[B.O. Plenty]

As you can see, this was posted on FR on 9/13/2000, but given the events of last week, I think we need to revisit this.

[#3Fan]

If a lot of the other state's populations can't kick their nanny government addictions, it may be necessary.

[condi2008]

This caught my eye 2 years ago, and the concept has intrigued me ever since. See also The Free State Project's website.

[Pan_Yans Wife]

Ping.

[TXnMA]

There is no reason why Texiana (Texas and Louisiana) couldn't peaceably secede, be an ally and have strong economic ties with United States.

Secession might not even be necessary. IIRC, The Republic of Texas' ageement to join the U.S. as a state included the right for Texas -- at any time -- to split itself into (as many as) five (5) States. Think of the possibilities with ten (10) senators!

[Common Tator]

Williams is just playing games with logic.

Abraham Lincoln set the rule that a state can't leave the USA with out a war. West Va left the Confederacy to rejoin the USA in 1863... Obviously that was not a problem for the USA.

And it was determined shortly after 1800 that the constitution is what ever the Supreme Court Justices say it is.

How many times does the Supreme Court have to rule in direct oppostion to the clear meaning of the words in the constitution before Williams and others figure out that the Constitution is not the Supreme Law of the land. The Supreme law of this land is what ever 5 of the nine Supreme court justices say it is.

Time after time people bring cases that go to the surpreme court based on what the constitution says in the matter. As we have learned once again that is a dumb thing to do. If one wants to predict the outcome of a Supreme Court Case one should never ask what the law or Constitution says. Those Documents are worhtless predictors. The only question is are their 5 votes on the court to support a case. If there are not it does not matter what the constitution says. It matters what the judges say.

[gcruse]

: If one group of people prefers government control
and management of people's lives, and another prefers
 liberty and a desire to be left alone,

The good news is that the Supreme Court decision
getting government out of the American bedroom is
right in line with rejection of government control and
management of people's lives.  There is no need to
secede, Texas is where she needs to be.

The bad news is that too many conservatives
disagree with this.

[MissAmericanPie]

Heck we better leave before the Mexicans do it first and we become Azatlan, lol.

[BikerNYC]

Let's look at just some of the magnitude of the violations. Article 1, Section 8 of our Constitution enumerates the activities for which Congress is authorized to tax and spend. James Madison, the acknowledged father of the Constitution, explained it in The Federalist Papers: "The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation and foreign commerce. ... The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives and liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement and prosperity of the State."

Very good. Now factor in the 14th Amendment...something that wasn't around when Madison was alive:

"...nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. "

The 14th changed the terms of the debate from what the founders first thought of things.

[stainlessbanner]

bump

[XRdsRev]

Texas gets back 95 cents from every dollar they send to Washington while Louisiana gets back $1.48 for every dollar they send. That doesn't include Federal Emergency Management spending for everytime a hurricane or tornado tears parts of those states up (which seems to happen quite often) or the value of Federal installations in those states. On the face of it, it seems like Texas is getting a raw deal until you look at what some other states are getting back, then you realize Texas is making out quite well in this arrangement (if you figure in some other intangibles, Texas probably comes out ahead). There are quite a few states that would love to get back 95 cents on their tax dollars (New Jersey only gets back 65 cents and Connecticut gets back 67 cents). I am sure they hate paying taxes too but you don't hear them constantly whining about how unfair it is and if anybody should be complaining, it should be those states who are picking up the slack, NOT Texas or Louisiana or West Virginia or Alaska or North Dakota or Mississippi or any other state that gets more than it gives or breaks even.

Tx and La are great places with fine people but both states rely heavily on Federal assistance/programs/government installations and would suffer without it. It seems a bit hypocritical to complain so loudly about taxes and Federal spending when you are clearly benefitting from it far more than many of your sister states.

I apologize for ruffling any feathers of my honored friends in the great states of Texas and Louisiana but "looking a gift horse in the mouth" really aggravates me. If you want to secede, that's your choice but before you go, the least you could do is return the money we have sent to you over the years.

[Zionist Conspirator]

One political question we have to answer is whether George W. Bush or Albert Gore shall be president, and just which party will control the House of Representatives and the Senate. But I'd suggest that there's a far more important long-run question we must answer: If one group of people prefers government control and management of people's lives, and another prefers liberty and a desire to be left alone, should they be required to fight, antagonize one another, and risk bloodshed and loss of life in order to impose their preferences, or should they be able to peaceably part company and go their separate ways?

"Liberty?" Is that what the struggle against homosexuality is about? I beg to differ.

When will conservatives stop the rhetoric that identifies libertarianism as conservatism's central tenet? Our liberal enemies can only call us hypocrites and laugh at us. Yet every movement towards immorality is portrayed by conservative/libertarian rhetoric as a "restriction of freedom."

There are some issues more important than the amount of freedom or size of government. All societies are required by the Creator of the Universe to outlaw homosexual acts and make them punishable by death. That's what this is about.

I realize this may offend some FReepers, but the use of people's moral instincts to promote libertarianism is very dishonest.

[mrsmith]

Perhaps after the Supreme Court creates an unenumerated right to be free from fear of gun violence- and of course gives itself power to enforce it- you'll see some concern.

Let's see: Tenth amendment down, Ninth amendment down... I see a pattern here.
8th amendment: "Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted."
Well, they'll need these to enforce their anti-morality crusade if the peasants get uppity about losing their unenumerated right to determine rules locally.

[sandydipper]

Federal authority is clearly limited and defined in the constitution. All those "things" not defined in the constitution are reserved for each state.

The federal government is way too involved with our daily lives and needs to be corrected.

[lilylangtree]

Frankly, there should be another "1776 War of Independence" and impeach the U.S. Supreme Court judges for moving beyond their purview trying to make law instead of interpreting it.

[Tauzero]

Williams is right!

...and Robinson is wrong

[rootntootn]

I fully expect that eventually this country will once again enjoin in a war between the states. The long simmering conflict between the socialist nanny state and freedom loving devotees of the Constitution was sharpened during the Klinton decade. The polarization of the US is now fully developed. Because the socialists don't really believe in the United States but rather some modern day interpretation I expect that force of arms is the only arbiter of the dispute.

One thing regarding the post, why include only Texas and Louisiana in the seccession? In the first place Louisiana is hardly a hotbed of conservatism. It has always been a vipers nest of underhanded dimocrat operatives. Landrieu is a perfect example. Furthermore, what about the rest of us? What about the rest of the southeast, the upper Rockies, etc?

[TBP]

This may be necessary, given the total disregard for Constitutional liberties displayed by the Extreme Court and the other 2 branches of our misgovernment as well.

"Resistance to tyranny is obeidence to God." -- Jefferson

[A. Patriot]

Go Here to see what happens when you try this. (note the picture of a real Black Helicopter)

[StriperSniper]

Dr. Williams Bump.