POLITICAL: Peaceful “Secession” — an idea who’s time has come

Saturday, February 18, 2017

http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2017/02/13/california-secession/

California Secession? How it Could Happen in Practice

*** begin quote ***

The following article was written by James R. Rogers and originally published on the Library of Law and Liberty website.

Rumblings of secession talk in California, as in Texas a few years back, raises the question of how, if ever, a state might secede from the Union without war.
The legal issue surrounding secession in the Civil War era concerned whether states might unilaterally secede from the Union under the Constitution. The answer, underscored by force of arms and the U.S. Supreme Court, was a definitive “no.”

That states may not unilaterally secede from the Union, however, does not mean there is no route by which a state might secede peacefully, and even legally. Indeed, the U.S. Supreme Court has said there is, albeit, saying it in dictum. In holding in Texas v. White (1869) that Texas did not truly secede from the Union, Chief Justice Chase, writing for the majority, nonetheless identified two routes by which U.S. states could peacefully secede: “There was no place for reconsideration or revocation [of Texas’s entry in the Union], except through revolution or through consent of the States.”

*** and ***

Much of the commentary related to California’s budding secession movement suggests that a constitutional amendment would be necessary for the peaceful, lawful secession of a state from the union. I don’t think so. Chase’s dictum regarding the “consent of the states” does not suggest the need for constitutional amendment to authorize a state’s secession.

Rather, to implement this route for the legal secession of a state, Congress would need only to adopt enabling legislation spelling out the process by which consent of the states would be obtained. Congress could stipulate the states’ consent would be provided by some proportion of state legislatures – half of them, or two-thirds – adopting a “secession consent” resolution or something. Or Congress could authorize states to consent to a state’s request to secede through special state-level conventions or by direct vote in state-level referenda. Or perhaps Congress could provide state consent through a vote of the Senate, or a vote of the Senate and the House, or some combination of the above.

Whatever process Congress might adopt for secession need not be as onerous as the process required to adopt constitutional amendments: Adoption of enabling legislation need not require a supermajority vote in Congress (as constitutional amendments require). And, at congressional determination, the proportion of states sufficient to provide the “consent of the states” could be fewer than the three-fourths majority required to ratify constitutional amendments.

*** end quote ***

Very interesting.

Now that the Liberal Left in California has learned what “executive power” in the “wrong hands” means, they have become interested in secession.

I’m reminded of a quote: “Would you tell me please, Mr. Howard, why should I trade one tyrant three thousand miles away for three thousand tyrants one mile away? An elected legislature can trample a man’s rights as easily as a king can.” Mel Gibson as the character Benjamin Martin in the movie The Patriot http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0187393/quotes

We’ve seen that the Congress has become corrupt and doesn’t faithfully execute its duties by creating the new Fourth Branch of Gooferment — the REGULATORS!

So perhaps, like the old Soviet Union it’s time to dissolve the Union and let partisans go their own way in peace. If the “blue states” want reform around welfare for all — fine. If the “red states” want to reform around “traditional values”— fine. California should be allowed to go its own way in peace.

Hopefully, it would NOT be like what happened in India and Pakistan initially, but things seem peaceful now. 

So too, can the RED USA and the BLUE USA live in peace together … …  finally.

Dona Nobis Pacem

# – # – # – # – # 


TINFOILHAT: Did the Alcatraz escapees make it?

Monday, October 12, 2015

http://nypost.com/2015/10/10/relatives-have-proof-alcatraz-escapees-are-still-alive/

Relatives have ‘proof’ Alcatraz escapees are still alive
By Tim Donnelly
October 10, 2015 | 9:45am

*** begin quote ***

Alcatraz officials have long stated that the men drowned, maintaining the prison’s bragging rights of no escapees. But now, more than 50 years later, new leads are being presented by the Anglin family, who are cooperating with authorities for the first time.

They claim that not only did the brothers survive the escape, they were alive and well up through at least the mid-1970s — and may still be alive today.

The evidence is offered up by the Anglins’ nephews David, 48, and Ken Widner, 54, who are featured in “Alcatraz: Search for the Truth,” a History Channel special airing Monday. The evidence has pumped life into the cold case, and has investigators lining up new interviews and planning to search South America for signs of America’s most notorious escapees.

*** end quote ***

And, why would we believe the “Alcatraz officials”?

Like with murder cases, it’s very hard to convict without a body.

And, from time to time, we hear of folks who have disappeared completely.

Personally, without proof, all we have is assertions and presumptions.

# – # – # – # – # 


INSPIRATIONAL: California Legalizes Self Driving Cars

Wednesday, October 3, 2012

http://tech.slashdot.org/story/12/09/26/1621200/california-legalizes-self-driving-cars

California Legalizes Self Driving Cars
Posted by Unknown Lamer on Wednesday September 26, @12:36PM
from the third-place-leaders-of-the-free-world dept.

*** begin quote ***

Hugh Pickens writes writes “The Seattle PI reports that California has become the third state to explicitly legalize driverless vehicles, setting the stage for computers to take the wheel along the state’s highways and roads … ‘Today we’re looking at science fiction becoming tomorrow’s reality,’ said Gov. Brown. ‘This self-driving car is another step forward in this long, march of California pioneering the future and leading not just the country, but the whole world.’ The law immediately allows for testing of the vehicles on public roadways, so long as properly licensed drivers are seated at the wheel and able to take over. It also lays out a roadmap for manufacturers to seek permits from the DMV to build and sell driverless cars to consumers. Bryant Walker Smith, a fellow at Stanford’s Center for Automotive Research points to a statistical basis for safety that the DMV might consider as it begins to develop standards: ‘Google’s cars would need to drive themselves (by themselves) more than 725,000 representative miles without incident for us to say with 99 percent confidence that they crash less frequently than conventional cars. If we look only at fatal crashes, this minimum skyrockets to 300 million miles. To my knowledge, Google has yet to reach these milestones.'”

*** end quote ***

I’d buy one of those if they are available for sale here!

# – # – # – # – #   


POLITICAL: California may cap future retirement checks

Friday, September 7, 2012

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-08-28/california-lawmakers-set-vote-to-limit-retiree-pensions.html

California Lawmakers Set Vote to Limit Retiree Pensions
By Michael B. Marois – Aug 28, 2012 2:32 PM ET

*** begin quote ***

New state employees in California would face a cap on the size of their retirement checks, Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg said yesterday. They would also have to put in more time on the job than current workers before they collect, he said.

Brown, 74, wants to cut pension benefits and curb abuses before he asks voters in November to raise income and sales taxes. A weak recovery from the longest recession since the 1930s, reducing job prospects and retirement benefits for most nongovernment workers, has churned up a backlash against the pay and benefits of public employees nationwide.

“If voters think that legislators have made a serious policy change, then the chances for the tax increase improve,” said Jack Pitney, who teaches politics at Claremont McKenna College in Claremont, California. “But if they think it is nothing but window dressing, then chances get a lot worse.”

*** and ***

He also wanted to raise the retirement age to 67 from 55 for most new state employees.

Rising retiree obligations are straining the budgets of states such as California and cities across the U.S. still grappling with income- and sales-tax revenue slammed by the recession.

California’s state pensions in 2010 had about 81 percent of what they needed to cover the benefits they promised, down from 87 percent in the preceding year, according to an annual study by Bloomberg Rankings. The median for all states was 75 percent, the data show.

Steinberg said the pension changes would save the state “tens of billions of dollars” over the next 20 to 30 years, though he later added that an analysis of the cost savings had yet to be done.

*** end quote ***

Sorry, but Gooferment pensions are a vestige of “golden watch” thinking.

No pensions for ordinary people; why should the political class get them.

It a terrible abuse of the taxpayer.

# – # – # – # – #   


%d bloggers like this: