Should Denver take the deal: Eastern Colorado votes for secession

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by jnpy!$4g3cwk, Nov 11, 2013.

  1. jnpy!$4g3cwk, Nov 11, 2013
    Last edited: Nov 11, 2013

    jnpy!$4g3cwk macrumors 65816

    jnpy!$4g3cwk

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2010
    #1
    Five counties in Eastern Colorado voted to secede from the rest of Colorado.

    http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/New-Colorado-Rural-voters-approve-secession-idea-4974069.php

    Should Denver take the deal? If people in Eastern Colorado feel they are being exploited, perhaps they should form their own state. In fact, the outlines of the new state could be expanded to include the map below:

    [​IMG]

    It is a sad reality that people in these rural counties don't seem to realize that rural prosperity depends on city dwellers purchasing their products.
     
  2. Shrink macrumors G3

    Shrink

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2011
    Location:
    New England, USA
    #2
    OK, I have a silly question to what seems to me to be a silly proposition.

    Assuming that they do secede, what guarantee is there that they will be recognized as a State?

    And if they are not...wouldn't they lose all access to any Federal funds, services, entitlements etc?

    As I said...silly question...:p
     
  3. elistan macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2007
    Location:
    Denver/Boulder, CO
    #3
    If the actually do secede, then by definition they are recognized as a State. Or more precisely, by being recognized as a state, they accomplish the act of seceding.

    Kinda like asking, if they do take a breath, what guarantee is there that they are breathing?

    ;)

    I think your question is more - what if their vote passes? (And it did.) AFAIK, it was a resolution stating the want to pursue secession from Colorado. So now they lobby the state legislature. Or perhaps governor. And if the entire state approves, then they lobby Congress. And if Congress approves, then they lobby every other state in the union. And if enough of those approve, then they get to be formally recognized as a new state. (Or some close facsimile of the above process.)
     
  4. bradl macrumors 68040

    bradl

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    #4
    Nope.. they wouldn't be. In fact, they wouldn't be a new state at all, and the Constitution prohibits them from doing what they are doing:

    They'd simply become refugees without a home anywhere in this country. Is Idiocracy the form of government in Southeast Colorado?

    BL.
     
  5. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #5

    Rural prosperity depends on city dwellers subsidizing their lifestyle.
     
  6. sovereign macrumors 6502

    sovereign

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2009
    #6
    No.

    But when I watch that movie I think I am watching a documentary about the current inhabitants of the White House and those that put them there.
     
  7. Tomorrow macrumors 604

    Tomorrow

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2008
    Location:
    Always a day away
    #7
    No. Even if they could somehow secede from Colorado, the authority to grant statehood lies in Washington, not Denver.

    That's a double-edged sword. Not too many city dwellers would be able to go without the goods and products that are either grown, harvested, found, or processed in rural areas.
     
  8. elistan, Nov 11, 2013
    Last edited: Nov 11, 2013

    elistan macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2007
    Location:
    Denver/Boulder, CO
    #8
    BY DEFINITION, if they secede, is was done at the national level.
    It is IMPOSSIBLE to secede without Washington getting involved.
    If they are recognized as a state, it is because they seceded. If they secede, they are recognized as a state. They are the same thing. Unilateral secession is not allowed by our constitution. (Texas v. White, 74 U.S. 700 (1869).) It can ONLY be accomplished through Washington, et. al.

    Saying "I secede" doesn't cut it.

    ----------

    No they wouldn't. Regardless of anything they vote on, they'd remain residents of Colorado, subject to its laws, and citizens of the USA, also subject to those laws. You're right that they wouldn't be a new state, but they'd also not become a resident of no state or nation. They'll still have to pay their Colorado state income tax, or face the consequences, just like if this vote never was brought up.

    And what they are doing is stating the want to split off from Colorado and start a new state. They aren't actually seceding from the USA - a county-level vote has ZERO ability to make that happen.
     
  9. Tomorrow macrumors 604

    Tomorrow

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2008
    Location:
    Always a day away
    #9
    You're correct in saying it's impossible to secede without Washington getting involved.

    But they weren't looking to secede from the U.S. - they were looking to secede from Colorado.
     
  10. jnpy!$4g3cwk thread starter macrumors 65816

    jnpy!$4g3cwk

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2010
    #10
    Yes to all of the above. That is why I said "Should Denver take the deal?" Colorado would have to make the request; the rest of the country would have to agree. It would probably end up being like the Missouri Compromise, only, based on demographics. Southern Arizona has also openly discussed splitting into a separate state because Phoenix is too right wing for Tucson. So, you could add the Dust Bowl State, along with Southern Arizona, to get one more Red state and Blue state each. Slightly ridiculous, but, apparently the state boundaries today are slightly ridiculous already, according to unhappy people in various rural areas throughout the country.

    True, but, show me a country in the world that has trouble getting open access to world food markets? But, that wasn't really my point. People in rural counties feel economically exploited by people in the city. I think that is a completely unfounded world view. It hasn't been true throughout most of recorded history, and it certainly isn't true today.
     
  11. dukebound85 macrumors P6

    dukebound85

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2005
    Location:
    5045 feet above sea level
    #11
    Who says they don't? :confused:

    Also, life in the city would be quite hard without rural dwellers supplying the food.
     
  12. bradl macrumors 68040

    bradl

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    #12
    Are you sure? because it sounds to me like those peopler hat voted for this didn't read the Constitution.


    but how would they just 'become' a new state? They would require Congressional action to be admitted to the Union, and it's illegal to tom a state within Colorado's jurisdictional boundaries. And if they used parts of KS, OK, TX, and NM, they'd require approval from their legislatures as well. Plus there would be a ton of legal questions to answer. If anything, they'd be another Puerto Rico, USVI, or Guam, but definitely not a 'state'. Territory would be more fitting.

    again, not going to happen, and the people there definitely didn't read the Constitution or their history.

    BL.
     
  13. Sydde macrumors 68020

    Sydde

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    #13
    Somebody messed up the geography here: none of these particular counties are in Southeastern Colorado, the southern-most county is Kit Carson, which borders only on western Kansas. Most of these counties are up near Nebraska and Wyoming, which would probably have to end up accepting them into their states.

    The real problem is that these people feel that it is impossible to get along and so they must take their toys and leave. I mean, I can kind of understand their frustration, but this sort of tantrum stuff is not going to get them what they want. The louder they get, the more likely the other guys will just shout them down. I am not quite sure how to solve this standoff, but secession threats are not going to help. At all.
     
  14. EvilQueen macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2013
    Location:
    In my own world
    #14
    But that doesn't mean they have to be part of the city. The city people can still buy the products even if they are from a rural area in another state.
     
  15. barkomatic macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2008
    Location:
    Manhattan
    #15
    I'd love to see them self finance the state programs that this rural area actually contributes a disproportionately small amount of revenue to. They'll be worse off for it--by quite a bit.
     
  16. ElectronGuru macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2013
    Location:
    Oregon, USA
    #16
    I remember secession talk among liberals during the Bush years, but it was more like 'let's move to Canada.' This is just a 'cake and eat it too' version of the same feeling. But the people today are largely the same people, dealing with the same problems (and other people) as 20 years ago. And I don't remember hearing this kind of talk from either side, then. So what changed, what do we now have or no longer have, that makes this more likely.

    Is it literally harder to get along or do we just want more?
     
  17. Ugg macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #17
    Siskiyou county in Northern California has also voted to secede. they'r trying to drum up support amongst other rural n. Cal. counties as well as southern Oregon counties to create the state of Jefferson.

    It's a perennial issue and mostly based upon ignorance. Much of the money that flows to rural areas comes from government largesse like massive health, highway and ag subsidies. They also want to create their own little libertarian fantasy world but wouldn't be able to do it given the almost non-existent local tax base.

    It's just the frustration of people who hate America. Nothing more.
     
  18. elistan macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2007
    Location:
    Denver/Boulder, CO
    #18
    Entertaining little recap of the state of Jefferson:
    (The whole series is very interesting, btw.)

     
  19. satcomer macrumors 603

    satcomer

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2008
    Location:
    The Finger Lakes Region
    #19
    I grew up in Upstate NY (Southern Tier) and Western New York want to make another State NOT including NYC or Long Island. It all has to do with NYS taxes all going "down state". It's a well known fact that NYC could not function without the tax money from Upstate.
     
  20. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #20

    That's absurd. For decades I've read, every so often, that upstate NY wants to form a new state. Never have I heard the ridiculous claim you make above.


     
  21. gkarris macrumors 604

    gkarris

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2004
    Location:
    "No escape from Reality..."
    #21
    http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/New-Colorado-Rural-voters-approve-secession-idea-4974069.php

    Someone needs to remind them that they left out "The return of slavery"... :eek:

    :rolleyes:
     

Share This Page