The last time there was a significant, organized movement anywhere near this large, it led to the civil war. Tho the liberal wail that 'it cannot happen here', it has happened here, and the results were ruinous.
In the annals of the Bureau, you have seen the argument that the unrest that will almost certainly follow economic dissolution will lead to political dissolution. In the absence of a strong federal government, many of the issues currently separating the several states may lead to their wish to seek secession.
In particular, the State of Hawaii wishes to secede due to the mishandling of its local indigenous population. In this case, the urge is more than merely angst at an overweening federal government. However, it is the overweening federal government that is providing added impetus, allowing non-indigents to align with the indigents and thus increase the strength of the movement.
Of course, a strong federal government would never relinquish Hawaii, because without Hawaii, the US has no Pacific base worth talking about and the loss of the forward naval presence would do palpable damage to the US' self-image as world police. However, a strong federal government is what we won't have soon.
As the Bureau has stated over and over again, the strength of a government is largely tied up in its currency, as the only power it can get is the power it can buy. Once it loses the ability to write notes of credit and runs out of shiny things to trade, it loses relevancy, not to mention power. Then the magic 30% kicks in.
It only takes 30% approval to control a country. Even tho Obama's approval rating is very high, only around 30% actually support him, pretty much the same number as Bush had in his first term. Everyone else is just feeling good about not having to worry about Bush. However, Obama will soon see the same partisan trenchwork in the path of his reforms and will soon see that much of America does not support his agenda.
This brings us to our central discussion, which is that 25 states, a full 50% of the US, are in the process of passing or considering 10th amendment 'Sovereignty Resolutions', two of which border on articles of secession. We've discussed Hawaii, where the secessionists are gaining power, but New Hampshire is another story entirely. Pressure has been building in New Hampshire for some time, as the federal government continues to try to force the small state to do things the federal way. Now, New Hampshire feels backed into a corner and a bill has been introduced that is the first 10th amendment resolution with real teeth, as New Hampshire has provided grievances and determined that failure to address such grievances will be grounds for secession.
The other states are less aggressive, but many states, most vocally Louisiana, are considering rejecting Obama's stimulus package because it increases federal 'cash for enforcement' schemes whereby the federal government uses payments to encourage the passage of laws that it has no right trying to get passed, being as how they are powers delegated to the states. New Hampshire already declines a lot of this kind of funding.
The Bureau once again wishes to point out that the federal government is effectively broke and is pursuing policies that will inevitably lead to the ruin of the dollar. The 'dollar overhang' is already large enough to guarantee hyperinflation when the right spark sets it off. A nation without the means to pay its agents is a nation that cannot accomplish anything. When the federal reserve note reverts to its inherent value of worthless, the United States of America will no longer be able to pay federal military and police forces, not to mention tax collectors, and the logistics of continuing to manage the 'empire' using FRN bills will be a significant draw in itself.
The Bureau can point to many historical parallels, such as Zaiire, where the army refused to do its job until it got paid in US dollars rather than Zaiires, as the exchange rate was around two million Zaiires to the dollar and rising at the rate of something like 100% per annum. The government tried to pay in beans and the military dumped the beans on a road, blocking off food to the capitol city, at which point the government had to airlift food, because the army was blocking any attempts to remove the beans from the road.
Of course, you will hear 'it can't happen here', but it has. Over and over again, it has happened here. In many states now, and more to come, there is a sense that the federal government is not responsive to the needs of the states and is unnecessarily interfering in the lives of the citizens of said states. Many of these interferences are actual unfunded mandates that the states must finance, which contributes to the already high deficits in many states. Were the federal mandates not there, the states may balance their budgets even now in most cases. Certainly, they would have a freer hand to try to accomplish that goal.
For instance, Texas is a few cuts away from a balanced budget. The SCHIP requirements will make this situation worse, as did No Child Left Untested. Were the state to simply abandon the No Child Left Behind provisions and ignore SCHIP, they would likely have a balanced budget, and this is even before eliminating unfunded medicare and medicaid mandates.
Texas itself has always been one day of indigestion away from secession anyway. Mostly said in jest, the idea of leaving the US is mentioned regularly by residents. However, there is now a far more serious tone for a lot of reasons that nobody outside Texas will understand.
Texas by itself is completely self-sufficient. This means Texas has no need of the union. However, as the rest of the country basically slides into insolvency, Texas will be paying a higher and higher premium to support its federal habit, something the residents do not like. Simply eliminating the federal dead weight on the average Texan's back would result in around 25% more spending money, and reducing many of the onerous regulations would lead to lower state taxes as well.
Texas has a healthy school system, by and large, the second largest agricultural output in the union, industry, including automobiles, defense, arms, ammunition, transport and energy, as well as control over much of the energy production for the entire US. Texans have an independent spirit. Texans are inordinately armed and Texas is a vast territory to try to occupy. Much of Texas has only a slight concern with the sanctity of governance, so an appeal to that civic duty will go unheeded.
Also, Texas has normalized relations with Mexico, unlike California. Texas has the ability to absorb labor at a far higher rate than any other state and has the labor capacity south of the border to support it.
This is not to say Texas is ready to secede or that any state is ready to secede, but it is to say that if the federal government collapses, many states will almost certainly secede and the resultant geography will be interesting. It is the opinion of the Bureau that California will become its own country. Washington State, Oregon and Idaho will form another country, possibly called Pacific States of America. Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, Utah, Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico and Oklahoma can join Texas in the Western States. From the Dakotas down to Kansas and over to Ohio form the Central States. From Kentucky south to Arkansas, over to Florida and up to North Carolina, possibly including West Virginia, are the Southern States. It is expected that Virginia, Maryland, Pennsylvania, New York, Rhode Island, Delaware, Massachusetts and New Jersey would remain the United States of America. That leaves New Hampshire, Vermont and Maine as the Eastern States.
This is, of course, rank speculation, although the Bureau is occasionally right on these wild-ass guesses. These guesses are based on our 'world view model' which simply assumes people try to do what they think is best for themselves. For certain, a new nation led by Texas and including the western states listed above, with good relations with Mexico and Canada, would be a powerful industrial country. It would also be good for the citizens of such states, as they saw their negotiable income increase as their freedoms also increase.
The other pressing issue is the almost clandestine efforts at convening a constitutional convention. This is very nearly real, as two states are all that are needed to complete the process and convene the convention, which would have plenary power over the entire governance of the United States. Frankly, the Bureau would rather see dissolution than handing world-improvers a clean slate to rewrite the constitution, as there's nothing really wrong with the constitution, it is just that nobody follows it anymore. The Bureau is convinced that a new constitution will be just as ignored as the current one.
No comments:
Post a Comment