Texas Trying to Seccede......Again

[Sionnach Glic]

AUSTIN -- Note to Washington, D.C.: Texas is a sovereign state.

After Gov. Rick Perry's recent comments about some Texans talking secession from the union made national news, legislators are considering issuing a "cease and desist" order to the federal government.

"This state prefers, to the greatest extent possible, to control our own destiny," said Rep. Vicki Truitt, R-Keller, one of several members co-sponsoring the measure. "We prefer that federal government limit the amount of federal mandates it forces upon the people of Texas."

House Concurrent Resolution 50, which claims sovereignty for Texas under the U.S. Constitution's 10th Amendment, was one of several proposals to go before the House State Affairs Committee late Tuesday.

Rep. Brandon Creighton, R-Conroe, filed the bill, saying that more than a dozen states have proposed similar efforts amid concern that the federal government may be overstepping its boundaries.

"From restrictions on gun and ammunition sales, to freedom-of-choice issues, to the Real ID Act, the federal government is passing laws that limit a state's ability to govern itself," Creighton has said. "Texas simply wants to send the message that we want to govern ourselves and decide for ourselves how our money is to be spent."

Under this resolution, the 81st Legislature "hereby claim[s] sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States."

"This serve[s] as notice and demand to the federal government ... to cease and desist, effective immediately, mandates that are beyond the scope of these constitutionally delegated powers."

Rep. Mark Shelton, R-Fort Worth, also signed on as a co-sponsor.

"Texans should have the right for their representatives in Austin to decide what is best for Texas," Shelton said.

Perry -- who stirred a firestorm last week with secession talk -- said he supports this bill, especially since the federal government "has become oppressive in its size, its intrusion into the lives of our citizens, and its interference with the affairs of our state." "I believe that returning to the letter and spirit of the U.S. Constitution and its essential 10th Amendment will free our state from undue regulations, and ultimately strengthen our union."

Rep. Lon Burnam, D-Fort Worth, said that he initially considered serving as a co-sponsor as well but that he changed his mind because of Perry.

"The concept has been corrupted by gubernatorial politics," he said.

Source

[Deepcrush]

To bad they didn't leave before they gave us the BUSH man.

Bye Tsu

[Tsukiyumi]

While this is highly unlikely, I still find it absurd and somewhat offensive. We spent 8 years with Commander Cuckoo in office, and now they say the government is overstepping it's bounds? What do you call limiting scientific research because of religious bias? How about forcing the middle class to shoulder the majority of the tax burden while rich people increased their fortunes? Or the massive failure to regulate the financial industry?

Personally, I can't stand Perry, and I don't think he or any other Republican will win the next gubernatorial election; Obama won something like 48% of the vote here. People are tired of this sort of crap.

[Mikey]

Good point, Tsu - the caucus support Obama received from Texas was shockingly high considering his platform and, um... melatonin level. Of course, some of that had to do with his masterful arrangement of caucus vs. primary...

Anyway... yes, some of the recent federal proposals do border on the far-enough left to make a lot of southern types uncomfortable, but times like these often call for such measures. History will vindicate these measures; nobody looks back in history and curses the Tennessee Valley Authority. Let's take away government subsidies for cattle losses or wildcat drilling, and then see how much Texas really hates government interference.

As an aside, if Texas secedes, it will be a matter of months before it becomes renamed "Oaxaca Norte."

[IanKennedy]

If he were to win would that make him the 'Gubernator'. Why is it not Governatorial rather than Gubernatorial?

[Mikey]

If he were to win would that make him the 'Gubernator'. Why is it not Governatorial rather than Gubernatorial?

Because English - British or American - is the screwiest, most bastardized language on the planet.

[IanKennedy]

Actually, Gubernatorial is Latin, I just wondered why you would use that than the perfectly ordinary Governatorial used elsewhere in the world. It's not like you date back to those days

[Deepcrush]

We are complex in that way...

[IanKennedy]

We are complex in that way...

Very deep, in more ways that one.

[Deepcrush]

Hey, I just tell it how it is... not my fault its that way.

[Mikey]

Like I said - bastardization. English is a terrible mish-mash of Romance vocabulary, Indo-Aryan grammar, and Germanic lack of inflection (plus the odd adjunct from some other vernacular which had come to settle here, in the case if American English.)