Louisiana petitions Obama for secession.

[Unicron]

Alidar Warlock wrote:

---

Halfway in between. They can withdraw with consent of everyone else. No state lives in a vacuum, so their actions affect others. Because of this, any secession has to take into account these realities.

Obviously, our country was founded by breaking away from another country, so I never want to categorically say they can never unilaterally secede. But it has to be the gravest of circumstances that can't be remedied through some other means.

Agreed. I think there might be circumstances where secession might be justifiable, but they'd have to be pretty dire.

[T'Girl]

Let's see, Louisiana has ridiculous amount of oil and natural gas. And a large number of refineries, refineries that can't be replace without considerable political will (which is missing) so would continue to refine oil for the US.

Tourism.

Louisiana has some fine schools. Source of lovely international tuition money.

The Panama Canal charges up to $140,000 dollars for a ship to pass through. There's lot's of traffic on the Mississippi River that has to pass through Louisiana.

The people of Louisiana paid their share for the creation of the US military, in all fairness they should get their fair share of it when they leave. No Nukes.

Unless the US federal government wanted to be snotty about it, crossing the border would be like entering/exiting Canada. Basically nothing but a long line and a display of your drivers license.

And for our liberal friends. The House of Representative will change from Republicans controlling 55.4% of the seats, to Republicans controlling 55.1% of the seats.

Hurrah.

[Peacemaker]

And then, within a really good hurricane up the Gulf and into NOLA, we'll all get the pleasure of watching them ask the rest of us for help when they can't handle it on their own - again.

[BillJ]

Let. Them. Go.

[gturner]

Jinxed wrote:

---

I say let them go. Most red states -- i.e. those in the south -- are poor states. They get more money back from the federal government than they send to Washington. They'll be begging for reinstatement in less than a year.

New Orleans controls the outlet of the Mississippi river, and thus much of the production that flows out the US heartland, and they would be able to charge the US exorbitant transit rates or shut down traffic altogether.
The last battle of the War of 1812 was fought there for good reason, and holding the mouth of the Missisissippi was and is a strategic and economic necessity.

[Finn]

Oh man, no. The state government has been crap at governing. Jindal and his henchmen have been acting like bullies to get things done the way they want. I'm amazed at lack of common services I've seen in other cities I lived in, even Cincinnati. They have been cutting down things so much. A lot of people have been screwed over.

No recycling. Very sparse bus service outside of LSU area and downtown. It's definitely not pedestrian friendly. Horrible traffic (I think it's worse than DC in some ways)

I asked some people at work about Katrina and Gustav. They weren't even pointing fingers at FEMA and Bush. They had beef with Jindal and the state government.

[Alidar Jarok]

T'Girl wrote:

---

Let's see, Louisiana has ridiculous amount of oil and natural gas. And a large number of refineries, refineries that can't be replace without considerable political will (which is missing) so would continue to refine oil for the US.

What gives Louisiana the right to those? Natural resources in the Gulf are currently owned by the federal government. The federal government would have to consent to giving them to Louisiana. Even if Louisiana is democratically entitled to secede, they aren't entitled to deprive something that currently belongs to the US as a whole.

[Roger Wilco]

MacLeod wrote:

---

So much for democracy, surely if a referredum was held in a state and a signifigant majority (say 70%) voted to secede. Haven't the people spoken and made their wishes known?

So yes they should be allowed to leave if they have the support of the populance.

I agree.

[SmoothieX]

Can't they just move to Canada like normal people 'threaten' to do when their guy doesn't get elected?

Though them seceding and the rest of us sitting back and watching them on TV the next time a Katrina hits would make for great entertainment.

[Shilliam Watner]

Alidar Warlock wrote:

---

What gives Louisiana the right to those? Natural resources in the Gulf are currently owned by the federal government. The federal government would have to consent to giving them to Louisiana. Even if Louisiana is democratically entitled to secede, they aren't entitled to deprive something that currently belongs to the US as a whole.

Louisiana has thousands upon thousands of producing oil and gas wells in their state waters and marshes as well as on land that are not owned by the federal government. They also have massive salt domes where oil and gas reserves are stored. They have the massive Haynesville Oil Shale in Northwest Louisiana that is a huge money maker. Don't forget they have a huge seafood industry. Louisiana could sustain itself if it seceded.

[Locutus of Bored]

Roger Wilco wrote:

---

I agree.

Oh, joy, then we can bring the direct democracy of the initiative system that has been sooooo good for California to matters that decide the fate of the entire nation based on the current whims of the largely uninformed and easily swayed electorate and which special interests can spend the most money. That sounds like a recipe for quickly tearing apart the country because some people are upset that President Kenyan Muslim Socialist got reelected and is going to take their guns and ban Jesus. Good call.

[Admiral2]

MacLeod wrote:

---

So much for democracy,

The United States is not a Democracy and never has been. It's a Republic. Each state has a republican form of government, and that means elected representatives make decisions on behalf of the people.

surely if a referredum was held in a state and a signifigant majority (say 70%) voted to secede. Haven't the people spoken and made their wishes known?

A referendum is only valid if the constitution provides for it (as in California). Neither the US Constitution nor that of the state of Louisiana provides for a public referendum, so even if the entire civilian population of the state signed the petition to support secession it wouldn't mean diddly if the state government didn't vote to act on it and the Federal Government said "Hell no."

So yes they should be allowed to leave if they have the support of the populance. Otherwise if you force them to stay against their will, why not change from the United States of America to the British States of America. Because in essence forcing them to stay would be little different than the British trying to force America to stay a British colony like they did 236 or so years ago.

The difference is there's a mechanism in place for making it happen. 238 years ago you could only use violence to break from the king. Here, if the idiots who created this petition were serious they'd be petitioning their Legislators to vote to unratify the US Constitution and ask Congress to let them out of the contract, which is the only legal way this can happen. If they can't be troubled to do the research necessary to do that much, then no. I don't care if everybody signs it, they should be forced to stay and suffer through the next four years like the rest of us who don't like Obama.

[QCzar]

Roger Wilco wrote:

---

I agree.

I don't.

Look, this isn't a Scotland/UK situation we're talking about here. There just aren't any prima facie cases to be made for this being anything other than naked insurrection. Which is fine, but the way I see it you've got to call it like it is (a rebellion, IOW). If they want to rebel, I'm all for it. Bring it on.

It's like saying if a majority of a state's populace wanted to ban free press, set up a Church of Louisiana or reinstate slavery we should just let them, because of "democracy". It's unconstitutional and it's insane. It is not and (as the Civil War proved) never has been a state's right.

And let's add to that the very real amount of disenfranchised people who may not make up enough of the populace to deny a "significant" majority (and who would likely become even more disenfranchised) who already live in the state of Louisiana even while it lay within the US. What becomes of them?

And last but not least, what problems can we imagine are so severe where Louisiana being an independent country becomes the only viable solution? Despite all the cynicism, the United States remains strongly democratic, with enfranchisement given to all of its citizens and to its states via the national legislature. The "dire" circumstances would therefore have to be truly extreme to make secession seem necessary or plausible.

[Hartzilla2007]

T'Girl wrote:

---

The people of Louisiana paid their share for the creation of the US military, in all fairness they should get their fair share of it when they leave.

I'm pretty sure it doesn't work that way.

[Gaith]

Let's also pause to note that, assuming this site has its numbers right, Louisiana receives $1.78 in federal funds for every dollar contributed to the nation as a whole.

gturner wrote:

---

New Orleans controls the outlet of the Mississippi river, and thus much of the production that flows out the US heartland, and they would be able to charge the US exorbitant transit rates or shut down traffic altogether..

If an independent Louisiana tried that, I'm pretty sure the Union would find some creative ways to make them cut it out, like charging $1,000 for every border crossing. (To say nothing of flat-out invasion and incorporation as a territory without Congressional voting power, like Guam.)