10th amendment movement and Texas talking secession comes to mind.
I have to disagree with the author on the issue of charity. Americans can be very generous, example of tsunami relief is a perfect. We just don't like giving charity to people who can certainly provide a measure of their own keep. We also believe in certain amount of sleeping in the bed you make.
"Texas" isn't talking secession -- its governor is trolling for conservative votes because he's squaring off with a more-competent RiNO than he is for election next year.
Conservative votes, I might add, that he doesn't deserve based on his record and certain "lifestyle" issues of his own.
As for the 10th Amendment, the Ninth and 10th Amendments were intended to serve as baffles against federal government becoming "central" government, which latter concept is obviously the one this Russian is most comfortable with, based on his own experience.
Relationship-seeking for federal patronage conduits with individual voters was a hallmark of FDR's New Deal and LBJ's Great Society politics. It needs to be undone for many reasons, some of which this Russian refers to -- the tendency of local eleemosynary and civic-boosterism resources to atrophy in the face of rivers of federally-directed political patronage dollars, for example. (Ee.g.: federal welfare, federal revenue-sharing, Medicare and Social Security, Obama's "Soviet medicine" proposals, Head Start child-minding (federal nanny-state, literally!), HUD Chapter 8 housing programs, No Child Left Behind, and so on.)