Posted on 02/12/2013 9:48:31 AM PST by SeekAndFind
The Lone Star state boasts all-star status when it comes to job creation and economic growth. Writing for City Journal, Wendell Cox brings us a great in-depth look at one of the healthiest state economies in the U.S. Texas job creation is well above the national average, with the number of jobs having grown 31.5 percent since 1995. Even more impressive, many of the new jobs were high-paying, coming from professional and technical fields. Cox explains why:
A pro-business climate has unquestionably been a substantial advantage. In its annual ranking of business environments, Chief Executive has named Texas the most growth-friendly state for eight years in a row. (California has been last for the same eight years.) The reasons included low taxes and sensible regulations; a high-quality workforce (Texas ranked second only to Utah in that category in 2012); and a pleasant living environment….
Part of the explanation for the high living-environment score is doubtless Texas’s low cost of living…. More than three-quarters of the cost-of-living difference between Texas and California can be explained by housing costs….
Read the whole thing. Cox makes well-supported points about why this particular state is doing so well.
Other states should be looking to Texas for inspiration. It’s no coincidence that Cox compares Texas and California so frequently in his article. California may still have the biggest economy, but at the moment Texas has all the momentum.
[Image courtesy of Shutterstock.com.]
Texas cannot secede but it can divide into five states. It should seriously consider this option.
Going from 2 to 10 senators would fundamentally change national politics.
Texas was not a territory when it joined the Union.
Resolution Annexing Texas to the United States
(1 March 1845)
The annexation of Texas was a key issue in James K. Polk’s U. S. presidential election campaign of 1844. As a result, Polk’s victory that November was interpreted in the United States as a mandate to annex the ten-year old republic. Early the following year, a joint resolution for annexation passed both houses of the U. S. Congress—even before Polk’s inauguration. It was signed by outgoing President Tyler on March 1, 1845, subject to acceptance by the Republic of Texas.
The following summer, the Convention of 1845 met in Texas to consider the annexation issue. By a vote of fifty-five to one, the convention accepted the annexation offer by passing an Ordinance with virtually the same wording as the U. S. resolution.
The resolution, as shown below, contains several interesting provisions unique among the states. Under the agreement, Texas was to retain all of its “vacant and unappropriated lands,” as well as its public debts. In addition, Texas, which claimed a land area about 50 percent larger than that of the present state, was given the option to form out of its territory up to four additional states. The issues of land boundaries and public debt, however, would not be finally resolved until the Compromise of 1850.
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States in Congress assembled, That Congress doth consent the territory properly included within, and rightfully belonging to the Republic of Texas, may be erected into a new State, to be called the State of Texas, with a republican form of government, to be adopted by the people of said republic, by deputies in convention assembled, with the consent of the existing government, in order that the same may be admitted as one of the States of this Union.
2. And be it further resolved, That the foregoing consent of Congress is given upon the following conditions, and with the following guarantees, to wit:
First, Said State to be formed, subject to the adjustment by this government of all questions of boundary that may arise with other governments; and the constitution therof, with the proper evidence of its adoption by the people of said Republic of Texas, shall be transmitted to the President of the United States, to be laid before Congress for its final action, on or before the first day of January, one thousand eight hundred and forty-six.
Second, Said State, when admitted into the Union, after ceding to the United States, all public edifices, fortifications, barracks, ports and harbors, navy and navy-yards, docks, magazines, arms, armaments, and all other property and means pertaining to the public defence belonging to the said Republic of Texas, shall retain all the public funds, debts, taxes, and dues of every kind, which may belong to or be due and owning to said Republic of Texas; and shall also retain all the vacant and unappropriated lands lying within its limits, to be applied to the payment of the debts and liabilities of said Republic of Texas, and the residue of said lands, after discharging said debts and liabilities, to be disposed of as State may direct; but in no event are said debts and liabilities to become a charge upon the Government of the United States.
Third, New States, of convenient size, not exceeding four in number, in addition to said State of Texas, and having sufficient population, may hereafter, by the consent of the said State, be formed out of the territory thereof, which shall be entitled to admission under the provisions of the federal constitution. And as such States as may be formed out of that portion of said territory lying south of thirty-six degrees thirty minutes north latitude, commonly known as the Missouri compromise line, shall be admitted to the Union with or without slavery, as the people of each State asking permission may desire. And in such State or States as shall be formed north of said Missouri compromise line, slavery, or involuntary servitude, (except for crime) shall be prohibited.
3. And be it further resolved, That if the President of the United States shall in his judgement and discretion deem it most advisable, instead of proceeding to submit the foregoing resolution of the Republic of Texas, as an overture on the part of the United States for admission, to negotiate with the Republic; then,
Be it Resolved, That a State, to be formed out of the present Republic of Texas, with suitable extant and boundaries, and with two representatives in Congress, until the next appointment of representation, shall be admitted into the Union, by virtue of this act, on an equal footing with the existing States as soon as the terms and conditions of such admission, and the cession of the remaining Texian territory to the United States be agreed upon by the Governments of Texas and the United States: And that the sum of one hundred thousand dollars be, and the same is hereby, appropriated to defray the expenses of missions and negotiations, to agree upon the terms of said admission and cession, either by treaty to be submitted to the Senate, or by articles to be submitted to the two houses of Congress, as the President may direct.
Approved, March 1, 1845.
Never understood the concept of deceptive practice and misrepresentation ? Consider the “Columbia Recod Club” as a parallel.
I believe VT was independent before it entered the union.
If Texas does secede, I’m outta here. I’ll be on my way to Texas in a heartbeat. My oldest son has been trying to talk us into moving there anyway.
Great research, EB! But it does say what I said — Texas is a State with no special secession privilege.
As to being a “territory,” I meant it was a definable area when it was admitted as a State (from your post: “That Congress doth consent the territory properly included within”).
But “Republic of Texas” would have been more accurate.
Depending on where they draw the borders, a couple of those states could be Democrat controlled. Regardless, they can't do it without consent of Congress and I don't see Congress allowing it.
I’d like to see a broader secession movement but the first state that tries it has a death wish unless someone does them a solid and uses one of the mythical missing Soviet suitcase nukes on DC first. Sure, Texas has great resources and infrastructure and could make it on it’s own. Unfortunately DC has a dozen carrier battle groups. Just one of those could turn Texas into a 3rd world country. And anyone who thinks Americans won’t fire on Americans needs to crack a history book. It’s happened more than once. A lot more.
This is under three terms of pro-gun, pro-life, pro-religious freedom, pro-capitalism Rick Perry. Folks were too hard on him. We’d be in a much better place right now if he were president.
” Texas is not going anywhere. It will go blue before seceeding. This national push to flood it with California commie refugees and a few more illegals will guarantee it.”
This. I looked long and hard at Texas as a potential relocation possibility. I wanted to love it and there was a lot to love, BUT demographically, the game is already over. CA just tipped over the demographic edge this year and went majority hispanic. It is already a one party state and a majority hispanic population will ensure it will never recover. Texas is running the same deficit and will turn into the same situation, it will just take a little longer. Throw in a little amnesty and it will be quicker.
“...VT was independent before it entered the union.”
That is so cool - The Vermont Republic, Freedom and Unity.
“Some wit suggested that were Texas to secede, their first act should be to make communism, socialism, and the Democrat party unlawful.”
And unless we also deported the life-long parasites that vote Democrat, secession would not accomplish too much.
“That kind of assumes that Texas is looking for anybody’s permission to secede.”
That’s it exactly. When it comes down to the ‘Declaration of Independence” moment, there are 2 ways to go - easy or hard.
“Texas cannot secede but it can divide into five states. It should seriously consider this option.”
Yes and no. This was a provision in the first Texas constitution, but there have been several constitutions since then. I believe that first Texas constitution also had provisions for Texas withdrawl from the union within a certain time-frame, but it has been a few years. The modern Texas constitution doesn’t have this stuff in it.
Texas founding is unique in our history and so worth studying.
I’ve read arguments that Texas “isn’t allowed” to secede.
Well, neither were the original colonies.
“It’s against the law!” Say some.
What law, citizen?
Some law back in your hometown?
STFU, GTFO and take your fail with you!
(My apologies to Heinlein for bastardizing his quote)
“That is urban myth. Upon statehood any territory becomes the same as any other state. The War of Northern Aggression cemented that relationship.”
Funny, King George also thought it was illegal for states (colonies) to secede.
>>Funny, King George also thought it was illegal for states (colonies) to secede.<<
He was right. If it comes to arms, then so mote it be.
“That kind of assumes that Texas is looking for anybody’s permission to secede.”
That’s it exactly. When it comes down to the ‘Declaration of Independence” moment, there are 2 ways to go - easy or hard.
Remember the civil war didn’t start because the south seceded... It started when the south attacked Ft. Sumter...
If Texas was really careful there could be no reason for the US to attack them.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.