Poll: 24 Percent of Americans Believe States Have a Right to Secede

story from CNS news
By Elizabeth Harrington
June 5, 2012

Poll: 24 Percent of Americans Believe States Have a Right to Secede
This shows what may be on the minds of many.

With all the economic and political turmoil lately (just to name two), it might seem like a viable option.

(CNSNews.com) – Nearly one-quarter of Americans believe that states have the right to secede, according to a recent poll from Rasmussen Reports -- up 10 percentage points in two years.

The latest poll is just one of many that shows that Americans have “serious and growing concern about the federal government,” according to Scott Rasmussen, founder and president of Rasmussen Reports.

very interesting:

According to the phone survey released Sunday, 24 percent of Americans believe that states should be able to withdraw from the United States to form their own country, if they want. Nearly 60 percent (59) of Americans say they don’t believe states have the right to secede, while 16 percent are undecided.

“We do see that people are concerned about the federal government in a variety of ways,” Rasmussen told CNSNews.com. “51 percent believe that it’s a threat to individual liberties.

“It may just be part of a growing frustration with other aspects of the federal government,” he said.

“But I think it’s important to keep it in perspective, growing to 24 percent still means that only one out of four Americans think that states have the right to secede, it’s not that they’re advocating for it,” Rasmussen said.

Some theories have groups of States Seceding and forming their own country.

Some "concerns" could be:

Economic independence.

Military

Currency

Revenue

and many others


Some existing countries actually use the U.S. Dollar
Which countries use the U.S. dollar as their official currency?

Hypothetical Pro's & Con's ??

reply to post by xuenchen


With a 70% majority, the states can decide to dissolve the federal government.

I think thats a much better option than officially seceding. States were meant to run themselves anyway.

I would think it nearly impossible to secede and survive at this stage of the global market.
The idea is fashionable and sexy, but it just isn't practical.

The amount of problems that would arise are in the thousands I imagine.

Still...............it would be one helluva show. Also, if something were to miraculously happen and actually have beneficial attributes, it would be a great example for areas of the current US which cannot do anything properly.

A new separate state which has a bi-partisan government which works together for the greater good of the peoples would be a start. Didn't there used to exist sucg a thing in this country?

Maybe a dictatorship where everyone must log onto ATS for an hour a day or be banished back to the USA.

Most states couldn't even exist with out federal subsidies. It's just big truck, macho swagger on the part of
those trying to cash in on the current anti obama trend.

Originally posted by olaru12
Most states couldn't even exist with out federal subsidies. It's just big truck, macho swagger on the part of
those trying to cash in on the current anti obama trend.

Some people think the Federal "subsidies" would even out.

Taxes from within would pay the differences.

Remember that no taxes would be paid to the U.S. Government anymore.

It could be possible.

reply to post by xuenchen


I think it's too late. After what happened in Wi$con$in last night I don't think it matters whether a state is separate from the union or not.

It just doesn't matter anymore. We are officially on our own.

State secede means that they are not beholden to regulation and taxation at the federal level which would mean increased freedoms and tax revenue generation as well as growth.

I don't see a downside state competing with each other would improve the quality of life exponentially.

Some one has to put Government in their place, but that is a pipe dream the government will never give up their power and control.

Why do you need a right to secede?

reply to post by satron


Very good question, we've been brainwashed to think that we don't have a right. But alas we do it's called the Republic!!!

reply to post by xuenchen


I don't see the downside really. I live in Texas and this discussion comes up quite often actually. Texas has a strong economy and could do just fine on it's own I believe. Even Gov Perry has brought up this option. 

Compare the US states to the EU. You have states like CA (Greece) whose out of control spending and deficits drags down the entire economy. Conservative states like TX (Germany) who have remained fiscally conservative are left to shoulder the burden for the stupid decisions of others. 

I think it's a viable option. The only states that would speak out against it are those with huge deficits that rely on government assistance (kind of like how broke people vote for big government democrats like Obama).

If States had a 'right' to seceed there wouldn't be a Union in the first place. If there are States that wish to break off, they'll need to fight their way out, as demonstrated by the civil war.

Another great thread by xuenchen.I think seceding is a viable option if enough states were to get on board. If it's only one state, say Texas (there have been rumblings in the past) it is not practical in today's political climate, and any attempt would be blocked by legislation. If it was a group of states lets say Texas, Arizona, New Mexico, California, Colorado, Nevada, ect it creates a very interesting scenario. It also makes it much more difficult to block legally. At that point you would have a civil war on your hands.Keep in mind I would support cessation if the overall goal was to once again unite. I don't believe in permanent cessation, as it would only cause continuous conflict in this region. I would term it a temporary cessation if I were pushing such an idea. I see the overall idea as highly unlikely and frowned upon by the American populace. With that being said, it is still a possibility if the leaders of their states start to feel that their state rights are being diminished at the federal level. S&F

Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by xuenchen

 

I don't see the downside really. I live in Texas and this discussion comes up quite often actually. Texas has a strong economy and could do just fine on it's own I believe. Even Gov Perry has brought up this option. 

I agree Texas should secede. I'm a native Texan and still own a section of land in the panhandle but I prefer to live in New Mexico away from the racism and hatred directed against my beautiful Hispanic girlfriend, who was born and raised in Galveston. "Good ole boys" ....yeah right!

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
If States had a 'right' to seceed there wouldn't be a Union in the first place. If there are States that wish to break off, they'll need to fight their way out, as demonstrated by the civil war.

Thats not true. I don't think it's out of the realm of possibility nor a violation of the constitution. Our Declaration states that it is not only a right but also a duty of the governed to abolish or alter the government when government becomes abusive.

 Even if we set aside the legal framework and talk about human nature and what is possible, since America came into existence by way of secession from under the authority of the Crown of England, secession certainly would be upholding one of the Nations earliest traditions. Those who would say that to advocate secession is treasonous, ignore the history of the Union. Those who rallied behind the secession from the USSR would have to be consistent and respect the desire of Citizens of the States to decide to withdraw from a Federal government of ideals to which citizens of a State do not conform. In theory the right to secede is a powerful deterrent to excessive Federal control over intrastate matters, and should not be rejected as a possible cure.

            Since the States voluntarily joined into the United States of America to form a more perfect union, it is logical that this union continues to be voluntary. Assume that the Citizens of a certain State choose to secede from the Union. We should consider what measures the Federal government might take.  It is almost unthinkable that the inhabitants of the seceding State would suffer personal injury or death as a result of actions taken under the authority of the President with the Consent of Congress. Certainly no law is broken when the secession is peaceful through referendum.

www.freerepublic.com...

Couple of thoughts.

I've posted before that Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas and a couple of the surrounding states have enough trade and resources (particularly in energy and agriculture) that they could probably issue their own currency based on grain/beef/oil/natural gas exports. Texas electrical grid is seperate from the rest of the country. TX and OK are also setting up large wind energy farm. I belief OK has an office in both Russia and China for grain trade negotiations.

State Taxes and along with maybe tarrifs on imports/exports could make up most of the federal funds, along with no taxes going to the Feds.

Military would be an issue. The TX, OK, and KS national guards are fairly stout. I would have to look it up, but on the ground the three states could field almost 2 full divisions. I think all three states also field about 4 squadrons of F16s. But they would likely loose all the federal bases which support the guard units and equipment. And of course guard is title 10, meaning while "technically" belonging to the states, they still actually belong to the feds. So how the military part fleshes out would be difficult. Figure most it not all of the federal stuff is withdrawn (assuming a peaceful transition, the last succession triggered a 4 year war) which would effect those local economies.

On the flip side, say if corporate and individual taxes were kept low, you might have busineess flocking to the area.

California/Pacific Coast is another area that COULD do well with similar resourcses, but of course their economy is totally trashed right now, would take some serious financial cuts and restructuring. I am sure other groups of states could do the same.

The really interesting part is if the US dollar were to collapse, this might be the only way to keep out economy on local levels running. States could seperate, develop their own currencies based on GDP and export ability, and declare themselves seperate and not connected to the Fed government AND it's debt. If the states could keep and consolidate their National Guards, they could have a reasonable defense capability. If the Federal Forces in the state could be added, well many of these states would have forces greater then UK, France, and Germany (actually the OK, KS, TX Army and AIr Guard would be roughly equivelant to those countries Air and Ground Forces.

It is an interesting concept.

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
If States had a 'right' to seceed there wouldn't be a Union in the first place. If there are States that wish to break off, they'll need to fight their way out, as demonstrated by the civil war.

while the Civil War was a treasonous act of the Federal government, the Conch Republic is not.
Perhaps it's time for a few more "republics" around this union ... www.conchrepublic.com...

reply to post by olaru12

I agree Texas should secede. I'm a native Texan and still own a section in the panhandle but I prefer to live in New Mexico away from the racism and hatred directed against my beautiful Hispanic girlfriend. "Good ole boys" ....yeah right!

You mean you prefer to live where there are more Hispanics?

Who is racist??

There has been "predictions".

The one from a Russian is intriguing.

WSJ article from Dec 2008

MOSCOW -- For a decade, Russian academic Igor Panarin has been predicting the U.S. will fall apart in 2010. For most of that time, he admits, few took his argument -- that an economic and moral collapse will trigger a civil war and the eventual breakup of the U.S. -- very seriously. Now he's found an eager audience: Russian state media.

Russian Professor Predicts End of U.S. by 2010

wild !

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
If States had a 'right' to seceed there wouldn't be a Union in the first place. If there are States that wish to break off, they'll need to fight their way out, as demonstrated by the civil war.

When the government fails to represent the very people that elected them, and does so with pure arrogance to the point that we are totally disregarded, well seccession becomes the only option. Outside of civil war.

Originally posted by seabag
Thats not true.

It is true. I don't know why you referenced me an opinion piece from Free republic. Why would I want to listen to an opinion piece from a rightwing website when I have your opinions? Reference me a part of the constitution where States could seceed when ever they deem necessary, thanks.

The civil war is the best example that States are not free to seceed when they wish (unless they seceed through force).