Skip to comments.Break up the states! The case for the United Statelets of America
Posted on 07/29/2014 5:43:20 AM PDT by C19fan
A ballot initiative that would support breaking California into six smaller and more coherent states is being backed by Timothy Draper, a tech investor. Its a great idea. But why stop with California? Breaking up all of the too-large states would increase both the accountability and efficiency of the U.S. government.
Americas state governments are too big to be democratic and too small to be efficient. Given an adequate tax base, public services like public schools and hospitals, utilities and first responders are best carried out by cities and counties. Most infrastructure is either local or regional or national. Civil rights, including workers rights, should be handled at the federal level, to eliminate local pockets of tyranny and exploitation. Social insurance systems are most efficient and equitable when they are purely national, like Social Security and Medicare, and inefficient and inequitable when they are clumsily divided among the federal government and the states, like unemployment insurance, Medicaid and Obamacare.
So what are state governments particularly good at? Nothing, really. They interfere in local government, cripple the federal government, shake down lobbyists and waste taxpayer money.
(Excerpt) Read more at salon.com ...
This is hoot:
When the former republic of Texas was admitted to the Union, it should have been admitted as several states, not one.
The reason Texas was not broken up was because all the potential mini-Texas states would be slave states. Just getting Texas into the Union was hard enough and no way the Northern states would allow the creation of multiple slave states. The author is either ignorant of history or thinks his readers are ignorant, probably the later. Multiple TX states would lock in the Slave Power in the Senate and perhaps enough advantage in the electoral college to prevent a GOP POTUS being elected in 1860.
I would love for America to be divided into at least two states. The liberals could get the north and the conservatives the south. I don’t know how much longer we can co-exist.
Any ones I left out?
I can see the water wars when Hollywood goes to battle with West Nevada.
Yeah because everybody knows there are no conservatives in the north. /s
Leave the states alone and break up the federal government.
99% of the problems in the cities and the states begin and end with the bloated, overbearing, life sucking, parasitic federal government.
That could literally be taken from East German Propaganda. Salon isn't hiding their Communism anymore are they?
The State of Jefferson.
But I think you probably alluded to it as Weedistan.
I like snow too much.
Yeah really! South Dakota here! RED State!
I am sure there are but I think they are vastly outnumbered.
First error in the article is we are not a democracy, second, all this would do is give us more senators, or little kings as one of the founders referred to them as.
Go back to the state houses elect senators.
The reason Texas wasn't 'broken up' was because it was its own Nation and therefore had control over the terms contained in the Petition of Admittance.
As far as 'breaking up' States in general, goes-
Schemes to subvert the liberties of a great community require time to mature them for execution. An army, so large as seriously to menace those liberties, could only be formed by progressive augmentations; which would suppose, not merely a temporary combination between the legislature and executive, but a continued conspiracy for a series of time. Is it probable that such a combination would exist at all? Is it probable that it would be persevered in, and transmitted along through all the successive variations in a representative body, which biennial elections would naturally produce in both houses? Is it presumable, that every man, the instant he took his seat in the national Senate or House of Representatives, would commence a traitor to his constituents and to his country? Can it be supposed that there would not be found one man, discerning enough to detect so atrocious a conspiracy, or bold or honest enough to apprise his constituents of their danger? If such presumptions can fairly be made, there ought at once to be an end of all delegated authority. The people should resolve to recall all the powers they have heretofore parted with out of their own hands, and to divide themselves into as many States as there are counties, in order that they may be able to manage their own concerns in person.
Alexander Hamilton Federalist #26
Hmmm...didn’t Russia say this would happen...
Russian analyst predicts decline and breakup of U.S.
Professor Igor Panarin said in an interview with the respected daily Izvestia published on Monday: “The dollar is not secured by anything. The country’s foreign debt has grown like an avalanche, even though in the early 1980s there was no debt. By 1998, when I first made my prediction, it had exceeded $2 trillion. Now it is more than 11 trillion. This is a pyramid that can only collapse.”
The paper said Panarin’s dire predictions for the U.S. economy, initially made at an international conference in Australia 10 years ago at a time when the economy appeared strong, have been given more credence by this year’s events.
When asked when the U.S. economy would collapse, Panarin said: “It is already collapsing. Due to the financial crisis, three of the largest and oldest five banks on Wall Street have already ceased to exist, and two are barely surviving. Their losses are the biggest in history. Now what we will see is a change in the regulatory system on a global financial scale: America will no longer be the world’s financial regulator.”
When asked who would replace the U.S. in regulating world markets, he said: “Two countries could assume this role: China, with its vast reserves, and Russia, which could play the role of a regulator in Eurasia.”
Asked why he expected the U.S. to break up into separate parts, he said: “A whole range of reasons. Firstly, the financial problems in the U.S. will get worse. Millions of citizens there have lost their savings. Prices and unemployment are on the rise. General Motors and Ford are on the verge of collapse, and this means that whole cities will be left without work. Governors are already insistently demanding money from the federal center. Dissatisfaction is growing, and at the moment it is only being held back by the elections and the hope that Obama can work miracles. But by spring, it will be clear that there are no miracles.”
He also cited the “vulnerable political setup”, “lack of unified national laws”, and “divisions among the elite, which have become clear in these crisis conditions.”
He predicted that the U.S. will break up into six parts - the Pacific coast, with its growing Chinese population; the South, with its Hispanics; Texas, where independence movements are on the rise; the Atlantic coast, with its distinct and separate mentality; five of the poorer central states with their large Native American populations; and the northern states, where the influence from Canada is strong.
He even suggested that “we could claim Alaska - it was only granted on lease, after all.”
Yeah, sure right. Think 100 states, each with their own state legislatures, laws, regulations, and bureacracies to enforce them. That would make Government grow, vs. shrink. That being said, if any state is a candidate for breakup, CA is—followed by NY and IL.
Repeal the 16th and 17th Amendmends. We did it for prohibition.
If we are going to start dividing things up lets just start with making the united states two or more countries.
The united states is already much like the former soviet union in that the central Government has almost complete control of the States which is of course contrary to the constitution.
If we want central power and a dictator we do not have to do anything, that is what we already have.