[Hanoi5]

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/...ble/#more-47864

This may even be fake, but you never know...

[PassedOut]

I saw this too and classified it under regular political hyperbole. As I recall, Gov. Palin's husband supported Alaska leaving the union also. Hot air like this rises now and then.

[Gerben42]

It's possible, sure. But I don't think you'll get enough votes for it. And what will the USA say about it?

Belgium has been in a state of thinking about splitting up for some time now, but it's still in one piece.

[kfay]

When Texas was admitted to the Union I believe it was included in their Constitution that they could secede from the Union at any time if there was a 2/3 vote in the state Congress.

I'm not certain of the particulars involved but it is indeed true, and only true for the state of Texas.

When it comes to this sort of thing, Texas is really full of itself. It is also the only state in the Union that can fly its flag at the same height as that of the US flag.

[vuroth]

Pretty sure they ruled up here that Quebec couldn't secede without paying down it's portion, per capita, of the national debt.

That kind of hurts.

[Gerben42]

Quote

That kind of hurts.

No it doesn't. It just means the "new state" starts with the same national debt per capita as the old one.

[Al_U_Card]

Gerben42, on Apr 16 2009, 02:05 PM, said:

Quote

That kind of hurts.

No it doesn't. It just means the "new state" starts with the same national debt per capita as the old one.

The "péquiste" government had been salting away money and increasing the assets of the investment arm of the Caisse de dépôt in expectation of trying to calm the world financial markets in the wake of a 50% + 1 vote on "sovereignty-association".

Fortunately for my government (Québec) pension, the vote went against them. (phew!)

I had the opportunity to speak with Pierre Trudeau about the purpose and effect of bilingualism and biculturalism on Canadian society. I agree with him 100% on all aspects of the benefits far out-weighing the costs. It was a fun chat.

[gwnn]

If Chuck Norris runs for president of Texas, it will surely secede per force.

[jdonn]

I was actually in favor of the idea, who needs them and it would dramatically shorten the US - Mexico border. But then I saw we would lose Chuck Norris so now I'm opposed.

[Al_U_Card]

Texas will vote to secede to join Chuck Norris.

[blackshoe]

kfay, on Apr 16 2009, 12:33 PM, said:

When Texas was admitted to the Union I believe it was included in their Constitution that they could secede from the Union at any time if there was a 2/3 vote in the state Congress.

Not so. The original Joint Resolution of Congress by which Texas was offered annexation contained this provision

Quote

New States of convenient size not exceeding four in number, in addition to said State of Texas and having sufficient population, may, hereafter by the consent of said State, be formed out of the territory thereof, which shall be entitled to admission under the provisions of the Federal Constitution; and such states as may be formed out of the territory lying south of thirty-six degrees thirty minutes north latitude, commonly known as the Missouri Compromise Line, shall be admitted into the Union, with or without slavery, as the people of each State, asking admission shall desire; and in such State or States as shall be formed out of said territory, north of said Missouri Compromise Line, slavery, or involuntary servitude (except for crime) shall be prohibited.

There is nothing, however, in the resolution about Texas being allowed to secede.

The US government has, since Lincoln at least, held that states have no right to secede. Lincoln, of course, backed up that opinion with armed force - successfully.

[helene_t]

The comments at the page linked in the OP are full of drama, people calling it "treason" and talking about respect for the the land their ancestors died for yada yada.

I simply don't understand how people can be so emotional about countries. If (insert random country or province here) decided to leave the UK, Netherlands, Denmark or the EU, it might make me a little happy or a little sad depending on whether said region contributes positively to said union or not, and it would certainly raise some questions about how to split up government assets and liabilities, and many other practical things, but I wouldn't deny any country's or region's people the right to decide for themselves, and the thought of some union becoming bigger or smaller wouldn't have much emotional impact on me. Who says big is beautiful anyway?

[mike777]

"I simply don't understand how people can be so emotional about countries..."

I understand that people do not understand how people can be so emotional about countries. I understand that people do not understand how people can feel a DUTY to a country. But clearly many do.


"...but I wouldn't deny any country's or region's people the right to decide for themselves, and the thought of some union becoming bigger or smaller wouldn't have much emotional impact on me. Who says big is beautiful anyway?"


Of course this brings up the issue of how to protect those minorities rights vs the rights of the majority. Or to rephrase when, if ever, should the wants/desires/rights of the minority voting group outweigh that majority vote?

[Aberlour10]

Gerben42, on Apr 16 2009, 12:26 PM, said:

Belgium has been in a state of thinking about splitting up for some time now, but it's still in one piece.

Due to these todays strong and serious secessionist tendencies in Belgium is interesting to know how Roosevelt thought about it as a new ,"after war" Europe....was in planning:

Quote

"In Belgium there are two communities. One are called Walloons and they speak French, the others are called Flemings and they speak a kind of low Dutch. They can't live together. After the war, we should make two states, one known as Walloonia and one as Flamingia, and we should amalgamate Luxembourg with Flamingia. What do you say to that?"

US President Franklin D. Roosevelt to Oliver Lyttelton (Lord Chandos) of the British War Cabinet, 1942

[mike777]

"the thought of some union becoming bigger or smaller wouldn't have much emotional impact on me."


Assume you are an owner of 10,000 acres of ranchland in Texas, USA rather than a renter/employee. On day minus one Texas and USA make a treaty promising full property rights to solve practical matters. Day zero, texas majorityvotes to secede and does so. Day plus one Texas passes a legally new law which makes it legal to take my 10k acres for the good of the Texas majority and cancels the treaty. btw I voted to not secede.

It may help in some of these posts if people think like an owner not simply another employee/ renter.

[jdonn]

mike777, on Apr 16 2009, 06:26 PM, said:

"the thought of some union becoming bigger or smaller wouldn't have much emotional impact on me."


Assume you are an owner of 10,000 acres of ranchland in Texas, USA rather than a renter/employee. On day minus one Texas and USA make a treaty promising full property rights to solve practical matters. Day zero, texas majorityvotes to secede and does so. Day plus one Texas passes a legally new law which makes it legal to take my 10k acres for the good of the Texas majority and cancels the treaty. btw I voted to not secede.

It may help in some of these posts if people think like an owner not simply another employee/ renter.

The impact of the plight of this person and others like him would be offset by the plight of the majority who wants to secede if they can't do so. We call that a democracy. If you are bothered that the decision is not unanimous then you have very high standards.

[mike777]

"Of course this brings up the issue of how to protect those minorities rights vs the rights of the majority. Or to rephrase when, if ever, should the wants/desires/rights of the minority voting group outweigh that majority vote?"




"Madison had thought that the greatest safeguard against the tyranny of the majority was the large number of sects and divergences of interests and opinions that divided people in ways that made it virtually impossible for coalitions to form stable majorities"


http://www.garlikov....ajorityrule.htm



http://www.helium.com/knowledge/121211-the...ny-of-democracy


jonstewart video

http://airamerica.com/blog/2009/apr/08/jon...democracy-video

[hrothgar]

mike777, on Apr 17 2009, 02:49 AM, said:

"Madison had thought that the greatest safeguard against the tyranny of the majority was the large number of sects and divergences of interests and opinions that divided people in ways that made it virtually impossible for coalitions to form stable majorities."

Is anyone claiming that the Texas secessionists are "stable" in any way, shape, or form? What a bunch of whack jobs...

On a more serious note: It seems clear that Madison was using the word "stable" to describe temporal affairs. You can probably gin up a majority that will agree with policy XYZ for a short period of time. However, said group will inevitably splinter over time.

What's truly remarkable about whats going on right now is how quickly things are moving... Obama has been president for what? Two monthes? And the poor aggrieved teabaggers have already been oppressed so badly that they're talking about gathering up all their toys and going home...

I'm just sorry that all the nuts are so scattered... If they were all concentrated into one State, I'd be happy to let them leave. As is, if we let Texas go we immediately have to deal with some kind of civil war in Texas, as all the urban population centers immediate seceed from Texas and try to rejoin the United States.

Maybe we should just declare Oklahoma to be no man's land... Put a big fence around the state, evacuate anyone who wants to leave, and write the territory off. Anyone who wants to seceed from the US or "go Galt" or whatever else is welcome to set up shop in Oklahoma.

Sadly, I suspect that we'd need to start shipping in foreign aid within a matter of months.

[jdonn]

This reminds me of the Family Guy episode with Petoria.

[luke warm]

i think if texas seceeded they'd get along just fine... the trouble with it is, it might give other states the same idea