States Petition to Secede From Union

[AUChizad]

 

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57548572/states-petition-to-secede-from-union/

States petition to secede from union

They don't want to take their country back. They just want to leave it behind.

As the dust settles in the wake of President Obama's decisive reelection last Tuesday, the White House petition website has been flooded by a series of secession requests, with malcontents from New Jersey to North Dakota submitting petitions to allow their states to withdraw from the union.

Most of the petitions submitted thus far have come from solidly conservative states, including most of the Deep South and reliably separatist Texas. But a handful come from the heart of blue America - relatively progressive enclaves like Oregon and New York.

All told, petitions have been filed on behalf of 20 states: Alabama, Arkansas, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oregon, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Texas.

Many of the petitions invoke the Declaration of Independence's dramatic assertion that "Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it, and institute new Government."

The petitions have been submitted through the White House's "We the People" website, which aims to give "all Americans a way to engage their government on the issues that matter to them." The White House promises that "If a petition meets the signature threshold, it will be reviewed by the Administration and we will issue a response." The threshold is 25,000 signatures in 30 days and, at the time of this article's publication, none of the secession petitions have reached the threshold (the Texas petition has received over 22,000 and needs to hit 25,000 by Dec. 9; Louisiana, with just under 15,000 signatures, needs to hit the threshold by Dec. 7.)

For some of the states represented, the secession requests are nothing novel: South Carolina, the state whose 1860 secession sparked the civil war, is hardly an unlikely locus of conservative angst in response to Mr. Obama's victory.

And in Texas, which still conceives of itself as a "republic," not a mere "state," politicians seem to make an almost annual show of flirting with secession, periodically dropping dark hints that Washington's chicanery may force the Lone Star state to flee the Union.

After repeatedly nodding at the possibility of secession in the last few years, Gov. Rick Perry, R-Tex., has more recently kept mum on the subject. But some local GOP officials in Texas have been happy to fill the void: Tom Head, a county judge from Lubbock predicted in August that Obama's reelection could lead to a second civil war. And the treasurer of the Hardin County Republican Party, Peter Morrison, asked in a post-election newsletter, "Why should Vermont and Texas live under the same government?" Morrison's newsletter requested an "amicable divorce" from the "maggots" who reelected President Obama, many of them voting on an "ethnic basis."

The Texas petition assails the federal government's "neglect to reform domestic and foreign spending," arguing that "it is practically feasible for Texas to withdraw from the union, and to do so would protect it's citizens' standard of living and re-secure their rights and liberties in accordance with the original ideas and beliefs of our founding fathers which are no longer being reflected by the federal government."

But some political officials in the states involved are not so eager to hop onboard the secession bandwagon, post-election angst or not. Morrison's boss, Hardin County GOP Chairman Kent Batman, explained, "People around here are asking why Texas is so different from the rest of the country, why we see things so differently...but I don't think a lot of people here are saying we ought to leave the Union."

Asked about Morrison's newsletter comments, the Fort Worth Star-Telegram reports that Batman sighed and replied, "Wow...OK, well, I guess I need to start taking a look at his newsletters."

[GH2001]

If a state legitimately thinks the 10th amendment is being disregarded and the Feds are overstepping their bounds (which they are and have been since Fdr), I don't have an issue with a state exploring that desire. I've been saying for a while this country will eventually split in two. Depending on which political philosophy one subscribes to they would have a choice in which place they would rather live. I don't see it being such a bad thing as long as another civil war doesn't erupt.

After all, the states did form the federal govt, or the Union.

[War Eagle!!!]

This is the thing Chad. I don't agree with this shit either, but the fact is that this country is digging a hole for itself that we may not be able to get out of. We are $16 Trillion in debt. That shit doesn't buff out. How the hell is America going to survive if we continue to go down the path we are on?

We had a chance to possibly change the direction we were going, but we didn't. And people are fed up with it.

I don't agree with people wanting to secede, but people are pissed and that is the only thing that they can do especially when they feel their vote and their state don't matter to the rest of the US.

[GH2001]

This is the thing Chad. I don't agree with this shit either, but the fact is that this country is digging a hole for itself that we may not be able to get out of. We are $16 Trillion in debt. That shit doesn't buff out. How the hell is America going to survive if we continue to go down the path we are on?

We had a chance to possibly change the direction we were going, but we didn't. And people are fed up with it.

I don't agree with people wanting to secede, but people are pissed and that is the only thing that they can do.

Agree. Seceding is a nuclear option. Some feel like its the only option left and I can't fault them for feel like they are being pinned in a corner and not wanting to go down on a sinking ship.

[Townhallsavoy]

This is the thing Chad. I don't agree with this shit either, but the fact is that this country is digging a hole for itself that we may not be able to get out of. We are $16 Trillion in debt. That shit doesn't buff out. How the hell is America going to survive if we continue to go down the path we are on?

We had a chance to possibly change the direction we were going, but we didn't. And people are fed up with it.

I don't agree with people wanting to secede, but people are pissed and that is the only thing that they can do especially when they feel their vote and their state don't matter to the rest of the US.

How much of that $16 trillion debt was spent on states wanting to secede?

If they did succeed in seceding, would the federal government ask for that money back?  Would those states have the resources to pay their share back?

I understand the anger, but threatening or even discussing secession is just a poor showing of a temper tantrum. 

[CCTAU]

Agree. Succeeding is a nuclear option. Some feel like its the only option left and I can't fault them for feel like they are being pinned in a corner and not wanting to go down on a sinking ship.

These are just petitions. They will be ignored by the ONE. But the message is being sent. The states need to adopt a virtual secession policy. Refuse to comply with obozocare and stick to their guns. If enough states do this, change will come. My issue is that I think the great ONE sees himself as emperor and will try to use force to get this done. It will be a grave mistake. The states participating in this feel disenfranchised. They make up a significant portion of land mass in this country. They feel that they are being forced by the high population areas to comply to policies that are 180 degrees from their beliefs.
The great ONE has created the divide and now must find a way to close the gap. Compromise would be one way. But when the first thing you do after getting elected is to join forces with the UN to attack your own country's 2nd amendment.......

[GH2001]

How much of that $16 trillion debt was spent on states wanting to secede?

If they did succeed in seceding, would the federal government ask for that money back?  Would those states have the resources to pay their share back?

I understand the anger, but threatening or even discussing secession is just a poor showing of a temper tantrum.

First, thanks for helping me notice that apple decided I really meant to say succeed not secede. Auto correx wurkz for me!

Second, did the states have a say in it when the fed gov was running up the debt? Wast their doing. The Feds can't run up 16 trillion and dance around like the overreaching federalists they are, then try to stick state govt with the bill. Talk about hypocrisy. Secession is actually ok in theory as long as it is agreed upon. What's not ok is unilateral succession.

I also find it funny that after Bush won in 2004, the dems talked about secession and it was "patriotic". Now it's unAmerican, backwards and treason. Although there is much more reason now to want to than there was then.

From 2004:
http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dorf/20041124.html

[Saniflush]

After all, the states did form the federal govt, or the Union.

This argument was made 151 years ago and was ignored.

[Vandy Vol]

Second, did the states have a say in it when the fed gov was running up the debt? Wast their doing.

In many instances, yes, they did have a say.  There are many things that the federal government can not force state governments to do.  In order to entice them to do something, the federal government offers funding to states who opt to do X.

I don't know how much federal funding that has gone to states has been voluntarily accepted, versus how much has been "forced" upon the states, but it's rather common for states to choose to do something in order to receive federal funding.

[Saniflush]

In many instances, yes, they did have a say.  There are many things that the federal government can not force state governments to do.  In order to entice them to do something, the federal government offers funding to states who opt to do X.

I don't know how much federal funding that has gone to states has been voluntarily accepted, versus how much has been "forced" upon the states, but it's rather common for states to choose to do something in order to receive federal funding.

Very true.  In fact when I was growing up Louisiana was a good example of someone that did not take some federal funds over something the federal government was mandating.

When the fed moved the legal drinking age to 21 Louisiana kept their at 18.  The fed then threatened them and said they did not move the age to 21 then they would yank all the federal money ear tagged for highways.  Louisiana told them to piss off cause they made more on the sale of alcohol.

[GH2001]

In many instances, yes, they did have a say.  There are many things that the federal government can not force state governments to do.  In order to entice them to do something, the federal government offers funding to states who opt to do X.

I don't know how much federal funding that has gone to states has been voluntarily accepted, versus how much has been "forced" upon the states, but it's rather common for states to choose to do something in order to receive federal funding.

I know you are trying to cherry pick and you are technically correct, but my point remains. Why do states rely on that? I mean, who turns down free funds right? Rarely does it happen. The fed gov has created a tax and spend entitlement mentality. Sure the states take a lot of free money. But it shouldn't be the way. It's more another symptom of this bigger problem. The fed govt started food stamps and most other welfare programs that have contributed to this debt. And then involve the states to administer it. Same thing with billion dollar wars. I know we have representatives that vote on these measures but since when did a governor or the people of a state get a say in any of these? This all starts and ends with DC.

[AU_Tiger_2000]

This argument was made 151 years ago and was ignored.

Didn't work out so well last time.  Of course this time the seceding states would have learned the lesson of the Viet Cong and jihadists and wouldn't fight a conventional war.  That could take years and cost millions of lives.

[Vandy Vol]

I know you are trying to cherry pick and you are technically correct, but my point remains. Why do states rely on that? I mean, who turns down free funds right? Rarely does it happen.

The point is that they had the option to turn it down, knowing fully well that our federal government already spends enough so as to continue driving itself deeper into debt, yet they did not turn it down (in most instances).  So if the federal government has put money and other resources into developing and maintaining states, should the states be obliged to pay that debt back upon secession?

There's obviously an argument to be made regarding federal funding that has been "forced" upon states, but I honestly don't know how the amount of that funding compares to the amount of voluntarily accepted funding.  Nor do I know how much of the total federal debt the voluntarily accepted funding makes up, although I assume it's a very small portion.

The ultimate point that THS made and with which I agree is that the federal government didn't do this on its own.  We can talk about the separation of state and federal governments all day, but there is a monetary tie between them that causes the federal government to support state governments in many ways.

Although the states' acceptance of federal funding is probably a small portion of the federal debt, and although the states' ability to receive federal funding is a symptom of a bigger problem on the federal level, the states still played a part.  To me, requesting secession is refusing to accept any responsibility for the financial situation, and is not a viable solution for the state governments that are currently reliant on federal funding and have no realistic way to create a separate, financially fruitful government entity.

[AUChizad]

LOLz

http://blog.al.com/live/2012/11/alabama_secessionist_says_work.html#incart_river_default

Alabama secessionist says working people must unite to save America

November 13, 2012 at 12:03 PM

“Derrick B.,” the man who started a petition seeking Alabama’s withdrawal from the U.S., is a truck driving, knife collecting former owner of a topless car wash who describes himself as “an absolute Libertarian.”

Derrick Belcher, 45, of Chunchula, said in an interview late Monday that secession may be the only way to save working Americans from crushing debt, burdensome federal regulations and rising taxes.

“I don’t want to live in Russia. I don’t believe in socialism,” said Belcher, an operations manager for a Mobile trucking company. “America is supposed to be free.”

Belcher said he posted his petition Friday on the White House web site after hearing about a similar petition filed by a Louisiana resident. More than 30 states have since followed, and Belcher’s petition has gained more than 18,000 signatures –- well on its way toward reaching the 25,000 threshold for receiving an official response from the White House.

A petition for Texas reached that milestone on Monday and had more than 62,000 signatures as of this morning.

When Alabama meets the requirement, Belcher said, he’ll deliver a copy of the petition to Gov. Robert Bentley, seeking formal action by the state.

Belcher said he believes secession can work if states band together to support each other.

“I don’t think any one state can stand alone. But if we’ve got 20 of them, then that starts to be something ,” Belcher said. “If you look at a map of the red states, we have all of the oil and we produce all of the food. We’re the ones that are carrying the rest of the nation.”

Belcher said he is a Libertarian and that he supported Ron Paul as a candidate for president. He said President Barack Obama won re-election last week because of voters who are dependent on the federal government.

“They throw all this on the working man’s back –- they make us pay for welfare and all these other programs,” he said.

Secession, he said, would allow Alabama and other states to stop entitlement programs.

“The people who want those handouts, it’ll force them to move to a different state,” he said. “It will consolidate working people and that’s how we turn things around.”

Belcher, who is white, said race was not a factor in his support of secession.

“It’s economics -– just that simple,” he said. “I’m working poor. And I work -– I’ve never taken a dime from the government. I’ll starve before I take a handout. That’s what being a true American is all about.”

Belcher blamed the government for shutting down his former business. Belcher said his Euro Details car wash, which featured topless women, was successful for a decade on Halls Mill Road in Mobile. But he said he was arrested and charged with obscenity by city officials in 2001.

“The government ripped my business away, and now they’re choking America to death with rules and regulations,” he said.

Belcher said he fully expects the petition to reach 25,000 signatures -– in fact, he’s aiming far higher, saying he’d like to double that number to ensure that it is recognized by the White House.

He said the petition got a jump start at a gun and knife show held at the Greater Gulf State Fairgrounds last weekend.

“Everybody got behind it. It’s done way better than I expected,” he said.

[bottomfeeder]

I signed it. And, I might add, I knew the guy who wrote it. Years ago when I was much younger, we use to hang out, drink alcohol and smoke pot. Those were the days.

[Vandy Vol]

[wesfau2]

The point is that they had the option to turn it down, knowing fully well that our federal government already spends enough so as to continue driving itself deeper into debt, yet they did not turn it down (in most instances).  So if the federal government has put money and other resources into developing and maintaining states, should the states be obliged to pay that debt back upon secession?

There's obviously an argument to be made regarding federal funding that has been "forced" upon states, but I honestly don't know how the amount of that funding compares to the amount of voluntarily accepted funding.  Nor do I know how much of the total federal debt the voluntarily accepted funding makes up, although I assume it's a very small portion.

The ultimate point that THS made and with which I agree is that the federal government didn't do this on its own.  We can talk about the separation of state and federal governments all day, but there is a monetary tie between them that causes the federal government to support state governments in many ways.

Although the states' acceptance of federal funding is probably a small portion of the federal debt, and although the states' ability to receive federal funding is a symptom of a bigger problem on the federal level, the states still played a part.  To me, requesting secession is refusing to accept any responsibility for the financial situation, and is not a viable solution for the state governments that are currently reliant on federal funding and have no realistic way to create a separate, financially fruitful government entity.

Yes.

Any further bitching about the "welfare mentality" of the citizenry should cease unless and until the states show some ability to spit the teat.

I signed it. And, I might add, I knew the guy who wrote it. Years ago when I was much younger, we use to hang out, drink alcohol and smoke pot. Those were the days.

You'll notice the total lack of surprise on my face.

[Tarheel]

We are long past secession as the answer.

[bottomfeeder]

I HATE THE MSM.

http://www.secretsofthefed.com/infowars-nightly-news-amber-lyon-cnn-is-a-hoax/

http://amberlyonlive.com/bahrain-coverage/

[Tarheel]

I HATE THE MSM.
...

I am the Vice President of the Hate the MSM Club.  Real journalism is as rare as the Northern, Hairy-nosed Wombat.

By the way, if I haven't said so before that's a helluva Avatar you have there...