Divorce, NO! Temporary Partition to Restore Order – YES!
By James E. Horn

This has been on my mind for a long time: It could act as a partial guideline.

The preamble to the DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE, IN PART: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. 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,
laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”

We do not need an Article V Convention of States to amend our Constitution at this point, do we? A limited Convention to deal with a single pre-proposed and agreed upon subject may be appropriate.

America, after decades of Maoist/Marxist/Communist/Progressive/Democratic influence is a mess. Some people are starting to call for a dissolution of the Union, a divorce, secession. As the political climate in America becomes increasingly polarized, a controversial movement has been gaining momentum among voters, just what the America haters want. States are expressing a desire to break away from the union.

The idea of a divided America has become a hot topic. Can we sort this mess out?

A separation, a temporary political partition may be in order. It should be for a limited period after which we can rejoin as a restored United States, with new state borders, etc.

While this is taking place, we would still need an administrative central government for taxation and disbursement of monies to the country to meet nationwide needs (national security/defense, foreign encroachment, and invasion, etc.) as they do now. Law enforcement, infrastructure, courts, welfare, education funding, etc. would be based solely on a census of citizens (excluding illegals) without any whine factors.

California/Oregon/Washington could start by partitioning the liberal coastal areas from conservative inland and mountain areas with separate local taxation (with per capita sharing of federal monies), educational systems, including universities (local teacher unions only), roads and highways (possibly collecting tolls when crossing over demarcation lines, with full constitutional rights for all. Food (and other product) producers could charge/pay transit fees, etc. Local law enforcement could actually lock bad guys up, and iased outfits like the ACLU, BLM, Antifa, CAIR, SPLC, etc. must be recognized for what they are, spoilers to be tolerated locally under the close supervision of duly elected councils, or sheriffs and/or police, or simply confined to blue areas/states.

Local laws can be passed to protect children from sexual predators who could be locked up or even executed for being the vile criminals that they are, with hold harmless forgiveness laws passed to protect the rights of parents who would be permitted to exercise corporal or even capital punishment on sex predators. Local laws can be established to prohibit abortions, and even to arrest and imprison abortionists. Liberal (blue) areas can allow abortions when the person wanting the abortion can pay for it themselves. There can be no payment burden on any taxpayers.

Bastardizd hybrid two tiered election systems that favor one side can be left with liberal dictators. Conservative areas can have two (or even more) distinct political parties with one person, one vote selecting candidates (including judges (none with lifetime appointments) from among themselves. Foreign money (including out-of-region money) would be prohibited; only donations from within their respective regions would be allowed for local elections. Ballots should be on paper, submitted, verified, and counted on election day, not in weeks where high speed computers can’t quickly (or aren’t allowed to) tally correctly….

The electoral college could become more representative – based more on geography than population centers IF STATES REMAINED INTACT. Such would negate the advantages of huge population centers (New York City in New York, Philadelphia in Pennsylvania, greater Chicago in Illinois and Wisconsin, Los Angeles & San Francisco in California, Denver in Colorado, Phoenix in Arizona, the Twin Cities in Minnesota, etc. Presently, the liberal/majority population centers dominate the electoral process leaving the rest of the state’s populations with less than fair representation. Votes would actually count. [For example: California has 54 electoral votes with coastal areas accounting for 2/3 (26 million people) of the state’s population means that those areas control all 54 electoral college votes in a block for Presidential elections.] When those coastal areas tend to vote liberal, the approximately 13-million generally conservative ‘inlanders’ or rural votes are effectively null and void as regards the electoral block. Where more conservative citizens occupy 70% of the land, should they not get a more fair and balanced representation? Oregon and Washington are dominated by coastal Seattle/Tacoma/Vancouver and Portland (areas generally along or west of Interstate highway 5) who likewise dominate the electoral votes for those states. This generally holds true in many other states or areas.

Presently more conservative rural (flyover) areas of America are way under-represented and get little or no independent Electoral College representation when they ought to be allocated electoral votes more closely associated with their geographic areas.


Federal law enforcement agencies would operate strictly within their charters and possibly with additional constraints applied by each jurisdiction. It would be good for the DOJ, FBI, DHS to be required to inform each legal or jurisdictional area they enter with notifications to local governments and law enforcement as to why they are there, their purpose, etc., Federal arrests would include participation with local law enforcement.

The Supreme Court would remain the pre-eminent judicial branch. Each partitioned area would have independent (like states) courts.

The DOD would continue to freely operate its military and defense installations including local offices in civilian locations.

The IRS could be forbidden to carry arms and would be required to include local law enforcement participation when visiting private citizens.

Federal gun purchase (red flag) laws could remain in place, but not infringe on legal purchases by legitimate citizens with no criminal convictions at all.

Breaking Free: The Growing Calls for State Secession
From a Conservative Perspective

[Some say that while many view this as a radical and extreme solution, some conservatives see it as a necessary step towards preserving their values and beliefs.
From a conservative point of view, the United States has strayed far from its original principles and has become a breeding ground for bad news liberal ideologies. The federal government has become too powerful and intrusive, infringing upon the rights and freedoms of its citizens. The notion of individual responsibility and limited government has been replaced with an Orwellian socialist mindset that promotes handouts and government control. In this climate, it is no surprise that conservative states are considering secession as a means of protecting their traditional values and way of life.

One of the main driving forces behind the push for state secession is the growing frustration with the federal government’s unconstitutional overreach, an out of control biased judiciary, and increasingly dictatorial rule. Taking away citizens’ rights. With the federal government increasingly dictating policies and regulations, states have lost their autonomy and the ability to govern according to their own beliefs. For conservatives, this interference is seen as a direct attack on their values, and many believe that secession is the only way to break free from this oppressive control.
Furthermore, the increasing divide between urban and rural areas has also fueled the desire for state secession. As metropolitan cities lean towards overreaching progressive policies, the more rural and conservative regions often feel ignored and marginalized. This has led to a growing resentment towards the increasingly illegitimate federal government and a longing for self-governance. By seceding from the union, these states can create their own laws and regulations that align with their conservative beliefs, without the interference of the federal government.]
The Generals

About James E. Horn

Retired American Diplomat served in American embassies and consulates for 25-years, ten in Islamic societies. I am not a fan of Islam. I do public speaking and have books listed.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.