PecosBill
1,000+ Posts
And specifically doing it to save Donald Trump's *** is even less of a reason.
That's because you're looking at it through the lens of Texas seceding, and you're generally unsympathetic to their likely reasons to secede. If you take a broader look at it (meaning not specific to Texas), the case for secession is the same as the case for any people seeking independence and self-determination. People want the right to govern themselves (to make their own rules and to define their own culture), and the Constitution generally gives that to states with only a few very specific and very narrow exceptions. Every time that right gets diminished by out-of-state busybodies, by sore losers in that state enlisting the help of out-of-state busybodies, or by economic conditions enforced from above, it strengthens the case for secession.
Obviously, if a state wants to clearly violate the actual words of the Constitution, you can hold that up and say, "you made a deal by joining the union and have to follow it." However, and I recognize how radical this is and don't necessarily endorse it but think it's worth asking, is it entirely fair to hold a society to a compact (the US Constitution) that was agreed to by their ancestors many generations ago? A reasonable argument can be made that at some point, a generation should be allowed to chart its own course.
We look at secession from cultural angles that form the basis for some Texans' desire to secede and garner less sympathy from liberals who have sway over cultural institutions. However, what about economic angles? For example, some of the most progressive states (like California and Vermont) have at least considered adopting single payer healthcare systems only to have those plans stopped because of prohibitive costs.
Well, are those programs too expensive because healthcare simply can't be delivered more cheaply? No, they're too expensive, because they're trying to exist in the broader American economic model for healthcare. What if California was willing to fundamentally restructure its economy and reorder its healthcare system to force down costs like European countries have done? As a practical matter that would mean eliminating or at least severely undercutting private insurance and imposing very onerous restrictions on the private practice of medicine. They may even have to do enough of an economic reordering to warrant adopting their own currency to really take control. I could come up with all kinds of pretty explicit constitutional roadblocks to stop that. However, from a moral and self-determination standpoint, do I really have the right to say in perpetuity that they can never do this just because their ancestors joined the union in 1850? I think that's at least debatable.
The topic of secession usually comes up not in the discussion of the topic in general but as a remedy to a recent problem such as an election result or policy start that are seen as unfavorable to "Texas" . In the current case Trumps loss of the National election.
A discussion of Texas as a nation would be an interesting exercise imo.
Subtract out the economic benefits of the Union such as a ready market for oil and gas production to Northern colder consumer states vs the tariffs often employed by the US to insure fair trade. New Texas could compete with the free world market for the US consumer market as a foreign entity. Saudi oil delivered, Canadian oil and gas is pipeline and sale to the world's top 2 energy consumers.
Another area to discuss would be the ownership of the Gulf Coast Refinery facilities that would be needed to refine crude to a market for gasoline, jet fuel etc. Most of which is owned by public companies protected by US law.
Immigration would be an interesting issue as Texas would become responsible for the border with Mexico and the much larger border with 3-4 States- NM, OK, LA and maybe Arkansas have to look. Immigration and particularly customs at every roadway.
Most importantly military as all the US military bases inside the State would be the property of the US military with a $740B annual budget. Their presence of Texas soil would be negotiated with a much larger military and economic power.
Perhaps the starting point would be a discussion with the residents of Texas on their interest in changing the current form of government a Republic with the second most power in the Union with a type to be determined. What would you suggest as the New Texas structure of government?