Should we start planning for the Texas Republic?

Thu, 04/16/2009 - 11:26am

Here at FP, we don't always pay much attention to U.S. domestic policy, obviously, and the tax-day tea parties confused us a bit. Why weren't the protesters dressed up as Native Americans (like in the Boston Tea Party) or Mad Hatters? Weren't top-bracket taxes higher under Reagan?

Regardless, we've glommed onto a U.S. domestic issue which suggests a foreign-policy disaster: the U.S. state of Texas threatening to secede. Texas Governor Rick Perry, angered, like the tea-bag-partiers, over Obama's spending and tax policies, has implied that Texas might leave the Union.

So what would Texas look like as a foreign country?

It would be the world's thirteenth largest economy -- bigger than South Korea, Sweden, and Saudi Arabia. But its worth would crater precipitously, after NAFTA rejected it and the United States slapped it with an embargo that would make Cuba look like a free-trade zone. Indeed, Texas would quick become the next North Korea, relying on foreign aid due to its insistence on relying on itself. 

On the foreign policy front, a seceded Texas would suffer for deserting the world superpower. Obama wouldn't look kindly on secessionists, and would send in the military to tamp down rebellion. If Texas miraculously managed to hold its borders, Obama would not establish relations with the country -- though he might send a special rapporteur. (We nominate Kinky Friedman.)

So, Texas would need to court Mexico and Central American nations as a trading partners and protectors. Those very nations would also pose a host of problems for Texas. President Perry might find friends in anti-U.S. nations like Venezuela and Cuba, but their socialist politics would rankle the libertarian nation. 

And Texas would become a conduit for drugs moving north to the United States from Mexico, maybe even becoming a narco-state. It would need to invest heavily in its own military and policing force to stop drug violence within its borders -- taking away valuable resources from, oh, feeding its people, fending off U.S. border incursions, and improving its standing in the world. 

In short: the state of Texas would rapidly become direly impoverished, would need to be heavily armed, and would be wracked with existential domestic and foreign policy threats. It would probably make our failed states list in short order. Probably better to pay the damn taxes.

And of course -- Texas isn't seceding. Only regions in civil war or self-governing areas in very weak states manage independence. Perry was floating a piece of asinine political rhetoric, running a heated race against fellow Republican Kay Bailey Hutchinson and courting small-government conservatives of all stripes. Plus, more importantly, Texas can't secede, according to the 1869 Supreme Court Case, Texas v. White. Ah well. 

IMPORTANT UPDATE:  Chuck Norris has offered to be President of Texas, greatly reducing the possible internal threat of unionists or external threat of U.S. military forces to the seceded country. (H/t Ezra Klein.) 

Photo: Flickr user Susan E. Gray



Advertisement

 

Irrelevant!

If Texas seceded, Texas v. White wouldn't apply anymore. Sure, Texas would be breaking US law, but US law wouldn't apply. It would be like Congress passing a law forbidding Canada from existing -- it's completely moot.

So what does Texas have to do

So what does Texas have to do to survive as a Republic?

1. NASA is just south of Houston, Texas. (We will control the space industry.)

2. We refine over 85% of the gasoline in the United States.

3. Defense Industry. (We have over 65% of it) The term "Don’t mess with Texas," will take on a whole new meaning.

4. Oil - we can supply all the oil that the Republic of Texas will need for the next 300 years. Yankee states? Sorry about that.

5. Natural Gas - Again we have all we need and it's too bad about those northern states. John Kerry will figure a way to keep them warm....

6. Computer Industry - we currently lead the nation in producing computer chips and communications: Small places like Texas Instruments, Dell Computer, EDS, Raytheon, National Semiconductor, Motorola, Intel, AMD, Atmel, Applied Materials, Ball Semiconductor, Dallas Semiconductor, Delphi, Nortel, Alcatel, Etc, Etc. The list goes on and on.

7. Health Centers - We have the largest research centers for Cancer research, the best burn centers and the top trauma units in the world and other large health planning centers.

8. We have enough colleges to keep us going: UT Texas, A&M, Texas Tech, Rice, SMU, University of Houston, Baylor, UNT, Texas Women's University, Ivy grows better in the south anyway

9. We have a ready supply of workers. (Just open the border when we need some)

10. We have control of the paper industry, plastics, insurance, etc.

11. In case of a foreign invasion, we have the Texas National Guard and the Texas Air National Guard. We don't have an army but since everybody down here has at least six rifles and a pile of ammo, we can raise an army in 24 hours if we need it. If the situation really gets bad, we can always call Department of Public Safety and ask them to send over a couple Texas Rangers.

12. We are totally self sufficient in beef, poultry, hogs and several types of grain, fruit and vegetables and lets not forget seafood from the gulf. And everybody down here knows how to cook them so that they taste good. Don't need any food.

This just names a few of the items that will keep the Republic Of Texas in good shape. There isn't a thing out there that we need and don't have.

Now to the rest of the United States under President Obama: Since you won't have the refineries to get gas for your cars, only Mr. Kerry will be able to drive around in his 9 mile per gallon SUV. The rest of the United States will have to walk or ride bikes.

You won't have any TV as the space center in Houston will cut off your communications. You won't have any natural gas to heat your homes but since Mr. Kerry has predicted global warming, you will not need the gas.

Signed, The People in Texas

Have a nice day!

"Obama wouldn't look kindly

"Obama wouldn't look kindly on secessionists, and would send in the military to tamp down rebellion."

Really? If so, he might have to watch his back.

Seriously?

I can't believe people are actually wasting their time talking about what would happen if Texas seceded. It is irrelevant because it will never happen! This has PR stunt written all over it for Gov Perry's reelection bid. Watch this video about it:

http://www.newsy.com/videos/don_t_mess_with_texas/

As much as I detest Texas's pompousness...

I don't think they would be in as dire a situation as you are portraying. They have a very good bargaining chip: Energy!

TX is the #1 producer of wind power, has 24% of our oil reserves, and refines 1/4th of our imported oil. If we were to embargo them, it would cripple our economy (as well as theirs) in a day.

This is just another reason why we need to move swiftly to break our addiction to oil and decentralize our energy production. We should not be vulnerable to threats from despotic leaders like Chavez, Ahmadinejad, and Gov. Perry.

An independent Scotland

Fifty years ago the idea that Scotland would secede from the United Kingdom was the risible notion of a few cranks. While it is still unlikely, it is now serious politics. Don't be too sure that the idea of an independent Texas won't develop some legs.

It can't secede, but...

Texas does have a legal right to break up into 5 separate states. That could bring 8 new Texas area Senators into Congress.

First, Texas was annexed to

First, Texas was annexed to the United Sattes and admitted into the union in December 1845. No secession clause was included in the treaty. A prior treaty in 1844 which included such a clause failed to pass the United States Senate.

Second, the formation of the original Republic of Texas was only an interim measure, The original intent of the majority of the founders who were involved in drawing up the Texas Declaration of Independence in March 1836.

General Houston and with his Jacksonian allies wanted to draw Santa Anna across the Sabine River and into Louisiana, where he would then face the combined armies of General Houston, and the Western Department of the United States Army commanded by Major General Edmund Pendleton Gaines. President Jackson and General Gaines favored the idea, while the Commanding General of the U.S. Army Major General Alexander Macomb and Major General Winfield Scott who commanded the Eastern Department opposed the plan.

The purpose of the plan was to draw Mexico into a war with the United States so that the United States could acquire through military the Mexican province of Coahuila y Tejas.

It was only the dissatisfaction of the rank and file of the Texas Army that forced General Houston into battle at San Jacinto, and the opposition from the Whigs and the northern Democrats that prevented annexation immediately after the Battle of San Jacinto.

Only the fringe elements in Texas actually believe in the sustainability of an independent Republic of Texas. Even in 1835 during the opening stages of the Texas Revolution most of the men involved in the provisional government of Texas
understood that the location of Texas sandwiched between the United States and Mexico negated almost immediately the durability of the Republic of Texas. The founders of Texas realized that eventually Texas would either be annexed to the United States or reconquered by Mexico.

The unsustainability of a Texan Republic was. was proved as early as 1839 with the ill fated Mier Expedition, and again with General Adrian Woll's recapture of San Antonio for a brief period in 1842

California?

I have to wonder if you'd assume the same response from the Obama Administration if this were California rather than Texas threatening to secede.

Wine and Avocados

Right, what would the rest of the US do without Wine and Avocados??