Never Gonna Let You Go

Calexit is again in the news as signatures are gathered.  The politics of Trump aside, California has an excellent case - purely on size - for becoming an independent country.   In 1870, the United States had a population of 38.8 million people who were represented in Congress by 241 Representatives and 72 Senators.  Today, California has a population of 39.3 million who are represented in Congress by 53 Representatives and 2 Senators.  The federal aristocracy put a cap on the number of people who could be in the ruling class and this gets worse every year.  A mere 535 people in Washington cannot possible represent the disparate interests of 320,000,000 citizens.  If the central government kept to its Constitutional role, perhaps it could but it has breached those bounds.  One cannot reconcile the sharply contrasting views of New York and Texas or California and Oklahoma.  Federalism or secession.

 

Though the state is dominated by Democrats, the Democratic Party cannot allow California to secede.  20% of all the Democratic Congressmen are from California.  Right now, the Republicans hold the House by a 240 to 194 margin.  Take out California and that becomes 226 to 155.  Without California, Trump won the popular vote by 1.4 million rather than losing it by 2.9 million.  The Democrats cannot afford to lose the state and will necessarily take action to prevent Calexit.  As such, the Republicans should grease the skids for Calexit and enjoy the ensuing civil war between California Secessionist Democrats vs. National Unionist Democrats.

California Embassy in Moscow?

If the website didn't say Los Angeles Times, I would think this story must be from the Onion.  Those in favor of California Secession have opened an 'embassy' in Moscow?  The same place that is supposedly responsible for the hacking that torpedoed the candidate that California overwhelmingly chose in the recent election?  You couldn't open this embassy in Mexico or Canada?  Maybe France?  No, let's go with Russia, America's old Cold War nemesis and current geopolitical rival.  California wants to escape the tyranny of Trump and figures Putin - Trump's puppet master if some media sources are to be believed - should be the first choice for an ally?  Have I stumbled on to a fake news site?

 

After reading the story, it turns out that a proponent for Calexit is teaching English in Russia; his wife is Russian.  Still, maybe he could have waited until an embassy had opened someplace that didn't have a long history of being America's enemy.

Dissolve the Political Bands

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another... they should declare the causes which impel them to separation.

Declaration of Independence

 

In the wake of Trump's victory, some in California are calling for the Calexit.  Here in Texas, there had been calls for a Texit during the Brexit campaign.  These secession movements are a sign of rising tyranny from a central government.  The states believe that the central government is going to impose laws and/or taxes upon them that they do not want.  Secession is a perfectly valid solution and I applauded the Brexit.

 

However, another solution would be to diminish the power of the central government in matters that can be managed by the state.  That is called federalism.  If California wants to have boys in the girls' room, there is no need for the federal government to impose that rule on Montana too.  Let Montana decide.  If Massachusetts wants a mandatory universal healthcare system called Romneycare, fine by me.  But don't impose it on all the other states and call it the Affordable Care Act.  If Texas wants everyone to wear a gun in public, don't force that on New York too.  The federal government is suppose to limit itself to interaction among the states (e.g. prevent a trade war between North and South Dakota) and foreign policy.  Most of the money that the federal government currently spends is not authorized by the Constitution.

 

The United States was formed from a secession movement that we now call the American Revolution.  The British Empire felt that the colonies were not paying their 'fair share' for the recently concluded French & Indian War while the colonials were incensed that they would be taxed by a far off parliament in which they had no representation.  The secession movement was successful and we celebrate it annually.

 

A little over four score years later, some of those colonies - now states in the resulting union - decided to secede.  Some in the North were perfectly happy to let the South and its dreadful institution of slavery be cast off from the nation.  Many were not.  In this case, secession was an effort to redraw city limits so the police didn't have jurisdiction over the crimes being committed.  This secession movement was unsuccessful.  Antonin Scalia held that the Civil War determined the Constitutionality of secession but I disagree.

 

Either events allow people to dissolve political bands or they do not.  In the case of the Revolution, they did.  In the case of the Civil War, they did not.  Secession movements are healthy and send important signals to the central government to hold a loose rein.  As Princess Leia noted, "The more you tighten your grip, the more star systems will slip through your fingers."

 

The government which governs least, governs best.  By Thomas Jefferson's standard, we have very bad government, the kind of government from which states would rationally want to secede.  Will the government loosen its grip or will secession movements gain steam?  I far prefer the former but, should that grip tighten, would wholeheartedly support the latter.