Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Texas CAN Split Itself Into As Many As Five Separate States

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
WeDidIt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-17-09 06:36 PM
Original message
Texas CAN Split Itself Into As Many As Five Separate States
Edited on Fri Apr-17-09 06:38 PM by WeDidIt
Unfortunately for the Texas Congresscritter just on Hardball (who said they could add as many as four new Republican Senators tomorrow), they CANNOT do so without the consent of the United States Congress:

The Constitution of the United States

<snip>

Article IV

<snip>

Section 3 - New States

New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new States shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress.


So under the constitution, even Rhode Island has that right so long as the Congress and the State Legislature of Rhode Island concurs.

Nothin' special about Texas when it comes to this.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Why Syzygy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-17-09 06:40 PM
Response to Original message
1. We don't want to be five states.
It's the diversity of geography and peoples that makes Texas what it is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WeDidIt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-17-09 06:41 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. My point was, all 50 states have this right.
Texas isn't special when it comes to the right to break itself into other states.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
readmoreoften Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-17-09 07:05 PM
Response to Reply #1
14. Actually, I'm really fine with living in the great State of Austin.
And I'd love to visit the State of San Antonio on occasion too. But the, say, State of Amarillo can keep its laws off me, thanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-17-09 06:41 PM
Response to Original message
2. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
JVS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-17-09 06:42 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. I hear China is always looking for investment opportunities.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HysteryDiagnosis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-17-09 06:43 PM
Response to Original message
5. States that can be achieved....
in denial, disillusioned, confused, confrontational and unlimited disinterest.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-17-09 06:46 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. LOL -that about sums it up
Another nutter from Texas- another reason why Harball unwatchable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madeline_con Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-17-09 06:44 PM
Response to Original message
6. The governor was blowing smoke up the asses of fellow idiots to
get a better turnout for "tea". Just a blow hard.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PA Democrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-17-09 06:48 PM
Response to Original message
8. More threats from Texas Republican blow hards.
Oh and apparently Texans (at least REPUBLICAN ones) are the most patriotic and hardworking people in the whole country, according to Congressman Full-of-Crap(R-TX).

So far they've threatened to secede and threatened to break Texas up into five states to gain more Republican seats in Congress. Now if only we could get them to threaten to hold their breaths until they get their way. That would be truly fitting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HooptieWagon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-17-09 06:49 PM
Response to Original message
9. Ha! I had that thought several years ago driving across I-10.
Freakin' drove all day and still wasn't out of Texas. The thought occured if it were divided into 4 or 5 states then at least I'd be crossing a state line every so often, and feel like I was making some progress...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cali_Democrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-17-09 06:51 PM
Response to Original message
10. The Congress would never allow it
10 Senators from Texas? Yikes!!!! :scared:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WeDidIt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-17-09 06:55 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. PRECISELY!
They'd have to have 60 Republican Senators to even contemplate such a thing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sebastian Doyle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-17-09 06:59 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. I wouldn't be too sure of that.
The DLC and BlueBalls crowd would LOVE for there to be suddenly 8 new Repuke Senators, so they wouldn't have to endure the wrath of their own constituents by deliberately obstructing the Democratic agenda.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KamaAina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-17-09 07:03 PM
Response to Original message
13. The repuke butthead must be referring to this
Edited on Fri Apr-17-09 07:03 PM by KamaAina
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/texan02.asp

Joint Resolution of the Congress of Texas, June 23, 1845
Joint Resolution Giving the consent of the existing Government to the Annexation of Texas to 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 said State, be formed out of the territory thereof, which shall be entitled to admission under the provision of the Federal (constitution. And 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 into the Union, with or without Slavery, as the people of each State asking admission may desire. And in such State or States as shall be formed out of said territory north of said Missouri compromise line, slavery or involuntary servitude (except for crime) shall be prohibited. And whereas, by said terms, the consent of the existing Government of Texas is required,...


One slight problem. This was a joint resolution of the Congress of Texas (the Lone Star Republic), NOT the U.S. Congress. Sorry, but the terms of the U.S. Constitution still apply (unless, of course, you're a repuke). :eyes:

edit: caps
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WeDidIt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-17-09 07:06 PM
Response to Reply #13
15. But under the constitution, all states can do that.
IT takes the state legislature and the congress to agree to it.

So as I said in my OP, even Rhode Island can divide itself into five states. All it takes is an act of Congress and passage by the state legislature.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KamaAina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-17-09 07:09 PM
Response to Reply #13
16. The resolution states that only Texas needs to consent, not Congress.
Edited on Fri Apr-17-09 07:09 PM by KamaAina
Too bad for Goodhair & Co. (not to mention President Norris :sarcasm: ) it isn't valid. But that's where this enduring urban legend came from.

And what part of the Lone Star Republic was ever north of the 36o 30" line?

edit: How could I have left out Chuck?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WeDidIt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-17-09 07:12 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. Nope, it doesn't say that at all
Edited on Fri Apr-17-09 07:12 PM by WeDidIt
...which shall be entitled to admission under the provision of the Federal constitution.

Under the Federal constitution, Congress must agree to the plan.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TexasProgresive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-17-09 08:11 PM
Response to Original message
18. Congress already approved that Texas can do just that
in 1845.

DIVISION OF TEXAS. The congressional joint resolution for the annexation of Texas, passed on March 1, 1845, provided that new states, not to exceed four, could be carved out of Texas, the new states to be entitled to admission to the Union, with or without slavery if south of the Missouri Compromise line, and without slavery if north of that line. The gubernatorial campaign of 1847 centered around the division of Texas into East and West Texas-East Texas being a slave state and West Texas being a free state-but the death of Isaac Van Zandt, chief proponent of division, ruined the hopes of the divisionists. In 1850 Senator Thomas Hart Benton of Missouri introduced a bill to reduce the size of Texas, and Senator Henry Stuart Foote of Mississippi proposed a new state east of the Brazos River, to be called Jacinto, but the proposal received little consideration in the Senate. On February 16, 1852, a joint resolution was introduced into the Texas legislature proposing that Texas be divided into East Texas and West Texas, but the measure was defeated by a vote of 33 to 15.

http://www.tshaonline.org/handbook/online/articles/DD/m...

As are as I know this law still stands because it has never been repealed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WeDidIt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-17-09 09:00 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. No law can supercede the constitution
Edited on Fri Apr-17-09 09:02 PM by WeDidIt
and no bill dividing Texas into five separate states has ever been passed, else there would be no Texas and in its place would be five separate states.

Article IV of the constitution is the legal doctrine. To separate into five states, the Congress must agree. It has yet to do so as the Texas legislature has made no moves to separate into five states.

From your own source:

The question of division continued to be discussed at intervals after Reconstruction. In 1906 it was proposed in Congress that Texas establish four independent legislatures, all functioning under one governor. According to the plan the state was to have eight senators, but the proposal met with only passing interest in Texas and no favorable action from Congress. In 1909, during the struggle over prohibition,qv division was again discussed, but the talk failed to crystallize into party policy.


Without an act of Congress, Texas cannot divide itself.

And back to my original point, this ability of Texas is nothing special. Rhode Island has the same right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
csziggy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-17-09 09:09 PM
Response to Reply #18
21. But would that annexation agreement have been voided when Texas seceded from the Union
In 1861? When the Confederate States lost the war and were allowed back into the Union, there was no re-affirmation of that annexation agreement. I think the state of Texas gave up any rights to subdivide itself when they broke the annexation agreement and joined secessionist states in insurrection and war against the USA.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UTUSN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-17-09 09:03 PM
Response to Original message
20. And each of the five can go to HADES!1 n/t
1
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Jul 24th 2014, 02:55 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC