2020 Presidential Election: let the jockeying commence

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?

 

Alternative facts...alternate electors...alternate reality?

 

The Biden folks are actually saying 'ol slow Joe did this

 

This from 2018 election in Michigan
You know the voter fraud that can't happen
"– Michigan State Police have arrested a recently celebrated Democratic Party official on several felony charges related to voter discrepancies.
The Michigan official who earlier this year received an award from the state’s Democratic Party is now facing six felony charges for reportedly forging records and falsely marking absentee ballots as invalid during the 2018 election, reported The Detroit News.

 

Lock them up if their guilty, just like they did with the Republican bundler in North Carolina. Nobody has said fraud "can't happen". Did it happen on the order of hundreds of thousands of ballots? No evidence of that.

 

Texplainer: If Brexit Can Happen, Can Texit?

“If there was any constitutional issue resolved by the Civil War, it is that there is no right to secede.”— Antonin Scalia, late Supreme Court Justice

AG Paxton and Tx RC Allen West might have others ideas.
#FreeNewTexas!

Opinion | What Texas Republicans' unhinged election stunts are really about

 

The United Red States of Traditional America
vs.
The United Blue States of Marxist America

As long as some of the red on the Pacific coast includes a deep water port or two, I think we are good. And Texas is going to need a "Californian Alien Co-habitant Act" quota system ("CACA" for short), but we can deal with that later

 

If you are a member of a club, and you leave the club, the club's rules no longer apply to you.

 

Yep. The last time I heard about it was during the Obama Administration when Debra Medina and Rick Fairy were talking about it and nullification. Once Trump took office, we never heard about it.

My guess is that oil and gas would be negotiated as part of a broader trade deal. There would be a lot of posturing (much like on Brexit), but something would be worked out on favorable terms for both sides. However, the presence of oil and gas in Texas puts it in a stronger position than the UK is in. (We'd be more like Norway.) Presumably Texas would also adopt its own currency, which would make for a pretty scary transition. Many Texas Republicans want the gold standard, which would make for an interesting battle.

Yeah, immigration would be interesting. My guess is that Texas would put a big priority on border security with Mexico but would be more open on merit-based legal immigration and would be surprisingly generous on legal immigration with Mexico. I think initially, things would be fairly closed with the US - border checks on the roads, passports, etc. However, I think that would be relaxed after a while (except for with Oklahoma - we'd keep a permanent 40-foot-tall wall reinforced with an electrical fence, as it should be to keep those goat-blowers out).

Military and infrastructure. Obviously Texas has plenty of highways built with federal money. If secession happened by force (but successfully), I would assume that Texas would seize all this. If it happened by negotiated settlement, we'd probably have to make some kind of a payment plan.

I think they'd largely keep things as they are with some adjustments. I think the Legislature would meet for longer but not become a full-time legislature. My guess is that you'd still see the Lt. Gov/VP and agency heads elected separately from the governor. (For example, I don't think you'd see the Comptroller converted into an appointed treasury secretary.) However, I think you'd see the state adopt a military department that is left within the control over the Gov/Pres. I think the judiciary would remain elected in partisan elections for better or for worse. Would the republic create state governments? That's hard to say. My guess is that they wouldn't.

 

@Mr. Deez
Do you think the residents of Texas would prefer secession from the US?

How would you deal with Social Security and Medicare for New Texas residents?

Do you think large Texas based companies (Southwest Airlines, ExxonMobil, Tesla, Oracle, Dell to name a few) would stay based in New Texas or relocate due to larger "foreign market" in the US?

What changes in the New Texas tax system - Income, Property, Sales, Excise do you see? How much deficit spending would be allowed?

Would the New Texas currency be allowed to float on world market?

 

Depends on if it is 1860 or 2020.

Scalia says no leaving the club.

 

Michigan Representative Paul Mitchell leaving the GOP. Evidently he cares about Trump's attempts to sow distrust in our election systems and the Supreme Court.

I appreciate his independence in light of both party's tribalism.

 

Whew! Allen West is now saying he didn't encourage Texas secession when he wrote this.

Just so we are all clear...Allen West must have intended for Texas to join a social club, a caucus or maybe just a handshake. If you think he was encouraging secession you were "ignorant" per West.

 

I admire his military service, but as a political party chairman, Allen West is a clown.

 

Here is more on this idea from Conrad Black --

"The Perilous State of America’s Republic"
If the United States cannot, in Lincoln's words, “bind up the nation’s wounds,” and re-emerge as a strong democracy, the end of Western Civilization is in sight.

"Americans should know how perilous their democracy has become. The majority of Donald Trump’s voters already believe the presidential election was rigged, and there is no doubt that suspect voting changes, attributed to the requirements of voting in a pandemic, have created large anomalies in five states that made a great many such votes impossible to authenticate. Untold numbers of ballots arrived at a time and in a manner that incites the inference that they were substantially fraudulent. The numbers of votes involved in Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin are undoubtedly adequately numerous to have influenced the election.

The courts have failed to address the questions raised by this disturbing pattern of votes confined to only five states. Some of the responsibility rests with President Trump’s counsel, who often have demanded remedies out of all proportion to the complaints alleged. They seem only now to be getting around to an attack on the constitutionality of unverifiable voting on a large scale in the four or five suspect states, which stand out like pike-staffs among the others where all went smoothly.

The refusal of the U.S. Supreme Court to hear the appeal from the state of Texas, joined by 18 other states, is an outright abdication. Of course, Texas and its co-petitioners have perfectly adequate standing to demand that all states, in choosing a president, conduct their elections credibly enough to assure the whole country that the Constitution has been followed in filling the nation’s highest offices. For the Supreme Court to take the position, as it did, that it could not hear the election challenge case because Texas and the others did not have the standing to challenge how another state conducts its presidential election is completely spurious in the circumstances. Where the courts don’t exercise their jurisdiction, a vacuum arises which is likely to be filled by lawlessness, and potentially, even violent lawlessness.

The United States has become a country where a majority of Americans—people of good will from both parties—believe presidential elections are not conducted honestly. (Think back to the contested election of 2000.) An overwhelming majority do not trust the media, which, in political matters, is effectively a totalitarian enterprise slandering the Republicans and censoring criticism of the Democrats. ...."​

The Perilous State of America’s Republic - American Greatness

 

Now that the EC has voted it will be interesting to watch how the 73M voters for DJT fragment into Trump voters and Trump base. DJT has a chance in the GA runoff to keep a cohesive group in place or he can continue his current path and appeal to just his core base. There are plenty of reasons to vote Republican in regards to the Senate going forward but his rally today will tell whether his attention is on GA or the Trump brand going forward.

 

He's a bit over the top with the secession talk, but he is holding state republicans to the campaign promises they made. I like him.

 

Now you are making me want to secede faster Deez. Look to Sam Houston as the pattern for how a Texas currency should work.

 

The state is the government, the sovereign political entity. Did you mean would Texas create new governments? Or did you mean regional offices to carry out the will of the Texas state? If the second, that is a bit of silly notion. The States are not regional offices of the US Federal government. We are independent entities that created an umbrella government to help us work together on things.

 

So the year matters but no actual law matters? What law says a state who has entered the union doesn't have the right to exit the union?

 

He's a carpetbagger promoting himself. Furthermore, his job is to build the party and win elections. It's not to police elected officials. That's the job of voters and activists.

 

He's clearly trying to do both, but his first loyalty will always be to his base - those who buy his narratives and claims without question.

 

The problem is that to entice businesses to stay, they'll want to maintain pretty loose credit in the short term. And once you do that, it's hard to go back.

I'm familiar with what states are, and that's what I'm talking about. I'm not sure that a hypothetical Republic of Texas would create state governments (as states are supposed to exist in the United States).

 

Mostly no. They wouldn't want to take the chance. This all hypothetical.

Social Security wouldn't be a problem. You can live and work overseas and still get Social Security. Medicare would be a bigger problem. It generally doesn't cover treatment outside the US, as my mother found out when she broke her wrist while visiting us in Germany. (Of course, her entire bill was only €95, so it didn't matter much.) That would put a lot of pressure on Texas to create a program to cover the elderly.

That depends entirely on the trade situation between the US and Texas.

I think Texas would increase its sales tax and impose some other kind of tax to finance its military and its cash settlement to the US, which would be substantial. It won't be called an income tax, but it'll operate somewhat like an income tax. They'll call it a payroll surcharge or something like that. Texas Republicans are very good at taking more money from people without calling it a tax increase.

I think they'd take on debt for startup costs but mostly hold the line on deficits. Municipal debt (which is very high) could get interesting. Local government would have to be overhauled.

I'd like to say no but probably so.

 

I think Scalia is wrong on this, and frankly, his opinion on it goes against his philosophy as a textualist. The textualist would look at the original Constitution, see that there was no prohibition on a state leaving, apply the 10th Amendment, and hold that a state has the power to leave. He would further look at the Reconstruction Amendments and see that Congress didn't print prohibit secession even in the wake of the Civil War, which even further reinforces the right to secede.

Nevertheless, considering the legality of secession is pretty pointless. If a state or states was truly committed to leaving, would they really care what the US Constitution thought of it? No. Furthermore, if the US was willing to go to full scale war to stop a seceding state, would it really care of the state has the legal right to secede? No. In fact, they already didn't in the Civil War itself.

The only real issue is whether the US was willing to wage war to stop it. Personally, I think that's debatable. The military is disproportionately southern and Texan. Could the US really count on them to go kill and destroy their own families and friends and others who are culturally similar and sympathetic to them? I'm not so sure, and if not, would a bunch of woke northern young men be willing to be drafted to do the job to save a Union they've been taught to hate anyway? And if so, to how committed would they be to risk their lives for it? Not too sure.

 

Interpretation, "I'm now very happy I can get back to my reign of terror."
Iran ‘very happy’ to see Trump leave office, says Rouhani

 

From Texas vs White:
*726 When, therefore, Texas became one of the United States, she entered into an indissoluble relation. All the obligations of perpetual union, and all the guaranties of republican government in the Union, attached at once to the State. The act which consummated her admission into the Union was something more than a compact; it was the incorporation of a new member into the political body. And it was final. The union between Texas and the other States was as complete, as perpetual, and as indissoluble as the union between the original States. There was no place for reconsideration, or revocation, except through revolution, or through consent of the States.
The entire ruling for your review.
Texas v. White, 74 US 700 - Supreme Court 1869 - Google Scholar

While the Constitution provides for addition of States as approved by Congress there is no exit clause to perpetual union. The precedent is set and the Readmmision to the Union in 1870 by Congress sets Texas as a State.

There are many States but only one Union.

Scalia opinion is best expressed by his own words rather than interpretation:

“The answer is clear,” Scalia wrote. “If there was any constitutional issue resolved by the Civil War, it is that there is no right to secede. (Hence, in the Pledge of Allegiance, 'one Nation, indivisible.')”

 

Pass the smell test? Biden's transgender Sec of Education

 

Interesting that you chose the county map of Red vs Blue that addresses geography rather than the State map that address population.
At last count the population map was ahead by 7M+/- votes and significant general population.

The State map is 25 each but the population map is weighted to the Blue team.

As best I can tell those West Coast deep water ports and railheads are in Blue territory. A minor detour to Panama or Vancouver could fix that for the Red Team.

2020 US Presidential Election Results: Live Map