session.
February 12, 2024
The legislature convenes today.
February 13, 2024
I'd comment, but I haven't listened to it yet.
February 15, 2024
Having now listened to it, Governor Gordon's State of the State, it was clearly disappointing. I can't strongly recall Governor Gordon's prior State of the State speeches, but this was clearly in the category of "red meat" for an intended audience.
The speech pitched to the far right and was full of Wyoming v. The Biden Administration invective, promising lawsuits against the Federal Government and the like, and promising that Wyoming's fossil fuel industry would be relevant in its current form forever. Gordon only hinted on industry changes being necessary for its survival, but otherwise declared that people have to depend on us whether they like it or not. Gordon knows better, so it was truly a political speech.
Interestingly, it's drawn criticism from some on the far right for being hypocritical. And there's some merit to that claim. Gordon has been under fire from the far right for his Carbon Neutrality discussions recently, and rather cynically tried to recast his statements.
"State of the _________" speeches are, quite frankly, approaching the worthless point, if in fact they did not do so sometime ago, as those delivering them just won't be honest in them. Everyone would be stunned if a President gave one that said something like "ladies and gentlemen, I'm here to report the State of the Union is imperiled, and It's because you either won't tell the truth or don't know what it is" or "I'm Gov. Jones, and oh boy, there are a bunch of problems here to solve".
The budget information was, however, interesting.
The Senate voted 17-14 to reinstate Sen. Dave Kinskey, R-Sheridan, as chairman of the Legislature’s most powerful committee after President Ogden Driskill, R-Devils Tower, unilaterally stripped Kinskey of the position last April. This removed Sen. Tara Nethercott who had been chosen to replace Kinskey.
House Bill 63 outlawing child sex change (mutilation) surgeries failed to secure enough votes for introduction because, oddly, the Freedom Caucus opposed it for not going far enough and House Democrats opposed it for going too far, thereby giving an example of the perfect being the enemy of the good.
February 21, 2024.
House Bill 203, paased the House Revenue Committee. The Bill exempts $200,000 of the fair market value of the assessment of single-family residential properties for this current tax year and $1,000,000 of fair market thereafter in exchange for an additional 2% sales tax.
I have mixed ffeelings about this bill, and I'm mostly mixed against it. Wyomingites fail to appreciate how much they actually depend on tax revenues simply for local governments to function and also are in the odd situation of not equating a host of things that encourage property value inflation with things they don't like. Basically, a lot of Wyomingites would like the state to remain what it was in some priro decade (and I confess I hold those views) while also having booming local economies and the like. Things have to give somewhere, and where they've been giving is in inflating property values. Removing $1M in valuation in this fashion will actually encourage that, and bring about additional problems.
Most people will like the bill, however, until they pay the sales tax, and then they'll be made about that.
And also:
House passes bill to rein in insurance providers
February 22, 2024
The legislature really hit the op eds this morning.
A bill mandating power plants to carbon capture, which is thought of as a way to save coal fire plants and hence coal, was criticized by an engineer as unworkable in the Trib.
Whether its unworkable or not, as a technology, it's likely not cost productive, although I'm not an engineer and can't venture a qualified opinion.
The Freedom Caucus criticized Governor Gordon's budget as unworkable and unsustainable.
Generally, the far populist right is hostile to government in general, and a favorite concept of it has been to "starve" the government to death. That's been tried repeatedly at the Federal level, where it's been forgotten that the Government can just borrow money, mostly from the Chinese, so it still dines out, just on The Bank of the Public Credit Card. At the local level, however, it can't do that.
Frankly, I've never seen a Wyoming budget that I regarded as containing much fat, so I'm skeptical that this is a big budget. One item, a raise in government employees salaries, is definitely not unwise spending. The state's employees are under compensated, and sometimes I wonder how they even get by. Basically all this budget does is to try to catch up, which it doesn't, but at least it does something.
The list of things specifically complaints of is interesting. Other than an increase in salaries, they are, and we quote:
"$21.8 million for a new gun/firing range.$10 million in ‘contingency.’$38 million for “affordable housing.”$7.5 million to build a new helibase."
I'm not keen on a couple of these things. The "gun/firing range" is the range at the Law Enforcement Academy. It needs to be rebuilt. I'm for that.
But to call it a "gun/firing range" is revealing.
I've noted before the FC is mostly made up of imports from out of state. Nobody familiar with firearms calls a shooting range a "gun/firing range".
$10,000,000 for contingency seems like a pretty good idea to me.
The money for affordable housing does not, but again probably not for the reasons that the FC views it. Rather, Wyoming has long catered to a weird concept that we can boost industry, bring in people, while keeping everything, including the population size, the same. That's obviously impossible.
Housing follows demand, and this is a byproduct of what we asked for. If we don't like getting what we asked for, we ought to modify that. Government funded housing probably isn't the answer to that.
$7,500,000 is to update the helibase for fighting wildland fires, of which we've been getting a lot.
I'm for that.
Something final to note.
The budget is bigger because of inflation.
Inflation was caused by a global pandemic followed by Donald Trump's political paramour Vlad Putin invading Ukraine.
Things cost more than they used to. A budget needs to reflect that.
Regarding a bill to defund UW's Gender Studies and Diversity Office, Sen. Charles Scott stated:
This kind of program was the principal agent of introducing that rot, introducing a faculty that is without diversity of opinion, that is a monolith of wokeness. We’re seeing this rot affect the University of Wyoming.
He also stated that he's discouraging people from attending UW.
February 23, 2024
Chloe's Bill, which was one of two bills seeking to prohibit underage gender mutilation last general session, has cleared committee in this session. It provides:
SENATE FILE NO. SF0099Chloe's law-children gender change prohibition.Sponsored by: Senator(s) Bouchard, Biteman, Boner, Brennan, Dockstader, French, Hicks, Hutchings, Ide, Kinskey, Kolb, Laursen, D, McKeown, Salazar and Steinmetz and Representative(s) Andrew, Davis, Heiner, Hornok, Jennings, Knapp, Locke, Neiman, Niemiec, Ottman, Pendergraft, Penn, Rodriguez-Williams, Slagle, Strock, Styvar, Trujillo and WinterA BILLforAN ACT relating to public health and safety; prohibiting physicians from performing procedures for children related to gender transitioning and gender reassignment; providing an exception; providing that gender transitioning and reassignment procedures are grounds for suspension or revocation of a physician's or health care provider's license; providing definitions; specifying applicability; requiring rulemaking; and providing for effective dates.Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Wyoming:Section 1. W.S. 35‑4‑1001 is created to read:ARTICLE 10GENDER‑RELATED PROCEDURES35‑4‑1001. Gender transitioning and reassignment procedures for children prohibited.(a) As used in this section:(i) "Child" means a person who is younger than eighteen (18) years of age;(ii) "Health care provider" means a person other than a physician who is licensed, certified or otherwise authorized by Wyoming law to provide or render health care or to dispense or prescribe a prescription drug in the ordinary course of business or practice of a profession;(iii) "Physician" means any person licensed to practice medicine in this state by the state board of medicine under the Medical Practice Act.(b) Except as provided in subsection (c) of this section and for purposes of transitioning a child's biological sex as determined by the sex organs, chromosomes and endogenous profiles of the child or affirming the child's perception of the child's sex if that perception is inconsistent with the child's biological sex, no physician or health care provider shall:(i) Perform a surgery that sterilizes the child, including castration, vasectomy, hysterectomy, oophorectomy, metoidioplasty, orchiectomy, penectomy, phalloplasty and vaginoplasty;(ii) Perform a mastectomy;(iii) Provide, administer, prescribe or dispense any of the following prescription drugs that induce transient or permanent infertility:(A) Puberty suppression or blocking prescription drugs to stop or delay normal puberty;(B) Supraphysiologic doses of testosterone to females;(C) Supraphysiologic doses of estrogen to males.(iv) Remove any otherwise healthy or nondiseased body part or tissue.(c) This section shall not apply to:(i) Procedures or treatments that are performed with the consent of the child's parent or guardian and are for a child who is born with a medically verifiable genetic disorder of sex development, including 46, XX chromosomes with virilization, 46, XY with undervirilization or both ovarian and testicular tissue;(ii) Any procedure or treatment that is performed with the consent of the child's parent or guardian and is for a child with medically verifiable central precocious puberty.Section 2. W.S. 33‑21‑146(a)(xi), (xii) and by creating a new paragraph (xiii), 33‑24‑122(a)(intro), (ix) and by creating a new paragraph (xi) and 33‑26‑402(a) by creating a new paragraph (xxxvi) are amended to read:33‑21‑146. Disciplining licensees and certificate holders; grounds.(a) The board of nursing may refuse to issue or renew, or may suspend or revoke the license, certificate or temporary permit of any person, or to otherwise discipline a licensee or certificate holder, upon proof that the person:(xi) Has failed to submit to a mental, physical or medical competency examination following a proper request by the board made pursuant to board rules and regulations and the Wyoming Administrative Procedure Act; or(xii) Has violated a previously entered board order;. or(xiii) Has violated W.S. 35‑4‑1001.33‑24‑122. Revocation or suspension of license and registration; letter of admonition; summary suspension; administrative penalties; probation; grounds.(a) The license and registration of any pharmacist may be revoked or suspended by the board of pharmacy or the board may issue a letter of admonition, refuse to issue or renew any license or require successful completion of a rehabilitation program or issue a summary suspension for any one (1) or more of the following causes:(ix) For senility or mental impairment which impedes the pharmacist's professional abilities or for habitual personal use of morphine, cocaine or other habit forming drugs or alcohol; or(xi) For violating W.S. 35‑4‑1001.33‑26‑402. Grounds for suspension; revocation; restriction; imposition of conditions; refusal to renew or other disciplinary action.(a) The board may refuse to renew, and may revoke, suspend or restrict a license or take other disciplinary action, including the imposition of conditions or restrictions upon a license on one (1) or more of the following grounds:(xxxvi) Violating W.S. 35‑4‑1001.Section 3. W.S. 35‑4‑1001, as created by section 1 of this act, shall apply only to conduct or procedures occurring on and after the effective date of this act.Section 4. The department of health, state board of medicine and state board of pharmacy shall promulgate all rules necessary to implement this act.Section 5.(a) Except as provided in subsection (b) of this section, this act is effective July 1, 2024.(b) Sections 4 and 5 of this act are effective immediately upon completion of all acts necessary for a bill to become law as provided by Article 4, Section 8 of the Wyoming Constitution.
Chloe Cole, whom the bill is named after and who was a victim of the barbarity of gender mutilation in the name of "transgenderism" spoke in favor of the bill.
February 24, 2024
So, week two is over. The results so far:
The Senate and the House are $900,000,000 apart in their respective budget bills, which is not a good sign at all, Part of that is due to the rise of the populist right in the House, which is hostile to government. An op ed earlier this week by Freedom Caucus members complained about the budget.
The higher number frankly seems reasonable to me. Raises of state employee salaries are certainly merited. Some government infrastructure, such as a heliport for fire fighting, fits into the category of things we'll regret later if not funded, probably after this episode in populism is over, which there are early signs may be coming.
Most but not all of the really populist bills have bitten the dust, showing that in spite of big predictions going into this session, the populist don't have enough pull to really get their agenda considered. There are some exceptions, but those exceptions pretty much uniformly feature broad support and can't, therefore, be considered solely populist.
An example of that is Chloe's Law, which was introduced last session and is back. Of interest there, its being advanced by Anthony Bouchard, who was an extremely controversial member of the legislature at one time but no longer seem to be. Moreover, he doesn't seem to be a member of the populist far right group in the legislature. Interesting, he was one of the very first ones, but during his race for the House he seems to have cut loose from them.
The bill to go from property taxes for local funds to a sales tax advanced, but barely. In its first reading, it passed by a mere two votes.
Given that, my prediction is that it'll go down in defeat.
Politic were being played with the pristine Kelly Parcel in Teton County, with a bill being introduced to hold it hostage if the BLM doesn't bend its knee on the Resource Management Plan for the Rock Springs area, which is flatly just sad. There were amendments at the same time to require that it continue to be used for grazing and hunting, which do seem like good ideas to me.
And so we're on to week three, which a massive gap in the budget to work out.
Appendix:
Last Prior Edition.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)