Sponsored by: Representative(s) Provenza, Andrew, Campbell, E, Larson, JT and Wharff and Senator(s) Jones, Rothfuss and Schuler
A BILL
for
AN ACT relating to crimes and offenses; providing an exception to the offenses of criminal trespass and game-and-fish trespass regarding incidental contact associated with crossing two (2) adjacent parcels as specified; and providing for an effective date.
Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Wyoming:
Section 1.W.S. 6‑3‑303 by creating a new subsection (d) and 23‑3‑305(b) are amended to read:
6‑3‑303.Criminal trespass; penalties; exception.
(d)For purposes of this section, a person does not commit criminal trespass if the person incidentally passes through the airspace or touches the land or premises of another person while the person is traveling from one (1) parcel of land that the person is authorized to access to another parcel of land that shares a common corner with or is immediately connected to the first parcel and that the person is authorized to access.
23‑3‑305.Hunting from highway; entering enclosed property without permission; penalty; hunting at night without permission prohibited; exception.
(b)No person shall enter upon, travel through or return across the private property of any person to take wildlife, hunt, fish, collect antlers or horns, or trap without the permission of the owner or person in charge of the property. Violation of this subsection constitutes a low misdemeanor punishable as provided in W.S. 23‑6‑202(a)(v). For purposes of this subsection, "travel through or return across" requires physically touching or driving on the surface of the private property. For purposes of this subsection, a person does not commit trespass under this subsection if the person incidentally passes through the airspace or touches the land or premises of another person while the person is traveling from one (1) parcel of land that the person is authorized to access to another parcel of land that shares a common corner with or is immediately connected to the first parcel and that the person is authorized to access.
Section 2.This act is effective July 1, 2025.
This is a Democratic bill. The Democrats have traditionally been the party that comes to the rescue in Wyoming when the GOP begins to descend into feudalism regarding land.
If the populist really care what Wyomingites think, this should past.
Contrary to news reports, it was not a FEMA funding bill, it was the stop gap bridge measure to keep the government open.
The hard right in Congress, including Wyoming's lone Congressman, voted against it. Voting against such bills has been really popular in the populist street level politics of Wyoming. And the hard right sees it as a way to force fiscal responsibility, as long as you don't want to be too cynical about it. It'd also handicap the government if it didn't pass, of course, which some long for.
Rep. Hageman gave her reasons as follows:
Washington, DC – Today, Congresswoman Harriet Hageman voted in favor of H.R. 9494 - Continuing Appropriations and Other Matters Act, 2025 (CR) that would keep the federal government open through March 28, 2025 and include the SAVE Act. The SAVE Act, cosponsored by Rep. Hageman and passed earlier this year by the House of Representatives with bipartisan support, would require states to obtain proof of citizenship—in person—when registering an individual to vote and require states to remove non-citizens from existing voter rolls. The bill failed 220-202.
Representative Hageman stated, “Safeguarding our election process is critically important, especially with the open border policies of the Biden-Harris administration that have allowed over 11 million illegals to enter our country. By including the SAVE Act with government funding and extending the funding into 2025, when Republicans have a strong chance of controlling the House, Senate, and White House, America wins. We will be able to craft responsible appropriations bills that slash wasteful spending, stop the current administration’s radical climate agenda, and eliminate woke DEI programs from federal agencies – at the same time, we can ensure that only American citizens vote in federal elections.
“I am disappointed that the House was unable to pass H.R. 9494 today. While Continuing Resolutions are never ideal, securing our elections and creating an opportunity to pass conservative spending bills in 2025 created a unique opportunity. I will not support a CR that fails to include the SAVE Act.”
I'm sure her logic is likewise popular in the state, but I'd note that tying immigration to continuing spending is linking two unrelated things. She voted against the bill that passed.
Anyhow, while this wasn't a FEMA spending bill, FEMA is part of the government and gets its money from the government, which would have closed if the CR hadn't passsed. . . .
FEMA is now addressing hurricane damage in the Southeast last week, and is about to deal with a second hurricane that looks to hit Florida with a fury not matched in a century.
Interestingly, the Trump campaign is now lying (imagine that) about disaster relief funds not making it to Appalachia. Trump has, of course, inspired the far right and the "shut the government down" midset.
Well, what about us?
Here are the list of disasters that FEMA recognizes for this year in Wyoming:
Fire Management Assistance Declaration declared on
And quite frankly, there are going to be more to come.
The Elk Fire near Dayton and Sheridan is now up to 75,000 and is only 10% contained as of this morning. A forest fire broke out in this county yesterday afternoon.*
These fires aren't stopping until it snows, and daily temperatures are freakishly high for October.
Let's discuss subsidiarity.
Subsidiarity on this site is defined in the Catholic sense. It is an organizing principle that things (problems, matters, politics, economics) ought to be handled by the smallest, lowest or least centralized competent authority.
Least centralized competent authority, not the least centralized authority.
The most centralized competent authority can indeed be the Federal government for large disasters, particularly multistate disasters, and ones which require large sums of money that cannot be locally obtained.
That latter is particularly the case for Wyoming.
We can't afford these disasters on our own. We can't afford to fight them. We can't address what they destroy.
Wyomingites are on social media right now complaining that the country is ignoring us. Well, attention works two ways.
This upcoming 2025 Legislature is likely to see the House controlled by the "Wyoming" Freedom Caucus. The "Wyoming" Freedom Caucus basically wants to give the Federal Government the middle finger salute. But nobody in the state wants to tell Washington "no thanks, you keep your FEMA, Highway, FAA money, we'll do it on our own".
There's a word for lashing out when you don't get what you want, and see yourself as the center of things.
A tantrum, angry outburst, temper tantrum, lash out, meltdown, fit, or hissy fit is an emotional outburst, usually associated with those in emotional distress. It is typically characterized by stubbornness, crying, screaming, violence, defiance, angry ranting, a resistance to attempts at pacification, and, in some cases, hitting and other physically violent behavior. Physical control may be lost; the person may be unable to remain still; and even if the "goal" of the person is met, they may not be calmed. Throwing a temper tantrum can lead to a child getting detention or being suspended from school for older school age children, and can result in a timeout or grounding, complete with room or corner time, at home. A tantrum may be expressed in a tirade: a protracted, angry speech.
Wikipedia.
“Be careful what you wish for, lest it come true!”, Aesop counseled, and for a reason. And Sappho counseled "don't bite the hand that feeds you".
And, of course:
Pride goes before disaster, and a haughty spirit before a fall.
Proverbs 16:18.
We've been pretty proud here recently.
Footnotes:
*A message from the Game and Fish:
Sheridan – The Wyoming Game and Fish Department advises hunters that the Elk Fire in Sheridan County continues to grow, impacting wildlife habitat and access to certain hunt areas.
Hunt areas impacted by the fire or associated public access closures are currently located within Elk Hunt Areas 37 and 38 and Deer Hunt Areas 24 and 25. This is an active fire situation and these areas may change. Game and Fish is maintaining a fire information page for hunters and updating it regularly.
As of Oct. 5, 2024, the following Access Yes areas have been closed until further notice:
PK Lane Hunter Management Area.
Sheridan County Walk in Areas #8 and #12.
Game and Fish personnel are assisting public safety officials and fire suppression efforts as requested.
Personnel will assess impacts to Commission-owned properties and wildlife habitat when it is safe to do so.
Members of the public should be extra vigilant in watching for wildlife on roadways to avoid collisions, as animals may relocate to new areas where they usually aren’t expected.
Wildlife are generally adept at moving away from wildfires and the department has not received reports of injured animals at this time. Members of the public who see an injured animal can report the location to the Stop Poaching Hotline at 1-877-WGFD-TIP. The hotline operates 24 hours a day and reports are sent to the nearest wildlife manager to respond.
Yesterday, I made some observations on Denver, and today I'm doing the same on Labor Day, 2024.
Of course, it's immediately notable that I'm making these the day after Labor Day, which was a day I didn't get off. I worked a full day.
I was the only one in the office.
Labor Day dates back to the mid 1800s as an alternative to the more radical observance that takes place in many countries on May 1. Still, nonetheless, early on, and for a long time, there was a fair amount of radicalism associated with it during that period when American labor organizations were on the rise. The day itself being a widely recognized day off is due to organized strikes on the day that started occurring during the 1930s, to the day as sort of a "last day of summer holiday" is fairly new.
Even now, when people think of it, they often think of the day in terms of the sort of burly industrial workers illustrated by Leyendecker and Rockwell in the 20s through the 40s. Otherwise, they sort of blandly associate it with celebrating work in general, which gets to the nature of work in general, something we sort of touched on yesterday with this entry;
Early on, Labor Day was something that acknowledged a sort of worthy heavy work. There are, in spite of what people may think, plenty of Americans that still are engaged in that sort of employment, although its s shadow of the number that once did. Wyoming has a lot of people who do, because of the extractive industries, which are in trouble. Ironically, therefore, its notable that Wyoming is an epicenter of anti union feelings, when generally those engaged in heavy labor are pro union. There's no good explanation for that.
When Labor Day became a big deal it pitted organized labor against capital, with it being acknowledged by both sides that if things went too far one way or another, it would likely result in a massive labor reaction that would veer towards socialism, or worse, communism. Real communism has never been a society wide strong movement in the United States, in spite of the current stupid commentary by those on the political far right side of the aisle accusing anyone they don't like, and any program they don't like, of being communistic. But radical economics did hae influence inside of unions, and communists were a factor in some of them, which was well known. As nobody really wanted what that might mean, compromise gave us the post war economic world of the 50s and 60s, which were sort of a golden age for American economics.
One of the unfortunate byproducts of the Cold War era, however, was the exportation of jobs overseas, which brought us the economic regime we have today, in part. The advance of technology brought us the other part. Today we find the American economy is massively dominated by capital in a way it hasn't been for a century, and its not a good thing at all. The will to do anything about it, or even understand it, seems to be wholly lacking. As a result of that, while an increasing number of Americans slave away at meaningless jobs in cubicles, and the former shopkeeper class now works at Walmart, we have the absolutely bizarre spectacle of two Titans of Capital, Donald Trump and Elon Musk, spewing out populist rhetoric. Populism, of course, always gets co-opted, but the working and middle class falling for rhetoric from the extremely wealthy is not only bizarre, its' downright dumb.
Indeed, in the modern American economy, having your own is increasingly difficult. Entire former occupations that were once local have been totally taken over by large corporations while agriculture has fallen to the rich in terms of land ownership, making entry into either field impossible. Fewer and fewer "my own" occupations exist, and those that do are under siege.
One of those is the law, of course. Lawyers, because of the nature of their work, still tend to own their practices, as to medical professionals of all types. The latter are falling into large corporate entities, however, and the move towards taking down state borders in the practice is causing the consolidation of certain types of practice in the former.
Not that "having your own" in the professions is necessarily a sort of Garden of Eden either, however.
Recently, interestingly, there's been a big movement in which young people are returning to the trades. That strikes me as a good thing, and perhaps the trades are finally getting the due they deserve. Ever since World War Two there's been the concept that absolutely everyone had to achieve white collar employment, which demeaned blue collar employment, and which put a lot of people in occupations and jobs they didn't care for. I suspect the small farm movement reflects that too.
Indeed, on my first day of practicing law as a lawyer over thirty years ago the long time office manager, who must have been having sort of a bad day, made a comment like "you might just end up wishing you had become a farmer". I remember thinking to myself even then that if that had been an option, that's exactly what I would have become. It wasn't, and it never has been for me, in the full time occupation sort of way.
Oh well.
And so we lost the garden to labor in, but we can make things better than they are. And we could do that by taking a much more distributist approach to things. Which seems nowhere near close to happening, a populist uprising notwithstanding.
The Republican National Convention is into day three as of the time of this writing. It's a populist party now, and as others have been pointing out, it's shedding values, as all populist movements do, as rapidly as it once claimed them.
Populist movements are famously shallow, having no real political thesis behind them other than that the "will of the people" is right, because it must be. For this reason, they're also nearly universally co opted in the end by other movements. The American Populist movement of the late 19th Century was absorbed by the Progressive movement, which had a real thesis behind it. American Populist who hadn't been absorbed by first the Republicans of the Theodore Roosevelt era or by Democrats following the rise of Woodrow Wilson, ended up various far left wing movement of the 20s and 30s, including American Socialism and Communism, which again had a deeper thesis. The Communist road had already been laid for Populist in Russia, where populist movements against the Crown in the late 19th and early 20th Centuries ended up in revolution, with the revolution being co opted by the Bolsheviks, who again had a real thesis, and would absorb and destroy populism in their country. In the German Weimar Republic street level populsits, and they're always street level, would gravitate towards the KDP and the NADSP, with the Nazi's, which had a heavily populist element which again was amazingly think, winning out in the end. Post war debates on whether the Nazi Party was socialist or fascist miss the reality entirely, it was populist, making it the most successful populist party, in terms of gaining control of a major nation, of all times.
Because populism is shallow, in the end it only reflect the thin surface of a populace's culture, and often the worst elements of it, once it is allowed to establish itself. German populism yielded to insane racial theories and hatred and worshipped with fanatical loyalty the German Volk in the form of a single man, Adolf Hitler. Southern populism of the 20th Century had, as a claimed feature, a deep love of culture and Protestantism, but it also featured a profound prejudice against anyone who was not a white Protestant.
And so we've arrived at that point.
Donald Trump's rise was adopted by and backed by Christian Nationalist, who just held a convention within the last two weeks. Open about their desire to establish the United States as an exclusively Christian (Protestant) nation, they've seen Trump as a Cyrus the Great who is their divinely appointed ally. In the wake of last week's assassination attempt by a young registered Republican who, in numerous ways, demonstrated that he didn't know diddly about marksmanship, rank and file and more elite members of the movement have declared that Trump was saved by Devine Providence.
That may in fact be true, but it's worth remembering that Adolf Hitler was the target of 42 known assassination plots, more than one of which went right to the edge of success. It's also worth remembering that God does in fact work in mysterious ways, and God's acts don't necessarily corelate with human desires, and life may in fact be preserved for reasons we don't really grasp, but which do not necessarily equal our political goals.
At any rate, the Republican Convention in fact with numerous prayers offered by Christian clerics, including Catholic ones, who should be cautious about Christian Nationalism. But it's worth noting that it also opened by a prayer from a conservative Sikh female lawyer. I'm not saying that's not admirable, but the hardcore Protestant backers of a man who last year said that he would keep out of the country people who did not adhere to "our religion" are now scrambling to suggest that this isn't contrary to their view.
And beyond that, an opening speaker was one Amber Rose, about whom I know nothing other than that she has a pornographic past and present, and who does not seem to stand for anything that MAGA populist claim to is revealing. Essentially, she evokes the very type of "wokeism" that actually did give rise to the movement in significant ways, as people instinctively reacted to what they knew to be contrary to common sense and morality.
The point, therefore, at which a populist movement is absorbed into something else has been reached. The "conservative" element of populism has been boiled out. Now the Republican Party and the Populist movement stands for one thing only, Donald Trump. Almost anything that a person thinks Trump stands for is now suspect in additional. We already know, for example, a movement which was deeply opposed to abortion in a party that had been deeply opposed to abortion, has abandoned that plank, as Trump is wishy washy on the whole thing.
Not that there weren't signs of this already.
Nearly coincident with the conference on Christian Nationalism, the "Hawk tuah Girl" rose to temporary fame regarding her TikTok interview on engaging in fellatio. Deeply antithetical to Christian morality, she showed up shortly thereafter featured in Daisy Duke's al la Playboy helicopter scene from Apocalypse Now. This past week, as already noted, the RNC gave a prime speaking slot to a pro-abortion feminist and self-proclaimed slut whose claim to fame is having sex with rappers. It turns out, accordingly, that lots of rank and file MAGA adherents don't really have a concern for traditional morality, indeed, they're okay with immorality as long as its fairly conventional, or in the case of same sex marriage, with Don Jr. claims Don Sr. has always been in favor of, in spite of what he said post Obergefell, it's become conventional as our memories only stretch back to last week.
Hawk tuah.
Well, this isn't that surprising. Much of the "Christian" and "moral" nature of the current populist was paper thin. Donald Trump is a serial polygamist who took rides on the Lolita Express. Lots of ardent populists saluting Christian Nationalism have long ignored Matthew 19:9.
His life will grow out of the ground like the other lives of the place, and take its place among them. He will be with them - neither ignorant of them, nor indifferent to them, nor against them - and so at last he will grow to be native-born. That is, he must reenter the silence and the darkness, and be born again.
Wyoming has always had a very high transient population. Right from the onset, a lot of the people we associate with the state, actually weren't from here, and more significantly weren't from the region. Francis E. Warren, for example, the famous early Senator, wasn't. Joseph M. Carey wasn't. A person might note that they arrived sufficiently early that they hardly could have been, but this carries on to this very day. Sen. John Barrasso is a Pennsylvanian. Secretary of State Chuck Gray is a Californian.
This does matter, as you can't really ever be a native of the Northern Plains or the Plains if you weren't born and raised here. You might be able to convince yourself, and buy a big hat like Foster Freiss, but you aren't from here and more importantly aren't of here. If you came from Montana, or Nebraska, or rural Colorado, that's different. Or if you came in your early years, before you were out of school.
But earlier arrivals did try. They appreciated what they found, took the effort to grasp what it was, and sought to become native to this place.
The recent arrivals don't. They brought their homes and their attitudes with them.
They were fooling themselves that they were "Wyoming" anything.
Or were.
Recently, however, something else has been going on. Just as the Plains were invaded by European Americans in the 18th and 19th Centuries, Wyoming is enduring it again with an invasion of Southerners, Rust Belt denizens, and Californians, who image they have Wyoming's values while destroying them. One prominent Freedom Caucuser is really an Illinoisan with values so different from the native ones it's amazing she was elected, but then her district elected Chuck Gray as well, whose only connection with Wyoming is thin. They do represent, however, the values of recent immigrants.
Whether you like it or not, Wyomingites have not traditionally been hostile to the Federal Government, and we knew we depended upon it. Indeed, while one Wyoming politician may emphasize a narrative of being a fourth generation Wyomingite, and is, whose agricultural family pulled themselves up from the mule ears on their cowboy boots, and they did work hard, we can't get around the fact that the state was founded by the Federal Government which sent the Army in to kill or corral the original inhabitants and then gave a lot of the land away on a government assistance program.
Wyoming was formed, in part, by welfare.
The government helped bring in the railroads, helped support agriculture, built the roads, kept soldiers and later airmen and their paychecks at various places, funded the airports, and helped make leasing oil rights cheap so that they could be exploited.
No real Wyomingite hates the government, no matter how much they may pretend they do.
Populist do, as they're ignorant.
Wyoming's cultural ethos was, traditionally, "I don't care what the @#$#$ you do, as long as you leave me alone". The fables about Matthew Shepherd aside, people didn't really care much about what you did behind closed doors, but expected that you wouldn't try to force acceptance of it at a societal level. Wyoming was, and remains, for good or ill the least religious state in the United States. You could always find some devout members of various Protestant faiths, and devout and observant Catholics and Mormons have always been here. But the rise of the Protestant Evangelical churches is wholly new, and come in with Southerners. When I was growing up, a good friend of mine was a Baptist, the only one I knew, as the church was close to his house (now he's a Lutheran). I knew one of my friends was Lutheran, and there were some Mormon kids in school. There was one Jehovah's Witness. In junior high, one of my friends was sort of kind of Episcopalian, and I knew the son of the Orthodox Priest. By high school I knew the daughter of the Methodist minister. But outside of Mormon kids and Catholic kids, the religion of my colleagues was often a mystery.
I'm not saying the unchurched nature of the state was a good thing, but I am saying that by and large there was a dedicated effort to educate children and tolerance was a widely held value. It was a tolerance, as noted, that required people to keep their deviations from a societal norm to themselves. People who cheated on spouses, who were homosexuals, or any other number of things could carry on doing it, but not if they were going to demand you accepted it.
And frankly, that was a better way to approach things.
Now, that's being fought over.
The Freedom Caucus group might as well have Sweet Home Alabama as their theme song, and that's not a good thing.
On "X", fka "Twitter" a man who was the father to a large family of daughters (it was either 7 or 9), and who is very conservative, posted an item expressing relief for Taylor Swift.
His points were really good.
Populist right commentators are all up in arms about Swift right now, for reasons that are darned near impossible to discern. It seems to stem from her expressing support for Democratic candidates in the past, including Joe Biden in 2016. Well, guess what, she has a right to do that. You have a right to ignore it.
She also expressed support for abortion being legal. I feel it should be illegal. That doesn't mean she's part of a double secret left wing conspiracy.
But, and here's the thing, there are real reasons to admire her, or at least her presentation, and the father in question pointed it out. He'd endured taking his daughters to Miley Cyrus, Ariana Grande, "Lady Gaga" etc., and found them disturbing.
Indeed, they are.
Miley Cyrus went from a child actress to being a freakish figure posed nude on a ball, looking like she was a meth addict who was working in a strip club. Ariana Grande has at least one song that's out right graphic about illicit sex. Lady Gaga has made a career out of being freakish, until she couldn't any longer, and like Madonna is another woman who was the product of Catholic Schools who took to songs that are abhorrent in terms of Christian, let alone Catholic, morals.
Swift, in contrast, can only be criticized a bit for dressing semi provocatively on stage, but only somewhat so. Off-stage, she's always very modestly dressed. Indeed, she's a throwback, with her ruby red lipstick and classic nearly 1940s appearance.
And in terms of relationships, it's noted that she's dating a football player.
Now, we don't know what their private lives are like, but they're admirably keeping them private. It's hard to know what Swift's views are on most issues. And we really don't need to. But in their visible relationship, made visible to us only because of media fascination, they're quite proper. As the poster noted, the football star is "courting" her.
It's not that there's nothing to see here. There's nothing to see here which any conservative in their right mind wouldn't have an absolute freak out about. They're behaving exactly the way in public that supposedly Christian conservatives want dating couples to do. No piercings, no weird tattoos, no scanty clothing.
Which would all suggest all the angst is about something else, and what that is probably about is the secret knowledge that huge numbers of real conservatives can't stand Donald Trump and won't vote for him.
The Andy Griffith Show
I was at lunch two days ago at a local Chinese restaurant, and across the way an all adult family was discussing the plot of the prior night's Andy Griffith Show rerun. It struck me that that may not have happened since the 1960s.
It's interesting.
The Andy Griffith Show went off the air before the Great Rural Purge in Television, but not my much. It ran from 1960 to 1968. It was consistently focused on the rural South, and it felt like it depicted the 1950s, which it never did, save for the fact that what we think of as the 60s really started in about 1955 and ran to about 1964. Indeed, while the show was in tune with the times in 1960, it really wasn't in 1968.
But that in tune with the times is what strikes me here. The family was speaking of it as if it was a currently running show, not like it was something from 60 years ago. That suggests that in some ways people have groped their way back in the dark to idealizing the world as it was depicted then, rural, lower middle class, devoid of an obsession with sex (although it does show up subtly in the show from time to time), and divorce a rarity.
Now, the world wasn't prefect in 1960 by any means. But the show didn't pretend to depict a perfect world, only one that was sort of a mirror on the world view of its watchers. To some degree, that world view had returned.
Epilog
The Taylor Swift story also appears on the most recent entries for City Father and Uncle Mike's Musings, both of which are linked in on this site.
