.png)
By Meghan Waters (Class of 2014)
Secession. The mere mention of
the word is bound to ruffle some feathers. Most would argue that the debate
over secession died long ago along with 750,000 men and a swing of the
gavel. But the question of
secession still persists. Most notably, Texas and Vermont have explored the
idea of disunion. Texas even submitted a petition for secession to the White
House in November 2012: “Given that the state of Texas maintains a balanced
budget and is the 15th largest economy in the world, it is practically feasible
for Texas to withdraw from the union, and to do so would protect it's (sic) citizens' standard of living and
re-secure their rights and liberties in accordance with the original ideas and
beliefs of our founding fathers which are no longer being reflected by the
federal government.” The petition has since garnered over 125,000 signatures,
prompting responses in the media and from the White House. Although most
condemn this petition (and secession itself) as radical and ridiculous, a
careful study of the Founding period reveals that secessionist rhetoric may not
be as absurd as it seems to the contemporary ear.
From the research I have gathered
from the Founding period, there seem to be two major, competing ideologies
regarding the structure of the American Union. On the one hand, the compact
theory asserts that 13 sovereign states united and formed a compact (the
Constitution) to create a central government with enumerated powers for their
safety and protection. Sovereignty, then, ultimately resides with the parties
to this compact (the states) who may reassume these delegated powers at any
time. On the other hand, the nationalist theory rejects the sovereignty of the
states and asserts that sovereignty ultimately resides in the American public
as a whole. The states are merely agents of the American people’s will.
After the Civil War and Lincoln’s
assertion that “the Union of these States is perpetual,” the compact theory and
secessionist thinking largely disappeared from national politics. Today
secession has become a “dirty word,” forever associated with the South and
slavery. My goal is to reexamine a forgotten part of our national identity and
demonstrate the legitimacy of the compact theory and secession. To be clear, I
am not a rebel rouser advocating for the dissolution of the Union (although
that imagery is quite hilarious). As Steven Yates said, “secession ought to be
considered as an absolute last resort, to be attempted only after every
reasonable effort to restore government to its original functions has been blocked,
every avenue closed off, every effort to discuss issues met with disdain or
silence. Anything less would be irresponsible.” Even our Declaration warned
against throwing off government for “light and transient causes.” But we must
not forget that the same document also says that “whenever any form of
government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to
alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government…it is their right, it
is their duty, to throw off such government and to provide new guards for their
future security.”
Meghan Waters is a senior McConnell Scholar from Kenton County, KY. Waters is studying political science and judicial administration.