# I joined, and pledged support to Yes California today. **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [November 11, 2016, 4:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467 "2016-11-11T04:44:31Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 41
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2017, 9:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/801 "2017-01-09T21:33:49Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > The language in Texas v. White describing how a state might leave the union is _dicta_. That is, it has no precedential impact… Thank-you. I kept meaning to ask one of our legal experts about that. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2017, 10:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/802 "2017-01-09T22:16:53Z")
> [@Morgenstern](#): > > PS, we’re not asking the UN to designate CA a colony of the US. Just saying. Yes, you literally are. Any time you reference Chapter XI, you’re talking about how the international community treats colonies. Don’t know how to explain this any clearer! Waste of time! ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2017, 1:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/803 "2017-01-10T01:38:24Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > You would be willing to defend your home state from an unwelcome military incursion. And that’s understandable. You’re also OK with the choice of some other state’s decision to walk away from the U.S.A… If they’re not shooting at me, I’m not shooting at them. _Buh bye. Have a nice day_. > > I’m assuming that California, or some state, has gone thru the process of becoming agitated over some issue, and has already voted to leave the Union. It’s a done deal. They’ve rejected U.S. federal control over their now independent state. > > Posse Comitatus doesn’t allow the use of the U.S. military against U.S. citizens, unless the U.S. Congress allows it. And the Union still considers the secessionist state to be part of the U.S.A… I suppose that Union states could call out their National Guard to perform any “bullets are flying, people are dying” requirement, if they felt that strongly about the loss of California almonds? > > It’s my personal opinion that no one would want to be the first to shoot. And without that first exchange of fire, there would be no need to dispatch U.S. military forces to force California’s return to the Union. You’d be like incorrect. Discouraging future secessionist movements is important. ---
**Author:** ![Pantastic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3bc359/32.png) [@Pantastic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pantastic)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2017, 6:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/804 "2017-01-10T06:03:37Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > Posse Comitatus doesn’t allow the use of the U.S. military against U.S. citizens, unless the U.S. Congress allows it. And the Union still considers the secessionist state to be part of the U.S.A… I suppose that Union states could call out their National Guard to perform any “bullets are flying, people are dying” requirement, if they felt that strongly about the loss of California almonds? I missed this before, but do you guys understand ANYTHING about how this country (or indeed any functioning country) actually works? Congress already explicitly allowed the armed forces to repress secession, rebellion, and the like with the Insurrection act of 1807, which was modified to be a bit broader in the last decade. Under that ALREADY EXISTING law, the president can use the armed forces to suppress any insurrection or conspiracy if the situation results either in people’s rights being violated or interferes with federal law being carried out. Since the whole purpose of Calexit is to stop having to comply with Federal law, and Calexiters keep talking about not needing to follow US laws, that would get invoked pretty quickly. It would really help your movement not look like a bunch of loons if they had a basic understanding of how the US and its laws work now instead of picking some phrase and deciding that it means you win. For quick reference: [Insurrection Act of 1807 - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insurrection_Act) > [@](#): > > (1) The President may employ the armed forces, including the National Guard in Federal service, to– > [A is non-insurrection emergency conditions] > (B) suppress, in a State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy if such insurrection, violation, combination, or conspiracy results in a condition described in paragraph (2). > (2) A condition described in this paragraph is a condition that– > (A) so hinders the execution of the laws of a State or possession, as applicable, and of the United States within that State or possession, that any part or class of its people is deprived of a right, privilege, immunity, or protection named in the Constitution and secured by law, and the constituted authorities of that State or possession are unable, fail, or refuse to protect that right, privilege, or immunity, or to give that protection; or > (B) opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or impedes the course of justice under those laws. ---
**Author:** ![Rick](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/9f8e36/32.png) [@Rick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rick)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2017, 1:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/805 "2017-01-11T01:24:45Z")
As I mentioned up in post #59 the California legislature can spend it fast than you can give it to them. Want proof? > **[Press Release - AD72 | DIXON](https://ad72.asmrc.org/press-release/)** > > PRESS RELEASES IN THE NEWS OP-EDS Wildfires Raging Throughout The State As Governor’s Administration Ducks Oversight Hearing Press Release The Assembly Budget Sub 3 Committee indefinitely postponed a scheduled hearing to provide oversight of the... The voters gave Governor Moonbeam 10 BILLION in new tax revenue. The legislature promptly spent 12 BILLION. > [@](#): > > “California taxpayers pay some of the highest taxes in the nation, and have the highest poverty rate when factoring in the cost of living. Just last November, California voters approved an additional $10 billion of new taxes to line our government’s pockets, yet the Governor and the Democrats have manage to spend $2 billion more than the state is projected to collect. To add insult to injury, Brown is now asking for $7 billion of new transportation taxes on California drivers. Conservative sounding spin and feel good terms like “budget prudence” can’t camouflage a budget that has California spending increasing by $36 billion over the last 6 years. Give the Gov and the legislature an extra 16 billion dollars and they will bankrupt the new nation in about 18 months. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2017, 3:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/806 "2017-01-24T03:19:17Z")
I saw this poll and had to share it here because this thread was so much fun: “[One in every three California residents supports the most populous U.S. state’s peaceful withdrawal from the union, according to a new Reuters/Ipsos opinion poll …](https://www.yahoo.com/news/more-californians-dreaming-country-without-trump-poll-192311764.html)” ---
**Author:** ![Ibn\_Warraq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e19b73/32.png) [@Ibn\_Warraq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ibn_Warraq)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2017, 3:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/807 "2017-01-24T03:21:51Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > I saw this poll and had to share it here because this thread was so much fun: > > “[One in every three California residents supports the most populous U.S. state’s peaceful withdrawal from the union, according to a new Reuters/Ipsos opinion poll …](https://www.yahoo.com/news/more-californians-dreaming-country-without-trump-poll-192311764.html)” I suspect most of the people saying this are saying this because they know it would never actually happen. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2017, 3:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/808 "2017-01-24T03:23:10Z")
> [@Ibn\_Warraq](#): > > I suspect most of the people saying this are saying this because they know it would never actually happen. I suspect you’re right. ---
**Author:** ![levdrakon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/49beb7/32.png) [@levdrakon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/levdrakon)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2017, 7:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/809 "2017-01-24T07:18:05Z")
> [@Ibn\_Warraq](#): > > I suspect most of the people saying this are saying this because they know it would never actually happen. It’s funny what happens sometimes, when that happens. ---
**Author:** ![Morgenstern](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Morgenstern](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Morgenstern)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2017, 12:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/810 "2017-01-24T12:24:59Z")
> [@Ibn\_Warraq](#): > > I suspect most of the people saying this are saying this because they know it would never actually happen. Those same people said Trump would never get elected too. in other news, signature collection has begun. We have 6 months to collect all the necessary signatures. That should be enough time for Trump to partially destroy the American dream. 110,000 + people have signed supporting the movement so far. 13,000 have agreed to work for it, collecting signatures, etc. Cascadia Independence has pledged support. That would be most of the entire west coast joining in. Interesting, RoCA will be born a member of NATO, that is, if the Orange baboon hasn’t destroyed NATO on his quest of destroying America. Yes, child nations of NATO members are automatically members. I suppose this would make the invasion and war between the US and RoCA some imagine less likely. Given 3 years are projected to meet this goal, and three years from now Trump will have totally screwed over the American people by then, things look quite doable. Especially with Cascadia thinking about joining in. And, _According to international precedents, when a nation splits both successor nations inherit the parent nation’s treaties and agreements unless and until one of the successor nations opts out. That would mean California already be a member of NAFTA, the WTO, and other free-trade treaties. That means no significant barriers to trade with the remaining United States would be enacted and trade would be largely unaffected._ Trade will go on, if old hamster fists hasn’t totally screwed that over too. One of the questions asked of the organization was…Can California return to the US if it secedes? The answer was “Does Canada want to be part of the US, or any other country for that matter? Why would California?” It’s moving forward. Signature collection, on forms already being distributed. Moving on to a better future. Trump will do more for this movement than Clinton could ever have. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2017, 1:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/811 "2017-01-24T13:22:06Z")
> [@Morgenstern](#): > > Interesting, RoCA will be born a member of NATO, that is, if the Orange baboon hasn’t destroyed NATO on his quest of destroying America. Yes, child nations of NATO members are automatically members. I suppose this would make the invasion and war between the US and RoCA some imagine less likely. > > [snip] > > And, _According to international precedents, when a nation splits both successor nations inherit the parent nation’s treaties and agreements unless and until one of the successor nations opts out. That would mean California already be a member of NAFTA, the WTO, and other free-trade treaties. That means no significant barriers to trade with the remaining United States would be enacted and trade would be largely unaffected._ Trade will go on, if old hamster fists hasn’t totally screwed that over too. Bullshit. When Scotland was voting on independence I don’t remember a single person mentioning this “precedent”. In fact, it was point blank said they wouldn’t retain EU membership. It would be up to signatories and whatever treaty dispute resolution is in place to decide whether a new country gets in. ---
**Author:** ![Morgenstern](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Morgenstern](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Morgenstern)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2017, 1:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/812 "2017-01-24T13:59:07Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > Bullshit. When Scotland was voting on independence I don’t remember a single person mentioning this “precedent”. In fact, it was point blank said they wouldn’t retain EU membership. It would be up to signatories and whatever treaty dispute resolution is in place to decide whether a new country gets in. What you “don’t remember” and reality might be 2 different things. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2017, 2:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/813 "2017-01-24T14:03:12Z")
> [@Morgenstern](#): > > Interesting, RoCA will be born a member of NATO, that is, if the Orange baboon hasn’t destroyed NATO on his quest of destroying America. … > And, _According to international precedents, when a nation splits both successor nations inherit the parent nation’s treaties and agreements unless and until one of the successor nations opts out. That would mean California already be a member of NAFTA, the WTO, and other free-trade treaties. That means no significant barriers to trade with the remaining United States would be enacted and trade would be largely unaffected._ In your professional judgment, would California be a “newly independent state” or a “separation of a part of a state?” For your information, a “newly independent state” would be of the character of states referenced under Chapter XI of the UN Charter. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2017, 2:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/814 "2017-01-24T14:33:57Z")
> [@Morgenstern](#): > > What you “don’t remember” and reality might be 2 different things. It might be but I’m pretty sure that isn’t the case. And there is no doubt about the reality wrt Scotland not being guaranteed EU membership. Where did you learn of this “precedent”. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2017, 3:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/815 "2017-01-24T15:21:29Z")
As soon as **Morgenstern** answers my question, I can fill you in on the issue WRT Scotland. I’m just anxiously awaiting his answer, first. ---
**Author:** ![Pantastic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3bc359/32.png) [@Pantastic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pantastic)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2017, 3:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/816 "2017-01-24T15:23:18Z")
> [@Morgenstern](#): > > Interesting, RoCA will be born a member of NATO, that is, if the Orange baboon hasn’t destroyed NATO on his quest of destroying America. Yes, child nations of NATO members are automatically members. I suppose this would make the invasion and war between the US and RoCA some imagine less likely. NATO only applies to a foreign power invading a NATO member, it doesn’t apply to a NATO member suppressing revolt in its own territory. > [@](#): > > And, \*According to international precedents, when a nation splits both successor nations inherit the parent nation’s treaties and agreements unless and until one of the successor nations opts out. Cite, please. I won’t hold my breath though. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2017, 3:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/817 "2017-01-24T15:33:07Z")
It’s a ridiculous assertion on it’s face because such a rule would be forcing countries into an agreement they never made. If Mexico makes a trade agreement with the U.S. the terms they hammer out will be based on the economies of the whole nation. They would not give the same concessions to gain access to the California market that they would to gain access to the entire U.S. market. Similarly, a military treaty would be negotiated based on military power and security concerns of the whole country. Why would Belgium want to be, according to Morgenstern forced to be, in a defense treaty with California and it’s non-existent military power? ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2017, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/818 "2017-01-24T15:43:12Z")
I haven’t taken part of this discussion so far, but I’ll chime in that I think the idea of California seceding would be harmful to both California and the country as a whole. The same goes for any other state (even a state with leaders I have strong ideological differences with). ---
**Author:** ![Morgenstern](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Morgenstern](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Morgenstern)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2017, 4:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/819 "2017-01-24T16:10:28Z")
> [@Pantastic](#): > > NATO only applies to a foreign power invading a NATO member, it doesn’t apply to a NATO member suppressing revolt in its own territory. Cite please. Note it uses the words “member countries.” Which CA would be. > [@Pantastic](#): > > Cite, please. I won’t hold my breath though. Here, go argue with their lawyer. > **[En Respuesta a la Actividad Reciente de Los EUA en la Crisis de Refugiados -...](https://votecnp.org/en-respuesta-a-la-actividad-reciente-de-los-eua-en-la-crisis-de-refugiados/)** > > Para Inmediata Publicación y Distribución A la luz de los informes recientes sobre los esfuerzos por parte de los estadounidenses para aumentar la cantidad de centros de detención federal para refugiados latinoamericanos en el estado de Texas, el... ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2017, 4:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/820 "2017-01-24T16:12:31Z")
Problem: Trump is going to ruin the country. Proposed Solution: Let’s ruin it before he gets a chance to do it himself! [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467.md?page=40) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467.md?page=42)