TexasCHLforum.com

Mrs. joe817 sent me this article from the Washington Post this morning . There's absolutely no chance that ANY kind of action will be taken IMO. But thought this is an interesting article. And no, I'm not advocating this in any size, shape or fashion.

"When Texas Republicans assemble for their state convention next month, it’s possible they will debate whether Texas should secede from the United States.

There’s almost no chance Texas Republicans will actually vote in favor of seceding, mind you — not least because most of the party wants nothing to do with this — but the fact we’re even mentioning secession and the Texas GOP convention in the same sentence suggests that the once-fringe movement has become a priority for at least some conservative grass-roots Texans."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the ... f-serious/

No need for it right now IMHO, but it doesn't hurt to have a plan in place.

One of my buddies wears a t-shirt that says, "Secede? ****, You're lucky we don't invade!" printed over the familiar outline of the state.

I think the article is just something the WP likes to scare its readers with - "Those crazy Texans! You know, where Ted Cruz is from!" --

JALLEN wrote:One of my buddies wears a t-shirt that says, "Secede? ****, You're lucky we don't invade!" printed over the familiar outline of the state.

-- but I'd love to have a T-shirt like that.

ETA: Heh.

It's an interesting thought experiment if nothing else. To me, there are two fundamental questions that would impact the feasibility of a secession.

1. How would the federal government react?

2. What other states / counties, etc., would join Texas? Would all of Texas secede, or just a portion?

On #1, it would be a tad bit hypocritical if the federal government tried to stop secession by force. It might be hard to reconcile this with the U.S. government's position on the right to self government by other countries (Ukraine is an example) that were once part of another country. In a perfect world, the federal government would respect the wishes of the people living in an area, who vote for secession. They would then negotiate reasonable trade agreements, and agreements for immigration, transport, etc. Texas has it's own power grid, so we may not need to negotiate much in the way of power sales, depending on the answer to #2, of course.

If the federal government is likely to respond with military force, like the last time this came up, then I personally think it isn't worth the effort.

#2 could impact our need / positioning for trade agreements with other nations, and possibly military needs as well.

Assuming friendly relations with the U.S., I think an independent Texas could potentially thrive. We would lure businesses from the U.S. with lower taxes, and an educated work force. We also have a strong enough military to protect Texas. Probably not strong enough to get overly involved in foreign wars, though. There would be turmoil during the transition, but long term it might just work OK.

Soccerdad1995 wrote: Assuming friendly relations with the U.S., I think an independent Texas could potentially thrive. We would lure businesses from the U.S. with lower taxes, and an educated work force. We also have a strong enough military to protect Texas. Probably not strong enough to get overly involved in foreign wars, though. There would be turmoil during the transition, but long term it might just work OK.

Fiscally Texas is in much better shape than most and that WITHOUT a state income tax. We would lure businesses from the U.S. and our leaving would be a huge financial loss and a continued threat for more financial loss. That's the bottom line why the U.S. would never sit back and allow Texas to leave. It always comes down to money. I think there are many counties in which the vote wouldn't carry and it would end up splintering the state if it came up. The US would definitely meet any effort to leave with military force (IMO). But it does make an interesting article and discussion.

Can we force the liberals and democrats to move out of the state if it happened?

I see this as DOA action, symbolic in nature and rightfully so, but practically non-deployable at this time.

We can't even agree on OC vs. CC on this very forum, and we are just a subset of the State. I'd love to see majority of Texans come to a agreeable practical resolution on this


Interesting and appealing proposition during these times however.

Soccerdad1995 wrote:It's an interesting thought experiment if nothing else. To me, there are two fundamental questions that would impact the feasibility of a secession.

1. How would the federal government react?

2. What other states / counties, etc., would join Texas? Would all of Texas secede, or just a portion?

1. I believe they would react with force. I don't believe that even if a perfectly legitimate case was presented and we attempted to do it peacefully they would allow it, and definitely not lying down.

2. Hard to say if other states would attempt to join. I don't think the average Texan is ready to accept succession much less some of the less liberty minded states. If Texas was to Succeed I believe it would be the entire state - don't think it would work if we didn't take that liberal haven called Austin with us

I was on board decades ago. Just sayin'...

Let Hillary win and put her "people" on the Supreme Court, then revisit this issue.

Chas.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:Let Hillary win and put her "people" on the Supreme Court, then revisit this issue.

Chas.

In the mean time, I am ordering a shirt so I can have something to wear if we have to revisit the issue.

Aside from the political issues, and even absent the use of force by the US Government, I don't think Texas could stand on its own economically, not at the level we would like.

Now if we could take some states with us, like Oklahoma and Arkansas for buffers, and the old southern states, then we might have a chance, as long as we avoid an all-out war with the north again. We might even take Utah and Arizona along in terms of political amity, which would mean New Mexico too, altho they wouldn't like it much, I think.

Was a bad idea 156 years ago and it's a bad idea today. Take the Federal government back with the methods that the founders laid out...elections, amendments, convention of the states...

I don't believe we'll have to secede. I've already aired my dystopian view of the nation's future on a number of occasions. I could fill a book on this subject because I've spent a lot of time thinking and writing about it, but in as condensed a version as I can make it, it is this:

As the distant federal gov't in DC becomes more and more grasping, it angers more and more people in liberty-loving states. As they become angrier against the federal gov't, it becomes less and less relevant to them, and they begin to act less and less in line with its dictates. Eventually, the nation begins to subdivide into semiautonomous regions of "like-minded" states which have contiguous borders. For instance, Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Louisiana, and possibly Missouri and Mississippi might form one such region. The states comprising these semiautonomous regions will still be part of the United States, and the federal gov't still exists in theory, but the federal gov't becomes increasingly less relevant to their governance as the states of each region begin to negotiate directly among themselves in terms of cooperative commerce, resource management, and other measures, cutting the feds out of the process. These semiautonomous regions will begin to negotiate and treat with other regions for the commerce and resources that do not exist within their own. For example, what can tiny Vermont do to coerce Texas to sell Texan oil to Vermont? Nothing. BUT.... we can offer to trade them some oil in exchange for maple syrup. In case you can't see what's happening, it's that the federal gov't stops being able to use the Commerce Clause to regulate every little action we take. Each state keeps electing representatives to DC, but the state governments become more relevant to The People, and the power of federal office over our affairs diminishes tremendously. They can pass all the crappy laws they want, but it won't mean anything because people no longer care what happens in DC.

At some point, the federal bureaucracies, Congress, SCOTUS, and POTUS wake up and realize that they have to do something to either reestablish their relevance, or concede that their day in the sun is over, and fade away. To reestablish their relevance, they have to get the attention of those regions. They can't do it by force, not when the national military is made up of personnel from those regions, whose personal loyalties are beginning to transfer to their regions of origin rather than the federal gov't. What group of yankees wants to take a train ride to the south to be slaughtered by Texans and Okies? Exactly none.......and in no small part because the yankees are trying to make their own thing work. If they have to deal with us, they'd rather it be over trade agreements rather than rifle sights.........as we should too...... So, the only way that the federal gov't can continue to exist and an entity with any influence at all, is to conceded that they have been going about it all wrong. If they can't force compliance, then they have to do it with reason. Not the "reason" of policy wonks and party apparatchiks, but the kind of reason that concedes that the other side has a legitimate complaint against them, and that the feds will have to win back their trust. Personally, I wouldn't give them that trust back until I see a term limiting Constitutional amendment for Congress, and the reduction of federal judicial appointments - including to SCOTUS - from lifetime appointments to limited terms. Judicial terms should be long enough to decouple them from the political process to the extent possible, but short enough so that no presidential appointment to SCOTUS can set the course of the nation for decades to come.

If they can't make those kinds of changes, then I think it is best that the federal gov't perish, and that these semiautonomous regions become new independent nations.

There are details to be filled in, but that's a general overview of what I think is down the road if the federal gov't doesn't pull its head out of its nether regions.