Secession

Having just checked the latest on MSN, there are currently 15 states requesting to secede from the Union. One of them is my home state. Is this simply a flash in the pan or is it serious? All of them have benifited from federal aid in the last 50 years. All of them have at least a nearly break even economy. All of them are major contributors to the economic well-being of the US. Are they doing this out of disgust at the current political system or is it a growing dissatisfation with the way the rest of the country is being run? How much is a response to the logjam of the last 4 years? Are we as a people ready to give uo on our political system?

In the case of Montana, I know so of the dissatisfation comes from federal policies forced upon us by government agencies such as the EPA. Their ideas of forest managment have cost jobs in the lumber industries because they will not allow logging (even of disease killed trees) which contributes to our annual fire problem. Their regulations for mining have prevented the opening of a couple of mines and forced the closure of others.

Conflicting laws regarding the meat packing industry have closed or prevented the opening of local slaughter houses. In a meat producing state, almost all of our meat is imported, with the addendent rise in prices due to shipping.

In an oil producing state, most of our gasoline and oil products are shipped in from out of state. The pipeline from Canada to carry oil to Colorado, which would have meant hundreds of local jobs has been delayed and delayed by politics. Along with North Dakota and Wyoming, we represent a lot of energy prodution. Add in the wind farms currently being developed in all three states, we would be in an excellent export position. Not to mention beef and pork.

It is past time for the federal government to forget party politics and start listening to the people and their needs. Every one in both parties need to understand that big business is not the be all and end all of this country, even if they do contribute to the politicians. Business is for the most part to short sighted to do the country any good. It is not the business of government to stifle competition but to encourage it.

If the neccessary 25,000 signatures in Montana, North Dakota and Wyoming are obtained, that will represent a significant percentage of the registered voters in each state. The total population of those three states is probably less than 2,000,000 people, total. That is not the number of registered voters, that is total population. If that many people are seriously considering seccession as an option, the White House should Think seriously about what it means for the country as a whole.

While I will not vote for it, I can see where it is becoming a viable option for my state.

These are *not* "States" formally requesting secession.
These are a few disgruntled losing voters, expressing
their disappointment by signing petitions.

They are not doing it in only fifteen states.
Petitions are being signed in all fifty states!
Yes, that includes all of the states that Obama won.

25,000 is *not* the number of voters needed to make
secession a done deal. Even if secession were legal,
**which it is Not!**,
that number would be *far* too few for that.
Rather, 25,000 is the number *below* which the Obama
Administration will not bother to respond to a petition.
If many petitions excede this minimum number,
then the administration might not answer all of them.

In the cases of Secession Petitions,
we can be sure that the Answers will be "No."

Another group of Petitions is also being signed,
asking that the Secession Petitions be ignored.
Thus do Americans enjoy expressing opinions.

Howard "Map-addict" Wilkins, Pointy-Headed Liberal

KNick wrote:Having just checked the latest on MSN, there are currently 15 states requesting to secede from the Union. One of them is my home state. Is this simply a flash in the pan or is it serious? All of them have benifited from federal aid in the last 50 years. All of them have at least a nearly break even economy. All of them are major contributors to the economic well-being of the US. Are they doing this out of disgust at the current political system or is it a growing dissatisfation with the way the rest of the country is being run? How much is a response to the logjam of the last 4 years? Are we as a people ready to give uo on our political system?

In the case of Montana, I know so of the dissatisfation comes from federal policies forced upon us by government agencies such as the EPA. Their ideas of forest managment have cost jobs in the lumber industries because they will not allow logging (even of disease killed trees) which contributes to our annual fire problem. Their regulations for mining have prevented the opening of a couple of mines and forced the closure of others.

Conflicting laws regarding the meat packing industry have closed or prevented the opening of local slaughter houses. In a meat producing state, almost all of our meat is imported, with the addendent rise in prices due to shipping.

In an oil producing state, most of our gasoline and oil products are shipped in from out of state. The pipeline from Canada to carry oil to Colorado, which would have meant hundreds of local jobs has been delayed and delayed by politics. Along with North Dakota and Wyoming, we represent a lot of energy prodution. Add in the wind farms currently being developed in all three states, we would be in an excellent export position. Not to mention beef and pork.

It is past time for the federal government to forget party politics and start listening to the people and their needs. Every one in both parties need to understand that big business is not the be all and end all of this country, even if they do contribute to the politicians. Business is for the most part to short sighted to do the country any good. It is not the business of government to stifle competition but to encourage it.

If the neccessary 25,000 signatures in Montana, North Dakota and Wyoming are obtained, that will represent a significant percentage of the registered voters in each state. The total population of those three states is probably less than 2,000,000 people, total. That is not the number of registered voters, that is total population. If that many people are seriously considering seccession as an option, the White House should Think seriously about what it means for the country as a whole.

While I will not vote for it, I can see where it is becoming a viable option for my state.

In the UK there is a serious attempt by some in Scotland to secede from the UK, with a vote coming up in late 2014 that Westminster has agreed to abide by. Most expect that it will not pass though. From what I've read it appears to be a similar situation to what you are describing where the central (federal) power is dominated by the heavily populated major urban centres, and values across the nation are varied. As an example, what does a latte sipping advertising executive in Manhattan know about raising hogs in Kansas? Here in Australia there are rumblings about the resource rich states of Western Australia and Queensland seceding from the rest.
Generally it's not a good idea but there are exceptions like the Soviet Union that needed breaking up.

Daryl wrote:In the UK there is a serious attempt by some in Scotland to secede from the UK, with a vote coming up in late 2014 that Westminster has agreed to abide by. Most expect that it will not pass though. From what I've read it appears to be a similar situation to what you are describing where the central (federal) power is dominated by the heavily populated major urban centres, and values across the nation are varied. As an example, what does a latte sipping advertising executive in Manhattan know about raising hogs in Kansas? Here in Australia there are rumblings about the resource rich states of Western Australia and Queensland seceding from the rest.
Generally it's not a good idea but there are exceptions like the Soviet Union that needed breaking up.

you think Aus is bad? we are smaller then some of the states in the US or Aus, and even so we have several groups in NZ here who want to break us up even further. But then again, we also have political problems with seperating the cook islands from us... IIRC they are the only protectorate left in the world, and they dont want to stop being a protectorate, as there are too many benefits to staying a (semi) part of NZ. Then we ahve the ones who want to join Aus, and the ones who want Aus to become our 4th and 5th big islands.


The scotland thing sounds interesting,but it all depends on how its worded. IIRC, the ones who are advocating for it dont want a full split, they just want more autonomy, but those who are against it are wording it as a full split to discourage the public from voting for the idea. not entirely sure though. anyone here who is a Brit/Scot/North Irish/Welsh who can confirm?



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
its not paranoia if its justified...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Also, it's my understanding that there's no check on whether someone who signs a petition is actually a resident of the state in question (and possibly not even a US citizen or resident). It wouldn't surprise me to find out that there are the same names on multiple petitions (not to mention that it seems some of the signatories did so to troll...)

Howard T. Map-addict wrote:These are *not* "States" formally requesting secession.
These are a few disgruntled losing voters, expressing
their disappointment by signing petitions.

They are not doing it in only fifteen states.
Petitions are being signed in all fifty states!
Yes, that includes all of the states that Obama won.

25,000 is *not* the number of voters needed to make
secession a done deal. Even if secession were legal,
**which it is Not!**,
that number would be *far* too few for that.
Rather, 25,000 is the number *below* which the Obama
Administration will not bother to respond to a petition.
If many petitions excede this minimum number,
then the administration might not answer all of them.

In the cases of Secession Petitions,
we can be sure that the Answers will be "No."

Another group of Petitions is also being signed,
asking that the Secession Petitions be ignored.
Thus do Americans enjoy expressing opinions.

Howard "Map-addict" Wilkins, Pointy-Headed Liberal

In MT, you must give your address as well as your name when signing political petitions. That includes your state of legal residence. You do not have to be a registered voter. All names are checked for validity. Having said that, it is still possible to "game the system" by signing multiple copies of a petition.

Current political map:



Poker

The video in this is very infomrative:

http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2012/11/01/163632378/a-campaign-map-morphed-by-money

Basically we're more purple than we are blue or red.

pokermind wrote:Current political map:



Poker

pokermind wrote:Current political map:



Poker

That's... odd. Off the top of my head, Florida, Virginia, Ohio, Wisconsin, Michigan and Illinois all went blue this last election. Where's that map from?

RandomGraysuit wrote:

pokermind wrote:Current political map:



Poker

That's... odd. Off the top of my head, Florida, Virginia, Ohio, Wisconsin, Michigan and Illinois all went blue this last election. Where's that map from?

wouldnt a better question be when? it might be an old election map from the era of landslide victories.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
its not paranoia if its justified...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~