Wyoming is heading into one of the most consequential election years in a generation. We have an open U.S. House seat, an open U.S. Senate seat, and we will elect a new governor.
That means voters are about to appoint three of the most powerful offices in the state—offices that exist not to glorify the people who hold them, but to serve the people by upholding the principles of federalism and the separation of powers.
And yet, listening to the early rhetoric from some of the candidates, I’m not hearing a commitment to that duty. I’m sensing something far more troubling: a willingness to trade away the authority of the office they seek in exchange for proximity to power. I’m hearing people who want the title, the prestige, the status, and the applause—but not the burden of pushing back against unconstitutional overreach.
I’m hearing people who would rather please a president or a party gatekeeper than defend the Constitution they claim to revere.
That’s not public service. That’s idolatry—the worship of the golden calf of power.
And it’s exactly how Washington has gotten away with hollowing out the Constitution in plain sight.
Let’s start with the economy, because that’s where the con is most advanced. For decades, Wyomingites argued about “tax‑and‑spend liberals.” At least that debate was honest. When the government taxes you directly, you can see the tax bill. You know exactly what is being taken from you with ease, and you can hold someone accountable.
But Washington discovered a better trick. They realized they don’t need to tax you directly to spend your money. They can borrow-and-spend instead. In fact, they can give you tax breaks, acting like a hero and claiming to save you money. But their tax breaks aren’t accompanied by less spending. The enormous bill still lands on your kitchen table—and you’re expected to pay.
Because taxing you directly is hard, Congress makes an easier decision to borrow the money from the federal reserve, acting like your wallet was spared.
Except you still pay for the spending, AND what it costs to borrow the money. Instead of calling it a tax, they give it a softer name: “inflation.” Unlike a tax, however, you don’t really know it’s impact on your wallet, and Congress knows this.
When Congress borrows money from the Fed, new money magically springs into existence. Every new dollar they create makes every existing dollar you hold worth less—taking more dollars to purchase the same amount goods and services. Translation: your groceries cost more. Your utilities cost more.
Your savings buy less. That loss of purchasing power IS the tax. Hidden in plain sight, it’s the most dishonest form of taxation imaginable because you can’t easily quantify it, you can’t track it, and you can’t vote against it.
This is what happens when elected officials worship power instead of exercising it responsibly. You get sold out, and once you see the pattern, you see it everywhere
Take war powers. The Constitution is explicit: only Congress can declare war, and only the President can command the war. If a legislative panel started giving battlefield orders, the President would not stand for—and rightly so. Yet presidents of both parties have declared war on their own, and Congress has let them.
Why does Congress have the power to decide war? Because they most directly represent the people, and citizens are the ones who determine if we will go to war and how to pay for it—not just a single man. T
oday we are watching a war unfold in Iran without a single member of Congress being required to stand up and say “yes” or “no” on behalf of the people that will bleed and pay for it.
Our gubernatorial candidates should answer a simple, unavoidable question: Will you authorize our Wyoming Guardsmen to shed their blood and die in a foreign war that Congress has not authorized? If they cannot answer that clearly, they are not fit to wear the title they seek.
The same dynamic is creeping into our elections. The SAVE Act, despite its good intentions, represents another federal intrusion into an area the Constitution reserves to the states.
Wyoming already has strong election integrity laws. We don’t need Washington and states like California to “fix” what isn’t broken in Wyoming. And once the federal government inserts itself into state‑run elections, it never retreats. Today, the change seem innocuous because a Republican is in charge, but later on a Democrat will use that power against Wyoming to push a contrary policy.
Our House and Senate candidates should answer the questions that actually matter: Will you protect Wyoming and its interests against other states that want to tell us how to govern ourselves and run our elections?
Will you exercise a duty of loyalty to the legislative branch as Wyoming’s representative, and stand against power grabs by the President—regardless of their party affiliation?
Will you uphold the principles of federalism, protect Wyoming, and represent her interests against the centralization of power in Washington?
These are not trick questions. They are the minimum expectations of anyone who wants to represent Wyoming.
Borrow‑and‑spend economics. Unauthorized wars. Federal usurpation. These are not isolated policy debates.
They are three fronts in the same quiet constitutional coup—a slow, steady erosion of the structure that once protected the people from the ambitions of the powerful.
The government has no inherent rights or power of its own. Whatever limited power our government officers have, it is granted to them by the people via the constitution. Wyoming cannot afford to appoint people to positions of authority who will participate in that erosion; who surrender their office’s power, or try to usurp the authority of another.
Both are an assault against the people who define, limit, and empower their positions.
We need servants who will champion and defend the authority granted to them, not surrender it. Leaders who will push back against unconstitutional power grabs, not enable them. Stewards who understand that public office is not a pathway to personal glory but a trust—a sacred one—granted by the people and enshrined in the Constitution.
The Constitution is not self‑executing. It requires guardians. And if Wyoming doesn’t choose guardians, we shouldn’t be surprised when Washington continues to take more than it was ever given—whether in dollars, in war powers, or in control over state matters.
Scott Clem can be reached at: ScottClem@live.com
