Some States seem to have had enough..

J

jetboatdeath

Blue Belt
Joined
Nov 17, 2005
Messages
253
Reaction score
9
Sounds about right. I think that the Federal Government needs to know that the states have power as well and threat of separation from the Union should be a viable outcome.

However, that's not the case anymore. I doubt that any one State could stand on its own two legs and make it work without internal strife and general instability.

Say a State separates from the USA through legislation and popular vote. What does that do to the people within that State? Americans have come a long way from being just Virginians, Missourians, and New Jersey-oids. They're just Americans. To strip that kind of identity away from an entire populace seems a bit ludicrous and would need some sort of drastic catalyst outside of some guy who doesn't even post his own name when writing the article.

Now consider the immediate deficit a supposed new State-Turned-Nation would accrue, since it's accumulated X amount of money in United States Federal taxes. They're going to have to pay that back in time; at least all the Federal money spent on that particular state within recent history. Would an aspiring Sovereign State want something like that? I don't think so.

Again, something drastic has to happen. Like another Civil War, or thwarted invasion by another country. Then that State could legitimately call shenanigans on the US, claim No Confidence in the Federal government, and attain Sovereignty without the social and economical fallout that would occur of that State were to separate from the Union through legislation.

Ultimately, the Federal government needs individual states to operate like agents of the Federal government. Yes, it takes away from the uniqueness of the states, but it does grease the gears that keep this country running. It also means that the States themselves need the Federal government for trade, travel, and culture... Because Americans are a melting pot... of curry. And regardless of the base meat in said curry... it's still curry. So what's the point of taking the beef out?

I like my curry with beef ;P
 
Typical crybaby bullcrap.

When Clinton was President and Congress was Democratic the Republicans were screaming "STATES RIGHTS! STATES RIGHTS!"

When they took over Congress the calls got quieter. All of a sudden the Speaker of the House was, to quote Newt Gingrich "co-equal with the President"

When they had the White House and Congress and the Supreme Court they praised Federal Power to the heavens. Even powers specifically denied to the Federal government could be overruled by the "Unitary Executive".

When they lost control of Congress Bush's cronies spouted errant nonsense about how the President couldn't be overruled by a, and I quote, "subordinate branch of government".

Now that they've lost they have started whining and whimpering about States Rights again.

It all comes down to one thing: Anything that gives Republicans power is right no matter how absurd the legal justification. Anything no matter how popular that denies them supreme and unquestioned power is wrong.

That's been their only consistent position since the 1930s when they tried to overthrow the duly elected government through a failed military coup.
 
All states have to do to avoid unfunded extra-constitutional mandates is avoid taking the federal money that the feds use as a stick. Often highway funds, sometimes other funds. I don't have a lot of respect for any states who cry and moan, but then buckle under when the money might get taken away.
 
Empty Hands said:
All states have to do to avoid unfunded extra-constitutional mandates is avoid taking the federal money that the feds use as a stick. Often highway funds, sometimes other funds. I don't have a lot of respect for any states who cry and moan, but then buckle under when the money might get taken away.
Click to expand...

Some states did this when the federal guidelines stated that they meet No Child Left Behind requirenents. They said that it would cost them more than federal dollars would support. Being in a donor state, Michigan, it pains me that we didn't withhold federal dollars.

The federal government has held federal dollars over our head to fund unconstitutional endeavors for too long. They take from the states and then say they are giving back to have us meet federal mandates.
 
Sovereignty resolutions by themselves have all of the effect and importance of declaring the O -ficial State Junk Snack to be Ding-Dongs.

But I do sense the destinations where some will take this, and my reaction is: Great! A Civil War! Just what we need to cure our problems!!!

Anyone wet dreaming about this scenario should read something more in depth than Wiki about what our first one was like....
 
I predict, much hot air, and much ado about nada.
 
Upping the ante

http://patdollard.com/2009/02/new-h...eatens-counterstrike-against-breach-of-peace/

The New Hampshire state legislature took an unbelievably bold step Monday by introducing a resolution to declare certain actions by the federal government to completely totally void and warning that certain future acts will be viewed as a “breach of peace” with the states themselves that risks “nullifying the Constitution.”

This act by New Hampshire is a clear warning to the federal government that they could face being stripped of their power by the States (presumably through civil war!

The remarkable document outlines with perfect clarity, some basics long forgotten. For instance, it reminds Congress “That the Constitution of the United States, having delegated to Congress a power to punish treason, counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States, piracies, and felonies committed on the high seas, and offences against the law of nations, slavery, and no other crimes whatsoever;. . . . . therefore all acts of Congress which assume to create, define, or punish crimes, other than those so enumerated in the Constitution are altogether void, and of no force;”...
Click to expand...
 
I can't help but wonder how many of our problems would be resolved simply by letting California secede from the Union - and take Nancy ****ing Pelosi with them.
 
Wild Bill said:
It shames me to see that Texas is not on the list.
Click to expand...

I thought Texas already had it hammered out, and something about having a legal loophole that allows them to leave the Union? Maybe I misread it, or maybe it was complete BS though, who knows.
 
CoryKS said:
I can't help but wonder how many of our problems would be resolved simply by letting California secede from the Union - and take Nancy ****ing Pelosi with them.
Click to expand...

California is a net exporter of federal dollars, source of a big chunk of the fresh food, and by itself the 8th or so largest economy in the world. In other words, it would create problems, not solve them.
 
Empty Hands said:
California is a net exporter of federal dollars, source of a big chunk of the fresh food, and by itself the 8th or so largest economy in the world. In other words, it would create problems, not solve them.
Click to expand...

Oops, my bad. Let me fix that:

I can't help but wonder how many of our problems would be resolved simply by letting California secede from the Union - and take the ****ing federal government with them.
 
Empty Hands said:
California is a net exporter of federal dollars,
Click to expand...

Maybe I misunderstand, how is EXPORTING our money a good thing? Wouldn't we WANT the money to stay in the U.S. to boost the U.S. economy?
 
Cryozombie said:
Maybe I misunderstand, how is EXPORTING our money a good thing? Wouldn't we WANT the money to stay in the U.S. to boost the U.S. economy?
Click to expand...

Sorry for the misunderstanding. What I meant is that California contributes more money to the federal government than it receives in federal benefits or other spending. Ironically enough, many of the heavily conservative states in the South and Midwest receive more federal money than they contribute.
 
many of the heavily conservative states in the South and Midwest receive more federal money than they contribute.
Click to expand...

So conservative states are smarter?
 
Texas can't leave yet. I havent moved there yet. Soon as I do, Cast Off!!!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Dividing up the country.

Previous Thread

dividing up the country, pt II

Next Thread

Similar threads

Xue Sheng
Happiest States
Replies
1
Views
748
granfire
granfire
hardheadjarhead
Other Marriages, other Laws. A brief history.
Replies
1
Views
1K
Feisty Mouse
Feisty Mouse
K
Learn Your State Motto
Replies
6
Views
992
andurilking2
A
Cruentus
Reciprocity agreements...
Replies
13
Views
2K
Carol
Carol
Bob Hubbard
  • Poll
2012 US Presidential Election - Pick a winner.
Replies
12
Views
2K
billc
B

Latest Discussions

Back
Top