Few individuals are aware that, in 2008, Igor Panarin, dean of the Russian Foreign Ministry’s academy for future diplomats, forecasted that the United States would get into four different countries in 2010.
He thought that the national and local results of the current recession, and the people’s frustration with the status quo and the Federal Government, would lead to the creation of five unique, independent, political regions.
Panarin divided the U.S. into these brand-new republics:
- Californian Republic. Idaho, Utah, Arizona, and all continental states west of them. Panarin predicted this group would fall under Chinese influence.
- Central North-American Republic. He expected all states in between Montana, Colorado, Missouri, and Ohio to be absorbed by Canada.
- Atlantic America. Panarin believed the region from Maine to South Carolina and Tennessee would join the European Union.
- Texas Republic. All southern states, plus Oklahoma and New Mexico. Panarin anticipated this group would either become part of Mexico or form its own government.
- Alaska and Hawaii. Panarin likewise believed that Alaska would become part of Russia, and Hawaii part of Japan or China.
While Panarin’s prediction was wrong, or possibly early, he was right in determining local clusters of discontentment, and their desires for change. As an example, California voters are thinking about a proposal by venture capitalist Tim Draper to divide the big state into six smaller units, so that ‘people will be closer to their state governments.’ If implemented, the area would’ve 10 more senators.
Another investor, Peter Thiel, co-founder of PayPal, has actually funded the development of drifting cities in worldwide waters off the coast of California which would assume a libertarian type of government entirely outside U.S. control. In Thiel’s view, these cities would be without regulation, laws, and moral conventions. They’d offer no welfare, enforce no minimum wage, and have loose building regulations and couple of limitations on weapons. While such efforts could be considered extreme by some, they reflect a hidden belief that’s very actual.
The Lone Star Loophole
While California would require congressional approval to divide into smaller sized systems, Texas couldn’t really have that same restriction. Some people argue that within the regards to annexation, when the Republic of Texas joined the Union in 1846, there exists an ideal reserved by the state to divide into 5 smaller sized states. This theoretical improvement would enable the resulting area to have 10 senators, instead of two – and 8 more electoral votes.
The Texas Ethos
Like America itself, Texas is a true melting pot – and the many diverse cultures represented throughout the state appear to have actually produced a strange mix of obvious contradictions:
- Texans of Mexican Descent. One-third of Texas citizens claim Mexican origins – yet its politicians are amongst the most aggressive promoters of border security and the strongest challengers of amnesty for prohibited aliens.
- Gun Ownership. In spite of its reputation as a rampart of the Old West, Texas ranks 33rd in a list of states with gun owners, according to The Daily Beast. According to a 2001 research study, about one-third of Texans own a weapon, significantly less than Colorado, Idaho, or Tennessee. While the quantity of weapon owners is declining, the variety of guns owned by them is actually increasing.
- Religious Issues. According to a Gallup poll, less than one-half of the population (43 %) attends church routinely, only slightly more than the 42 % nationwide average. As well as though a smaller percentage of Texans (38 %) favor stricter laws to remove or reduce abortions, the state legislature passed a costs in 2014 which, according to Emily DeRuy at Fusion, ‘would close every abortion clinic in the state and limit access to things like cancer and Sexually Transmitted Disease screenings.’
- Voter Participation. Despite the state’s influence on national political issues, voter participation is lower than lots of states, ranking 46th from 50, according to Georgetown Public Policy Testimonial – due mainly to the low turnout of Hispanic residents. As an effect, older, white, conservative voters usually dominate elections, resulting in a more conservative political environment than the state’s demographics would suggest. This benefit’s highlighted by the dominant political party’s power to make voter districts to its own benefit, a procedure referred to as gerrymandering.
To many people, especially those of a conservative bent, Texas is the model for ideal government. Definitely, its economic performance throughout the economic crisis is subject of excellent envy. The state asserts to be number one in task creation ever since, accounting for one-third of net new jobs nationwide – a claim PolitiFact judges to be valid. Governor Rick Perry wrote in ‘The Washington Times’ on July 29, 2009 that the Texas technique of minimal government has led to ‘balanced spending plans, low taxes, a predictable regulative climate and a reasonable legal system.’
However, critics point out that the Texas constitution requires the legislature to stabilize its budget plan every year without loaning from future receipts. They also note that the absence of a state income tax lead to exceedingly high property and state sales taxes – both which unfairly burden low-income earners and retired seniors.
Other criticisms include the state’s weakening facilities, lack of sufficient regulative oversight, excessive insurance and energy rates, and local and county debt loads, which have exploded due to the state’s lack of funds for required programs. They likewise point to the decreasing instructional funds per student (43rd in the country, according to the Dallas Information), the upcoming water crisis, and the incarceration rate, which, according to a research study, was the highest in the world as of 2000. State leaders have actually also aggressively promoted for the repeal of the Affordable Care Act, declining federal funds to broaden Medicaid. As a result, Texas leads the nation in the number of uninsured citizens.
Republicans have controlled the Texas state legislature and significant political offices for many years, reflecting the conservative nature of the voters and the power of the state’s rural constituency. In 2014, Republicans lurched additionally right with Tea ceremony prospects winning almost every significant race in the Texas primary. This has led to among the most conservative regulating bodies in the 50 states.
As more conservative Tea Party candidates are chosen throughout the nation – in 2014, Bulk Leader of our home Eric Cantor was beat in Virginia’s seventh congressional district by a Tea Party-endorsed newbie – it wouldn’t be outside the arena of possibility to see the Federal Government ultimately start to resemble the government now in place in Texas.
Texas Republican Platform
The Texas Republican Platform boasts many goals that could find sympathy with Americans who see government as an obstacle, as opposed to a tool, of individuals. Among the 289 topics consisted of in the platform are the following highlights:
- Eliminate all federal companies not initially entrusted by a stringent interpretation of the U.S. Constitution.
- Remove unelected, designated bureaucrats, and need congressional approval of company decisions before they take effect.
- Use ‘every readily available resource to attain 100 % border security and control.’
- Eliminate all governmental executive orders.
- Abandon affirmative action.
- Guarantee clergy the right to complimentary speech without threatening their tax advantages.
- Repeal the Voter Rights Act.
- Repeal the McCain-Feingold Act.
- Repeal Patient Defense and Affordable Care Act.
- Adopt American English as the main language of the United States.
- Define marriage as a God-ordained, legal and moral commitment just between a natural man and a natural lady.
- Deny criminal or civil penalties versus those who oppose homosexuality from faith, conviction, or conventional values. Don’t grant special legal entitlements or create of special condition for homosexual behavior.
- Reverse Roe vs. Wade.
- Eliminate public financing of, or using public centers to promote, perform, or support elective abortions.
- Phase out Social Security tax and change to a system of private pensions.
- Pass legislation relieving existing constraints on guns, such as open bring and school bring.
- Oppose foreign help other than in nationwide defense and disastrous disasters
The Federal Government Under the Texas Model
If the goals of the Texas Republican Platform are understood and the Tea ceremony succeeds in acquiring control of the presidency and both residences of Congress, we could ultimately see the following modifications across the country.
1. Balanced Budget Amendment
Due to the fears and financial susceptability resulting from the growing nationwide debt, there’s a strong possibility that a Balanced Budget plan Modification limiting expenses to federal incomes would be passed. As a repercussion, government services would be significantly cut down, especially in regulatory firms, such as the Departments of Education, Energy, Health and Human Services, Labor, and Transport. The Epa, Federal Drug Administration, Office of Equal Opportunity, and Security and Exchange Commission, as well as the power of the Federal Reserve and the Internal Income Service, would be greatly limited.
Budgets for such programs as NASA, Export-Import Bank, and other esoteric programs would be cut. As a consequence, federal deficits would disappear and financial obligation would decrease. Obligation for numerous services such as education and business policy would return to state governments.
2. Domestic Concerns Replace Foreign Issues
The U.S. would likely relocate to a more isolationist policy much like that followed before World War II. The country wouldn’t engage in foreign wars or authorities actions, nor preserve government facilities outside the limits of the United States. Appropriately, the president’s power to do something about it without prior congressional approval would be restricted.
Defense, nevertheless, would remain to control domestic spending with a focus on border defense, terrorism, and the development of technological weapons with around the world strike capabilities. Powers of the National Security Council would be expanded, not restricted, for increased security of residents to make sure domestic tranquility and safety (while this action could offend the anti-government faction of the Tea Party, it mirrors the higher see).
In addition, voting laws would end up being more limiting, as would immigration laws – with preference given to those with either capital or unique abilities. Punishment of illegal immigration would become more serious, too.
3. Deregulation and Financial Freedom
Longstanding ecological policies would be rolled back, encouraging mineral expedition and energy freedom with broadened off-shore drilling and use of domestic coal and oil shale resources. Obligation for business regulation would move increasingly to individual states. Workers rights to organize would be limited with a nationwide right-to-work law, and the minimum wage would be removed.
Entrepreneurship would be motivated with tax advantage and public finance, even as customer securities are rolled back, including the most current bankruptcy and credit controls. The Federal Government would cease to support the housing market with direct guarantees, and the arrangements of Dodd-Frank would be substantially weakened.
4. Sweeping Modifications on Social Matters
Affirmative Action would be terminated on a federal level, while the meaning of ‘marriage’ would be unequivocally decided on a state level. Weapon ownership rights would be expanded, as would reasons for making use of weapons to secure life and home.
Federal charges for the use, sale, or transport of controlled substances, excluding alcohol, would be broadened. Rights for females, homosexuals, and minorities would recede as a national sense of orthodoxy replaced toleration for difference. Abortion for any reason would be outlawed, and the rights of a fetus expanded. Congress would lower the barriers in between church and state, specifically recognizing the United States as a ‘Christian’ country.
The United States is in the throes of a historic political change, and the quickly expanding federal debt and results of increasing ideological department make sure to turn our political focus to domestic issues over the next years. However, while the circumstance described here is possible, it’s barely likely.
Americans have revealed time and once again that they jointly reject extremes on both sides of the political spectrum. The Tea ceremony and its conservative sees have been welcomed in Texas – however it’s less clear whether those look ats can discover approval in the more comprehensive nationwide electorate. As a multi-generational Texan, I definitely hope not.
Do you advocate for a United States of Texas?