Northern Colorado wants to Secede and become 51st State

[IDrinkaRum]

Earlier this week, Governor John Hickenlooper signed SB 252 which deals with renewable energy, it was the last straw for eight (8) counties in Northern (rural) Colorado. They are wanting to secede from the rest of Colorado become the 51st state known as North Colorado.

The Inquisitir article

The Fox(2 now) article

And the Huffngton Post article

Is this really necessary? Are the (mostly) Republican rural land owners in northern Colorado overreacting to the Democrat Governor?

I'm really not sure this is a good idea. But what do I know? I don't live in Colorado.

[Kheldarson]

I don't know about if it's necessary or a good idea, but they may not be able to anyway. They have to have the permission of the current state's legislature and the chances of that happening are probably zil.

Heck, the only reason why it worked for West Virginia was because we were in the middle of the Civil War and Congress decided that the sitting legislature of Virginia didn't have a legal say since it had seceded.

Probably helps that VA didn't fight the decision after the war anyway...

[Greenday]

Eh, South Jersey has tried it a few times. You'd think it being such a small state that it'd be ridiculous, but South Jersey is comparable to the deep South in a lot of places and North Jersey might as well be part of NYC. Then there's where I live, Central Jersey, which is actually normal unlike the other two.

Most stereotypical New Jersey politics seem to be based on Central and North Jersey's viewpoints so I could see why South Jersey would rather just form their own state.

[IDrinkaRum]

Part of Nebraska wants to add itself to the new state.

Since it's not only just Colorado wanting to secede and form another state, does this change things?

[Kheldarson]

Still doesn't change the legal procedure. Just would add another sitting legislature that would have to weigh in on the decision.

They might be able to apply more political pressure, but they're still asking to remove whatever tax revenue they produce from the states' budgets, and who wants to allow that?

[Greenday]

but they're still asking to remove whatever tax revenue they produce from the states' budgets, and who wants to allow that?

Plenty of people want to do it to the federal budget. How is it really any different?

[Kheldarson]

Plenty of people want to do it to the federal budget. How is it really any different?

Clarification: What legislature wants to do that?

Doesn't matter what the people in that area (or state) want, they still have to have the permission of their government to do this (or don't, in the case of the federal union). And no government is going to allow money to slip through their fingers, no matter how small.

[Greenday]

Please, if they want to form their own state badly enough, they don't need anyone's permission to do it. The Confederate States of America already proved that.

[Duelist925]

Please, if they want to form their own state badly enough, they don't need anyone's permission to do it. The Confederate States of America already proved that.

Aaaand then we had a war over how, nope, they can't actually do that.

[Greenday]

Aaaand then we had a war over how, nope, they can't actually do that.

Yes we did. But had the Confederacy won the fight, they would have achieved permanent separation. North Colorado can always fight for it if they want it so badly.

[Nekojin]

Yes we did. But had the Confederacy won the fight, they would have achieved permanent separation. North Colorado can always fight for it if they want it so badly.

Do you really think that armed conflict - violence, death, destruction, and all the related collateral damage, both physical and psychological - is a rational response to this?

Any other nation in the world, we'd be talking about district lines or county lines. The fact that we've got one additional step of abstraction in our boundary lines doesn't make it any more sensible have a civil war on a scale smaller than national. And I'm not entirely sure that the equation changes much if you start talking on a national level.

[Greenday]

Do you really think that armed conflict - violence, death, destruction, and all the related collateral damage, both physical and psychological - is a rational response to this?

I don't know how bad it is there so I don't know if it's worth fighting over. But if, say, 49 states consistently kept voting for laws that hurt my state and the people of my state, that'd certainly be worth going to war over.

[Nekojin]

If that were the case - and I don't see any evidence that this is the case - then wouldn't an effort to reform the state or federal government make more sense than simply trying to redraw a few lines? We're not talking about secession from the union here, to be clear - we're talking about splitting one state in two, or two states into three, with the newly-formed state being part of the union as well.

Can you see any benefit from attempting to force this by violence? Any benefit at all? I'm coming up short.

[Hyena Dandy]

Yes we did. But had the Confederacy won the fight, they would have achieved permanent separation.

Yes, if you kill enough people, everyone agrees to let you do what you want so you stop killing people.

Yay.

[Kheldarson]

Please, if they want to form their own state badly enough, they don't need anyone's permission to do it. The Confederate States of America already proved that.

Aaaand then we had a war over how, nope, they can't actually do that.

Yes we did. But had the Confederacy won the fight, they would have achieved permanent separation. North Colorado can always fight for it if they want it so badly.

I'm just going to address this entire section because I'm really twitching right now.

1) The secession of a state from the Union and the creation of a state are two separate issues of law. Pulling the Civil War into this discussion in any way is kinda dumb. Especially since:

2) The Civil War had jack to do with the legality of making their own state or nation. It had to do with economics, slavery, and differing points of view. The Confederacy winning wouldn't have changed the legality of their secession (which was, again, not the point), it just would've changed the number of nations in this area. And still wouldn't change the laws on how to create a new state from a current one.

3) The main reason the South was able to even pull off secession in the first place as is was the fact they did it en masse. North Colorado wouldn't stand a chance if they pulled this.