Is secession viable, and could the economy of a state improve?
With the 150th Rememberance of the War for Southern Independence, (1861 - 1865), is it coincident that the US is in such trouble, and could secession be a solution? by Mark Vogl
(conservative)
Friday, March 11, 2011
Wow, what a question.
But given the depth of special interests in the federal purse and the refusal of one national political party to realize just how bad the crisis is, could secession be an option?
Throughout the ages, the ruling elite and those in power have had real troubles with rule of the law. When they could not muster a majority in the US to follow them, they would inevitably move to extra legal means to get their way.
Roe v. Wade may be the most known and obvious example, but it is not the only one.
The political battle in Wisconsin demonstrates just how rooted the special interests are, how desperate they are to keep their advantage, and how dedicated they are to maintaining their advantage, no matter that an entire state is in fiscal peril. Protestors are shipped in from other states, while the elected liberals leave the state in an attempt to block reform. In the end these strategies failed because Governor Walker and the newly elected Republican majority appear to be dedicated to solving the issues of the state's finances.
Unions are by their very nature dangerous in a fee society. They create an economic bond and a belief in their entitlement and their superiority. They are even more dangerous when they are connected to the government. A union in the private sector is, in the end, still under the control of the free market. If the greed of the union drive up the labor costs so much that their customers refuse to buy then the company the union is employed by fails and the union is out of work.
But, in the case of a government union, there is no free market. They make demands, politicians want their votes and support so the demands are met. Taxes go up. The people at the bottom hurt from the increased taxes, the cost of all goods and services rise so that special elite of the government workforce can get their pound. And when recession hits, and people in the private sector are let go, the government worker, safe in their cocoon feel no pain personally. Their job is not threatened. Their raises continue. Their benefits continue.
It is so easy to see why socialism doesn't work. If all workers were paid by the government, no one would ever be fired, pay would rise everywhere, which would then be seized through taxes and the viscous circle of extended poverty would never end.
Capitalism is not perfect. But, it does adjust to economic conditions. It does clear out waste, both in terms of excess capacity, and in terms of poor products.
Wisconsin, National Public Radio (NPR), the Endowment for the Arts all point to how the special interests in this nation cannot adjust to bad economic times. Funding NPR in this time, is like a family on welfare buying a new television!
America needs a new direction, a change which reinvigorates not just our economy but our people.
Secession could help do that.
The Founding Fathers saw far ahead to the problems we have today. Did you ever wonder why the District of Columbia has no votes in the presidential election? Its because the Founders anticipated the greed of the special interests. They anticipated that most federal workers would work in DC, and since they would most benefit from increased federal power they were blocked from participating in the election. That's what should have happened in all the states. Government workers should not be allowed to vote in their government's election since there is an automatic conflict of interest.
Now, as to secession.
Once again, back to the Founding Fathers. The Tenth Amendment is so clear, and one of the most ignored of Amendments. In the Tenth it specifically says that any powers not addressed in the Constitution revert to the people and the states respectively. Whether we talk about the environment, or education these areas are not addressed in the Constitution, nor is space and NASA, NPR, or so many other items.
But the one power which they intended not to include was secession. It is undeniable that at the time the Founders wrote the Constitution all of the states, north and south, big and small, saw the states as the partners to a compact. They saw the federal government as their agent. Many states included secession clauses in the resolutions which ratified the Constitution.
At West Point, the text book on American government specifically addressed the right of a state to secede!
(Lincoln’s refusal to accept the legal decision of the southern states to secede is an example of the ruling elite and those in power not accepting the laws of their time. His call for volunteers to "preserve the union" was simultaneously a call for volunteers to reject the Constitution as it was written and agreed to by the separate states. It is why the Civil War is also known as the War for Southern Independence, or more belligerently the War of Northern Oppression. ).
So for the moment, just to get to the economics of secession, let’s assume that peaceful secession of a state is a right. What would be the economic impact of secession on the state, and on the federal government be?
If a state were to secede, the federal government would lose all the revenue brought in through federal taxation in that state. But it would also lose all the costs associated with federal spending in that state, with the exception of federal retirements and social security. Of course, it’s possible the feds would attempt to block those payments, but one would have to ask, would they block all monies going out of what remained in the union...whether those checks went to a seceded state or Mexico and Germany?
The residents of the seceded state would lose the federal jobs, and the jobs funded by the federal trough.
No question there would be economic disruption on both sides. But in the long run there would be one less level of government for the residents of the seceded state. One less group of people the special interests could sack.
The special interests and power groups of Washington, New York and California would see their influence reduced considerably. Instead of directing change through DC, they would have to work 50 different states! The people of each state would become a special interest in and of themselves.
Secession has another aspect all together. Should states actually have the right to leave the union peacefully, the power of the federal government to impose its will would be dramatically and permanently reduced. If the Supreme Court had to include in its consideration how the separate would react to their decisions, they could not expect to impose decisions like Roe v. Wade or Gay marriage. Controversial, undecided questions would have to be left to the respective states...which is EXACTLY what the Founding Fathers intended.
An accepted right of secession might actually strengthen the union by introducing the idea of real limits on power at the federal level and mor work towards compromise and diversity in dealing with issues.
At a time when globalism has been imposed on us, and the threat of even another layer of governance and taxation (the United Nations) rests just over the horizon, the natural counter is a resurgence of the right of secession.
Are you anti American if you believe in secession? I would argue quite the contrary. American is as much a state of mind as it is a citizenship. America is about its founding philosophies; Christianity, republican - democracy, and the free market and capitalism, plus an appreciation for the land that is America. It is not first and foremost about loyalty to Washington, the city, as it is about loyalty to Washington the man!
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 5
thumbs so far
The views expressed
in this article are those of Mark Vogl only and
do not represent the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates.
Mark Vogl is solely responsible for the contents
of this article and is not an employee or otherwise affiliated
with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
Posted By: Interested Catholic
Date: March 12, 2011 09:28:34 AM
Mark,
The vision that you provide of a state seceding from the Union does not answer a question that I have had for quite some time. That is, what makes you think that the government of a secessionist state would not become a microcosm of the Federal government? In other words, would there be no special interest groups at the state level? If the state were run like its own country, which I can't help but think that it would be, how would we prevent what has happened at the Federal level from happening at the state level? How would a state government be run that differs from how the federal government is run? You have given very few examples of how the economy could improve and only one example of how the federal government would suffer. Your dream of secession seems like just that. A dream, with no basis in reality.
Posted By: Russell G. Davis
Date: March 12, 2011 01:40:49 PM
"Unions are by their very nature dangerous in a fee society." Although I strongly suspect you meant "free society" it is a classic Fruedian slip. One might describe a fee society as one in which everything is privatized. What used to be part of the common stock (to paraphrase Adam Smith), is now privately owned and costs a fee while it is less effective with huge executive salaries.
And Unions are dangerous to a FEE society. witness the paragraph that was rammed through in the Wisconsin bill which gave away the Wisconsin common stock to no-bid tyrants.
I suspect you'll fix the typo, but it was amusing and true...unlike the rest of the column.
