FAIL! (Petitions to Secede)

[Jonas Parker]

http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=213799


FAIL! (Petitions to Secede)
The Market Ticker ® - Commentary on The Capital Markets
Posted 2012-11-11 14:12 by Karl Denninger

From the often-whacked-out Examiner:

As of Saturday November 10, 2012, 15 States have petitioned the Obama Administration for withdrawal from the United States of America in order to create its own government.

States following this action include: Louisiana, Texas, Montana, North Dakota, Indiana, Mississippi, Kentucky, North Carolina, Alabama, Florida, Georgia, New Jersey, Colorado, Oregon and New York. These States have requested that the Obama Administration grant a peaceful withdrawal from the United States.

FAIL.

You do not ask for permission to secede.

You simply do it, and tell the overarching government you formerly adhered to that if they don't like it they're welcome to attempt to force you to return.

Generally speaking, of course, it's a pretty good idea to figure out how you're going to respond if they do make such an attempt and be prepared for it before making that statement, because sometimes they will.

 

[TorahTips]

In order for any state to leave the union, it would first of all have to be on the state ballot. Even when that passes, it would simply result in the beginning of negotiations with the federal government. Those negotiations would likely end in failure. The petitions at whitehouse.gov are all started by private citizens. Anyone can put one up on any subject that they wish. They are totally non-binding and basically meaningless. This is nothing more than a personal opinion poll.

The financial mess that would be created by any state that left the union would be enough for them to back away from the whole process. There are financial commitments that each state has made to the union and those will not be allowed to be broken. Any attempt to secede would likely crush the state that made the attempt.

 

[Bubble Head]

There is nothing in the Constitution thats says a state can not leave. Thats what happened in the 1860s IE. The War Between The States. Not the Civil War as most often referred to. A civil war is one in which a fraction wants to overthrow the existing government. The South did not want any part of that they just wanted to leave. North said you couldn't even though there is no provision for their stance even to this day. So have at it and leave.

 

[Bubble Head]

PS Never said the feces would not hit the fan just said YOU CAN DO IT. Think outside the box.

 

[Mr. Gravy]

They were discussing this on FOX news about 1/2 an hour ago.
Said it showed how divided the country was.

 

[Troke]

There is nothing in the Constitution thats says a state can not leave. Thats what happened in the 1860s IE. The War Between The States. Not the Civil War as most often referred to. A civil war is one in which a fraction wants to overthrow the existing government. The South did not want any part of that they just wanted to leave. North said you couldn't even though there is no provision for their stance even to this day. So have at it and leave.

You got it backwards. There is nothing in the Constitution that authorizes a State to leave.

 

[Bubble Head]

It is far more divided now than when the War Between the States broke out and by the way it way not over slavery it way over taxes and the balance of power in the House and Senate. Slavery took on its role after the War started.

 

[TorahTips]

PS Never said the feces would not hit the fan just said YOU CAN DO IT. Think outside the box.

BH, technically you are correct in that there is nothing stated that I know of that prohibits a state from leaving the union. However, because it is not stated, no one really knows how to do it. There are some complicated issues that I don't think could be realistically encountered without a long period of argumentation over how to do it. I think this was intentional in the beginning. Why would anyone want to lay out the method of seceding so clearly in the constitution? That makes no sense. Thus, it is intentionally vague.

I think the first thing that would have to happen would be for the state to officially vote to begin the process during an election cycle. In that effort, I believe that one of the first measures would be to revoke the state's representation to the federal government by calling home the senators and representatives.

I doubt that this could be a peaceful adventure. Nor would it be a short process.

 

[TorahTips]

The whitehouse.gov petition site serves a useful purpose for the White House. It allows them to see what the common people are upset about. I believe that is the purpose of the whole site....

 

[Bubble Head]

You got it backwards. There is nothing in the Constitution that authorizes a State to leave.

Troke can you help me with that. I have reviewed the opinions of over 400 lawyers at the time of the War that said no such thing. Might have missed something and would like to see it. And yes Troke you have to be stark raving crazing to try to read those kinds of opinions but I tried. No internet at the time. I do believe Torah Tips is right that the States have to vote to leave but the question can be placed on the ballot. Nothing to stop that.

 

[Troke]

It is far more divided now than when the War Between the States broke out and by the way it way not over slavery it way over taxes and the balance of power in the House and Senate. Slavery took on its role after the War started.

The South thought it was over slavery. That has been shown many times on this forum. As for the balance of power, the
South wanted to make sure the Senate stayed with enough slave states to prevent abolitionists from getting creative ideas.. Thus the savage fights over the slave status of new states.

 

[Bubble Head]

Troke, most of the opinions stated that since it was left out it was not ruled out to give you the reader digest version. Torah Tips is right but the feces will still splatter.

 

[TorahTips]

Troke can you help me with that. I have reviewed the opinions of over 400 lawyers at the time of the War that said no such thing. Might have missed something and would like to see it. And yes Troke you have to be stark raving crazing to try to read those kinds of opinions but I tried. No internet at the time. I do believe Torah Tips is right that the States have to vote to leave but the question can be placed on the ballot. Nothing to stop that.

Being a state is kinda like being married. I've never been to a marriage ceremony that explicitly detailed how the couple would get a divorce if the marriage didn't work out. But, we all know that divorce is a real option, even though the couple swears "'til death do us part." My guess is that if a state attempted (realistically) to leave, there would be severe financial ramifications. If that didn't work, there would be logistical issues. If those didn't work, there would be military action.

Bearing the whole weight of financial and economic ramifications would be too much for any state to realistically consider this option.

 

[diamonds]

I am looking for the link to sign for Arkansas... They have now joined the other states... Of course I can not find it... I know it takes more than this but I do not care if my name goes on their bad list....

 

[TorahTips]

Realistically, there would be years of chatter from a state before it actually happened. I don't think that one state could do it. It would take a number of states that all shared borders. There would be ongoing meetings between those states. They would also negotiate and inform the federal government of their intentions. Then, it would go on their state ballots. They would withdraw their senators and representatives from the federal government.

Then the fun would start....

 

[Troke]

Troke, most of the opinions stated that since it was left out it was not ruled out to give you the reader digest version. Torah Tips is right but the feces will still splatter.

Well, been years since I gave this a thought, but it seems that somewhere it was said that you can leave a Confederation which is what we had first, but you cannot leave a Federation which is what we have now unless it is specifically stated in the enabling document. And it isn't.

However, a Federation could disband if its members so voted.

 

[Bubble Head]

The South thought it was over slavery. That has been shown many times on this forum. As for the balance of power, the
South wanted to make sure the Senate stayed with enough slave states to prevent abolitionists from getting creative ideas.. Thus the savage fights over the slave status of new states.

The press was pushing the slavery issue even with false stories of slaves rising up and killing all the white people around them. Never happened. What you need to look at is the cotton tariffs put in place to force the South to sell to the North as well as the cloth mills were in the North and the bankster were in the North. Balance of power meant more than slavery. As a matter of fact many in the South were totaly disgusted with the idea of salvery. While in the North children (8 years old and on) were working in the factories and clothing plants 12 to 14 hours per day for pennies and some of them indentured servents which is a form of slavery. They called it in the North the Industrial Revolution. We are at that crossroads again. By the way I am not from the South or North and I would never own a slave. Have enough trouble taking care of myself much less a slave. Think about it.

 

[SIRR1]

It's on Yahoo now, 20 states have filed.

Secession petitions filed in 20 states.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/secission-petitions-filed-20-states-190210006.html

In the wake of last week's presidential election, thousands of Americans have signed petitions seeking permission for their states to peacefully secede from the United States. The petitions were filed on We the People, a government website.

States with citizens filing include 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. Oddly, folks from Georgia have filed twice. Even stranger, several of the petitions come from states that went for President Barack Obama.

The petitions are short and to the point. For example, a petition from the Volunteer State reads: "Peacefully grant the State of Tennessee to withdraw from the United States of America and create its own NEW government." Of all the petitions, Texas has the most signatures so far, with more than 23,000.

Of course, this is mostly a symbolic gesture. The odds of the American government granting any state permission to go its own way are on par with winning the lottery while getting hit by a meteor while seeing Bigfoot while finding gluten-free pizza that tastes like the real thing.

An article from WKRC quotes a University of Louisville political science professor who explained that these petitions aren't uncommon. Similar petitions were filed following the 2004 and 2008 elections. Still, should the petitions garner 25,000 signatures in a month, they will require an official response from the Obama administration.

SIRR1

 

[Jonas Parker]

THE TEXAS CONSTITUTION​

ARTICLE 1. BILL OF RIGHTS

That the general, great and essential principles of liberty and free government may be recognized and established, we declare:

Sec. 1. FREEDOM AND SOVEREIGNTY OF STATE. Texas is a free and independent State, subject only to the Constitution of the United States, and the maintenance of our free institutions and the perpetuity of the Union depend upon the preservation of the right of local self-government, unimpaired to all the States.



Sec. 2. INHERENT POLITICAL POWER; REPUBLICAN FORM OF GOVERNMENT. All political power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority, and instituted for their benefit. The faith of the people of Texas stands pledged to the preservation of a republican form of government, and, subject to this limitation only, they have at all times the inalienable right to alter, reform or abolish their government in such manner as they may think expedient.

 

[TorahTips]

OK. Texas has exceeded the amount that they need for someone from the administration to respond on December 9th. The votes in Texas will continue to add up. Although the signatures are nonbinding, they could be significant for the formation of some grassroots organization that might lead to something more significant.

 

[Bubble Head]

Texas will be the pivot point should this go futher. Texas can take care of Texas and still export.

 

[TorahTips]

Texas will be the pivot point should this go futher. Texas can take care of Texas and still export.

According to what I've read elsewhere, Texas has this unusual "power" because they had a structured government before they joined the union. And, in their state constitution they reserve this unique power. I also read that Alaska and Hawaii may also be able to do the same because they both had established previous governments.

 

[Troke]

The press was pushing the slavery issue even with false stories of slaves rising up and killing all the white people around them. Never happened. What you need to look at is the cotton tariffs put in place to force the South to sell to the North as well as the cloth mills were in the North and the bankster were in the North. Balance of power meant more than slavery. As a matter of fact many in the South were totaly disgusted with the idea of salvery. While in the North children (8 years old and on) were working in the factories and clothing plants 12 to 14 hours per day for pennies and some of them indentured servents which is a form of slavery. They called it in the North the Industrial Revolution. We are at that crossroads again. By the way I am not from the South or North and I would never own a slave. Have enough trouble taking care of myself much less a slave. Think about it.

Could be. But one should never forget the value in slaves. IIRC, in the 1860 Census, Mississippi was #2 in wealth after New York. And it was not due to their plantation mansions. The subject can be PHOGGED as much as one wants, but the wealth in slaves was at the bottom of it.

 

[Bubble Head]

According to what I've read elsewhere, Texas has this unusual "power" because they had a structured government before they joined the union. And, in their state constitution they reserve this unique power. I also read that Alaska and Hawaii may also be able to do the same because they both had established previous governments.

I was going to mention Alaska and Hawaii for that very reason. In fact Alaska had a suit aganist the Feds recently since land was suppose to be opened to settlement as a perk to them voting statehood but of course was denied after statehood. You should always ask a native american about fed promises before voting. The only one the Feds have ever kept is "we will take".

 

[Bubble Head]

Could be. But one should never forget the value in slaves. IIRC, in the 1860 Census, Mississippi was #2 in wealth after New York. And it was not due to their plantation mansions. The subject can be PHOGGED as much as one wants, but the wealth in slaves was at the bottom of it.

True enough Troke as it is today in how much taxes you can produce before the government pulls your plug. Just like the slaves of old in this country.

 

[TorahTips]

I was going to mention Alaska and Hawaii for that very reason. In fact Alaska had a suit aganist the Feds recently since land was suppose to be opened to settlement as a perk to them voting statehood but of course was denied after statehood. You should always ask a native american about fed promises before voting. The only one the Feds have ever kept is "we will take".

Violations of federal agreements could be a good reason for them to secede. I doubt that they would create a separate country. They would probably join with an existing country (maybe even Canada).

 

[momof23goats]

just watch this closely for the next few days. This has never happened, since the civil war, or better known in the south as the war of northern aggression.

this should tell the pres. just how people really feel. IF Texas does secede others will follow.

 

[Bubble Head]

Violations of federal agreements could be a good reason for them to secede. I doubt that they would create a separate country. They would probably join with an existing country (maybe even Canada).

When I last was in Alberta most of the ranchers, very rural, wanted to join with Alaska all the way down to Texas and form a new country. They are tired of being hosed by the liberals on both coasts keeeping them from acheiving.

 

[DustMusher]

IMNHO, secession falls under the Unemuerated Rights Clause of the Tenth Amendment:

The tenth reads, "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States, respectively, or to the people."

Dissolution of the Republic neither in whole nor in part is enumerated in the Constitution, thus that power remains with the states.

DM

 

[Garryowen]

You got it backwards. There is nothing in the Constitution that authorizes a State to leave.

Those powers not specifically delegated to the federal government, nor denied to the states, are reserved for the states, or for the people. States don't need specific authorization.

Of course, it's important to recall that the Colonies didn't have the authority to tell King George to take a hike, either.

 

[Troke]

Those powers not specifically delegated to the federal government, nor denied to the states, are reserved for the states, or for the people. States don't need specific authorization.

Of course, it's important to recall that the Colonies didn't have the authority to tell King George to take a hike, either.

Ah yes, the 'living Constitution'. Odd that should pop up right now.

 

[night driver]

Alaskans who think SERIOUSLY about the issue are adamant that they will NOT join Canada, for a simple reason....the way Canada treats the First People, and how the oil revenue would be handled...

 

[Floratrek]

I read here that the states' petitioning is now up to 20. http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/secission-petitions-filed-20-states-190210006.html

 

[Shinmen Takezo]

FAIL.

You do not ask for permission to secede.

You simply do it, and tell the overarching government you formerly adhered to that if they don't like it they're welcome to attempt to force you to return.

Generally speaking, of course, it's a pretty good idea to figure out how you're going to respond if they do make such an attempt and be prepared for it before making that statement, because sometimes they will.

Big fail indeed.
FYI--you just do it.
You do not ask permission to seize your freedom back.
You do not scuff your feet around and ask pretty please... you just ****ing do it.

 

[Hognutz]

FAIL.

You do not ask for permission to secede.

You simply do it, and tell the overarching government you formerly adhered to that if they don't like it they're welcome to attempt to force you to return.

Generally speaking, of course, it's a pretty good idea to figure out how you're going to respond if they do make such an attempt and be prepared for it before making that statement, because sometimes they will.

Big fail indeed.
FYI--you just do it.
You do not ask permission to seize your freedom back.
You do not scuff your feet around and ask pretty please... you just ****ing do it.

I agree,but, this gets the idea thrown out there......The party has to get started somehow.

 

[Shinmen Takezo]

In order for any state to leave the union, it would first of all have to be on the state ballot. Even when that passes, it would simply result in the beginning of negotiations with the federal government. Those negotiations would likely end in failure. The petitions at whitehouse.gov are all started by private citizens. Anyone can put one up on any subject that they wish. They are totally non-binding and basically meaningless. This is nothing more than a personal opinion poll.

The financial mess that would be created by any state that left the union would be enough for them to back away from the whole process. There are financial commitments that each state has made to the union and those will not be allowed to be broken. Any attempt to secede would likely crush the state that made the attempt.

Huh?!!!
Put it to a vote by the people?

You've got to be kidding right?

All it takes is for the state legislatures to sign off on it--in addition to the governor signature on the proclamation of independence.

That's all it takes.

Then the proclamation is delivered to the secratary of state of the DC thugs, and the divorce is done... also the senators and congressmen are withdrawn at the same time from the thug's place of governance.

And why would financial problems be a reason to back away from the whole process?

This is crazy.

They could just start issuing their own currency--just like the DC thugs.
What makes DC monopoly/ponzi-scheme money any better than the currency uttered by a state that declared its independence?

Answer: it wouldn't.

Also the independent state could declare a "jubiliee" and that all debts inside that state are washed away--and that they are no longer responsible for any share of DC's national debt problem.

 

[anney]

I am looking for the link to sign for Arkansas... They have now joined the other states... Of course I can not find it... I know it takes more than this but I do not care if my name goes on their bad list....

This is from an article at KTHV...it has a link inside to the Whitehouse page where it says you have to create an account to sign the a petition...

http://www.todaysthv.com/news/artic...th-White-House-for-Arkansas-to-secede-from-US

Looking if I can find a more direct link.

 

[marsh]

Texas v. White 74 U.S. 700 (1869) the court held that the Constitution did not permit states to unilaterally secede from the United States, and that the ordinances of secession, and all the acts of the legislatures within seceding states intended to give effect to such ordinances, were “absolutely null”. http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0074_0700_ZO.html

The United States was originaly a Confederation governed by the Articles of Confederation. When it later became united as one entity under the Constitution, it was considered that the People, not the States themselves, created one compound government.

The People divided power among branches and levels of government in order to protect individual liberty. Although the “states” ratified the Constitution, it was done by special state “conventions” called with representatives elected solely for that purpose. It was NOT the State legislatures that ratified the document. The State legislatures cannot dissolve the union.

For this reason, we are “one nation indivisable.”

 

[lectrickitty]

You got it backwards. There is nothing in the Constitution that authorizes a State to leave.

No YOU got it backwards. The Constitution gives extremely limited powers to the federal govt, everything else is reserved by the states or by the people. So show me where the Constitution says the feds can attack any state that leaves the union...

 

[momof23goats]

that is correct, s othe states can gete out if they want.
well since Texas has the names now and others are coming in close, and will probably make it, lets see ewhat ole bummer will do now? knowing that people would rather go it alone with out him, that is a huge hello!!!!!!
the senate, should make him stand down , then arrest him, you all pick the charges cause there is a long list. -