Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Liberals in southern Arizona seek to form new state
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/liberals-southern-arizona-seek-form-state-130257516.html | 05.10.11 | ca.news.yahoo.com

Posted on 05/10/2011 6:38:58 AM PDT by VU4G10

TUCSON, Arizona (Reuters) - A long-simmering movement by liberal stalwarts in southern Arizona to break away from the rest of the largely conservative state is at a boiling point as secession backers press to bring their longshot ambition to the forefront of Arizona politics.

A group of lawyers from the Democratic stronghold of Tucson and surrounding Pima County have launched a petition drive seeking support for a November 2012 ballot question on whether the 48th state should be divided in two.

The ultimate goal of the newly formed political action committee Start our State is to split Pima County off into what would become the nation's 51st state, tentatively dubbed Baja Arizona.


TOPICS: Front Page News; Politics/Elections; US: Arizona
KEYWORDS: arizona; az
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 next last
To: VU4G10

“Baja Arizona”? A better name would be “Boo-hoo” Arizona. What a bunch of lib cry-babies.....


41 posted on 05/10/2011 7:54:01 AM PDT by Reo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: American Quilter

Thats a good idea. Form Southern AZ as a new state and send all the illegals and the libs down there and let them live together in peace and harmony. Too bad GA can’t do it.


42 posted on 05/10/2011 8:01:01 AM PDT by Georgia Girl 2 (The only purpose of a pistol is to fight your way back to the rifle you should never have dropped.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: VU4G10

Moot point -

They will soon be a part of Mexico anyway.


43 posted on 05/10/2011 8:06:16 AM PDT by Iron Munro (Every day we now throw away things people will kill for after TEOTWAWKI)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VU4G10
The great state of Peyote.
44 posted on 05/10/2011 8:06:31 AM PDT by Niteranger68 (Jared Lee Loughner - Disciple of Michael Moore)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paladin2

Nice idea. But the law has to stipulate that whoever votes for this bill has to live in the new state for 20 years.


45 posted on 05/10/2011 8:07:04 AM PDT by EQAndyBuzz (Who is John Galt?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: VU4G10
I would like to see them succeed.

I guess people don't believe it when they see failed states like California and Illinois because they were once prosperous and healthy.

Maybe it would be a lesson for all to see a state start as a liberal bastion and watch the inevitable crash that will happen in a year or two.

Of course, the old liberal excuse would no doubt be used..

..we just needed some more money and it would have worked.

46 posted on 05/10/2011 8:08:34 AM PDT by B.O. Plenty (Give war a chance...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VU4G10

Give me what I want or I’ll take my ball and go home!


47 posted on 05/10/2011 8:19:01 AM PDT by blueunicorn6 ("A crack shot and a good dancer")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: C210N

“New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new State shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or Parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress.”

I think the plain meaning of this is such:
1. “New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union”— it’s ok to have new states
2. “but no new State shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State”-— If we have new states they must have their own jurisdiction; they must have their own state governmental system separate from any other state (i.e. Kentucky can’t be ruled by the Virginia legislature or Virginia courts)
3. “nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or Parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress.”— if you are going to form a new state by merging two pre-existing states or parts thereof, you need both states to agree to it and for congress to agree to it

this provision in itself does not mention anything about states splitting off on their own as is the case here. It seemingly only addresses the merger of states. The only helpful part of this provision is that if Baja Arizona was a state, it couldn’t be subject to the dictates of the Arizona state government.


48 posted on 05/10/2011 8:19:20 AM PDT by wrhssaxensemble (Christie-West/Christie-Rubio 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: VU4G10

Typical liberals split don’t unite,see Obama&Co.


49 posted on 05/10/2011 8:21:35 AM PDT by Vaduz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RockinRight

Finally, a map with the correct red/blue coloring.


50 posted on 05/10/2011 8:54:49 AM PDT by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: snoringbear
I would say no to being allowed to form a new state. However, if they want to break off and form a separate country or become a state of Mexico, then let’m go I say.

I say we keep the land and just ship the Liberals to New York. Trains heading East...

51 posted on 05/10/2011 8:57:09 AM PDT by April Lexington (Study the Constitution so you know what they are taking away!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: ecomcon

Most of them are WHITE...ya know, liberal white guilt.

Just like here in L.A. where the races dont talk to each other, once the lib whites are the minority there, they will come back into the fold. Better to have their own country where they cant vote, but that has not stopped the illegals either.


52 posted on 05/10/2011 8:58:38 AM PDT by max americana (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: camerongood210

Somebody already owns the rights to Libtardistan.


53 posted on 05/10/2011 10:42:31 AM PDT by King of Florida (A little government and a little luck are necessary in life, but only a fool trusts either of them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: April Lexington

No thanks, we have too many here in the East as it is.


54 posted on 05/10/2011 10:44:11 AM PDT by wrhssaxensemble (Christie-West/Christie-Rubio 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: VU4G10
Why do I have the feeling these secessionists won't be featured on Chris Matthews?
55 posted on 05/10/2011 10:51:44 AM PDT by Minus_The_Bear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VU4G10

Liberals having their own state? What’s the worst that could happen? Ask California.


56 posted on 05/10/2011 11:25:43 AM PDT by Grunthor (http://www.hermancain.com/index.asp)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

I think this is a bunch of lawyers, accademics and communists seeking to be congressmen and senators in the US congress.


57 posted on 05/10/2011 12:04:59 PM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: VU4G10
It's a bad idea. It shows just how some people's minds have been taken over by partisan conflicts. IMHO "Baja Arizona" would be pretty quickly taken over by Mexican drug interests.

But there is a history behind the notion. There was some discussion over how the New Mexico Territory would be divided and admitted to the union. What we got was an eastern half (New Mexico) with long Spanish traditions and an emptier western half (Arizona) with a pronounced Indian presence, which in time became dominated by transplants from the rest of the country.

Earlier, though, there was talk about dividing the territory into northern and southern territories. In that case Santa Fe would have been the capital of New Mexico, the northern state which would include Albuquerque and Flagstaff and stretch to the Colorado River. Phoenix and Tucson and Las Cruces would all be in Arizona, the southern state. Indeed the name "Arizona" was originally chosen by Tucson pro-Confederates as a name for the Southern part of New Mexico Territory that they wanted to take into the CSA.

Unless Democrats win large majorities in both Houses of Congress this isn't going to happen. It would disturb the balance in the Senate. There would have to be a possible new Republican state to maintain that balance and win bipartisan support. Moreover, the District of Columbia is in the front of the line, and Democrats aren't going to alienate African-American voters by letting what's basically just the University of Arizona jump in front of a very large minority group.

58 posted on 05/10/2011 12:08:11 PM PDT by x
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VU4G10

Liberals have zero business in the great state of Arizona.


59 posted on 05/10/2011 12:08:38 PM PDT by riri
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: econjack

I would sign their petition if they go for their own country.


60 posted on 05/10/2011 12:15:43 PM PDT by rocksblues (Obama, the biggest liar in the history of American politics!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson