Why Texas can Divide Itself into Five New States...

Ever since Texas was admitted to the Union, it has had the unique privilege of being able to divide itself into as many as five new states without Congressional approval. Today on That Is Interesting, I explore the history behind this unique law, as well as one possible way a divided Texas could look.
Music -
• Cinematic Scene - ASha...
• Epic Orchestral Cinema...
• Land of Petals
Image and Info Sources -
docs.google.co...
Become a member! / @thatisinterestingtii

[@ThatIsInterestingTII]

How would you break up Texas? What would you call each state? What should their capital cities and flags be?

[@CRT.v]

New Texas South Texas Texas One Texas Prime Texas Alpha

[@user-hy6cp6xp9f]

Texas 1, Texas 2, Texas 3, Texas 4, and Texas 5

[@sayonitepaskide7976]

Texas, North Texas, Lincoln, Jacinto, and Trans-Pecos Capitals: Austin, Amarillo, San Antonio, Coldspring, and El Paso.

[@alexpease2569]

So I looked at a map technically Texas has already used this as it is broken up into 5 states not named texas and texas

[@wowhaha4871]

I think that if Texas was split up it should be East Texas and West Texas with East Texas having 130 counties and West Texas having 124 counties. East Texas would obviously be more populous, and the capital would still be Austin. In West Texas, the capital should be Lubbock because it would be somewhat centrally located in the new state. The largest city in East Texas would still be Houston, but in West Texas, it would be El Paso.

[@elig57]

As a North Texan, I'm not so sure I could get behind having my new state partially being named after Oklahoma...

[@tracygriffin4439]

I agree. Texlahoma will NEVER fly.

[@jakehix8132]

What better way to lead the sheeps to the pasture than by renaming yourself til the sheep call you cousin?

[@cantanuh]

It should be Texarkana

[@toshomni9478]

People from outside the region probably aren't aware of the intense rivalry between the two states.

[@anniejuan1817]

I would name that area (rather logically) "North Texas". Many Texans would consider "Texlahoma" to be an insult.

[@drakkonusfrostburn4038]

I'd suggest calling the states Texas, North Texas, West Texas, East Texas, and South Texas. That way all the people would still be Texans.

[@timothykeith1367]

That's what we call - except Central Texas would be there, and maybe Panhandle.

[@timothykeith1367]

A "35 Texas" could be a long snakelike state as there isn't often much development five miles on either side of I-35. That would likely be a blue state but on either side would be red states.

[@martinhall932]

hahaha

[@ginsederp]

I'd suggest calling the five states North Texas, West Texas, East Texas, South Texas, and Austin.

[@timothykeith1367]

@@ginsederp Trans-Pecos is an incredible place to visit - very different. Not many people live out there. The Valley might be another region, its not quite the same as South Texas.

[@farragutclassdestroyer3129]

80% of Texas counties: *SQUARE*

[@paulengstrom432]

and WHY SO MANY? With sparse population, no less. How do they afford so many county governments?

[@timbowalk14]

@@paulengstrom432 We can afford so much because the land has so much use. I'm Houstonian and Houston may be a big city but the land in Houston has a lot of use

[@jq7323]

@@timbowalk14 No where better to take a massive dump. I fly down to Texas all the time from PA just to drop a load on the excellent land.

[@ronaldserio3941]

At least there’s not too much gerrymandering goin on there😂

[@peterthestud1]

That’s how 80% of the counties in the US are shaped.

[@wayfaringman8418]

No self-respecting Texan wants that hallowed state's name combined with anything from Oklahoma.

[@Kal18042]

As a Texan You are ABSOLUTELY CORRECT sir

[@chrisengrace]

Exactly what I was thinking. Call it North Texas instead but please not Texlahoma

[@JesusGarcia-en3pj]

Darn tootin’

[@redmatthews6757]

Bruh🤣😂 Real

[@DingoDyce]

They're practically the same. Might as well

[@NRH_Wx]

As a Texan I really hate these Names. Names would be as simple as West Texas, North Texas, Central Texas, South Texas and South East Texas. If Texas would break up Why not 5 Texas names to rub it in....

[@mrdankraccoon9144]

Texas is Texas

[@HampETX903]

@@mrdankraccoon9144 not really El Paso isn’t even in the same time zone as the rest of Texas

[@xanderreyno]

Only Texas could split into 5 and somehow end up with more Texas.

[@NRH_Wx]

@@xanderreyno 😂

[@ClipsThatTakeUpStorageOnMyXbox]

Texas, Mexas, Lexas, Rexas and Breakfast.

[@youmaybehighstrungbutimlok1601]

I can get behind a state called Breakfast!

[@DaVoDeTh]

I vote yes for ft. worth

[@warsawpacked418]

I remember hearing about this years ago and one commentator observed (correctly in my opinion) that the only way to divide Texas would be into five concentric Texi all in the shape of the original.

[@thepagecollective]

:D

[@AverytheCubanAmerican]

Texas: Everything’s bigger in Texas This scenario (in Bill Wurtz): *Not anymore*

[@ctk3316]

Dude I see you literally everywhere

[@theperfectmix2]

Spotted

[@JimJimWACA]

dad!!! please acknowledge my existence!!! i haven't been fed in 2 weeks!!!

[@Perririri]

Ok Zoomer

[@aircoolguy5218]

You again

[@rapdri89]

I read the thumbnail as: “Five new taxes” and I was like: “Hell no”

[@mrp4242]

Well, if formerly red states keep shifting towards ‘purple’....well, just be prepared.

[@akorn9943]

“What’s next, a license to make toast in your own damn toaster?”

[@f30rocity78]

@@mrp4242 Could it be because Californians are moving to Texas??

[@logon12]

Lol

[@delighteddino9363]

Government: ... *MONEY?* People: what do you want now? Government: *MORE. MONEH.* People: but- what will it pay for-? Government: *JUST GIMME THE MONEH*

[@faithfulforever6331]

Texas may have the power to split up; but it would never happen. Texans are too proud of being Texans. None of them would ever want to surrender that affiliation, even if it was politically advantageous.

[@zefrum3]

wait for the Californians and New Jerseians and New Yorkers to wate that down

[@faithfulforever6331]

@@zefrum3 Probably true. Maybe the new states should be called New California and Jeryork.

[@killfuck7544]

True that son! Politics are temporary. Identity is forever!

[@faithfulforever6331]

@@killfuck7544 Yes and it is not only our identity; it is our heritage and culture.

[@lincmad]

Any state can split into multiple states with the consent of Congress, but Texas holds no special status. The video is flat-out wrong.

[@feeberizer]

El Paso is already a separate part of Texas. The city is on it's own power grid isolated from the rest of the state that also feeds part of southern New Mexico where I live. During the deep freeze of Feb 2011, El Paso Electric's generators kept freezing up forcing rolling blackouts across the region for three weeks. Then when the big freeze hit in Feb 2021, El Paso Electric maintained power due to improvements made over the prior 10 years while the rest of Texas went black.

[@steven4315]

If Texas split up, ERGOT would cease to exist. ERGOT is not allowed to cross state lines.

[@westtexas7]

We don't claim El Paso. Much more like New Mexico.

[@robertreznik9330]

The Panhandle did not go black!

[@SupremeLeaderKimJong-un]

North Texas, Best Texas

[@Mick-hp4yg]

😂

[@martinhall932]

North Korea, Best Korea

[@angbenyi6618]

@@martinhall932 OOF

[@GhostieTheML]

@@martinhall932 OOF!

[@MewxPro]

Fort Worth > Dallas

[@imnotyourunicorn91]

Don't split up Texas! I love our unique state. No shape is more handsome 🤠

[@PoliceBlot]

Face shape is better

[@MewxPro]

@@PoliceBlot stay in Idaho, you potato peeler

[@PoliceBlot]

@@MewxPro Montana actually

[@E4439Qv5]

Ahem. _Oregon._

[@GeographyWorld]

That is interesting! Would be crazy to see 4 more stars added to the American flag.

[@anpratadraiochtuil5293]

it would be 4 more stars

[@noelhann5262]

And they might not. The American flag has often lagged a bit behind in adding new stars.

[@honeycomblord9384]

Puerto Rico recently had a poll indicating that they'd wanna become a state, so make that 5 more stars.

[@RTMonitor]

The US Flag is like the joke of The Fast and the Furious movies and never stop producing it.

[@MikeV8652]

Great report, but San Antonio was not "the first settlement ever founded in the state," as you say. Assuming that you mean the first European settlement, that was Nacogdoches, settled in 1716, two years before San Antonio.

[@deeppurple2557]

Nope. Two Texas towns older than Nacogdoches: Ysleta (1680) and Presidio (1535)

[@MikeV8652]

@@deeppurple2557 With due respect to many Indian settlements of much greater age, the operative phrase in my statement was "first European settlement" (precisely because no one can say what is the oldest Indian settlement). In 1535, three Spaniards and one African briefly visited an Indian pueblo at what is now Presidio in an area cultivated for some 3,500 years now, but that didn't suddenly make it a European settlement. Both Ysleta and Socorro relocated from pueblos near Albuquerque in 1680, but they, too, were Indian settlements, plus a handful of Spanish missionaries.

[@_ch1pset]

I can already say that the way you described dividing up Texas in the end ignores some of the modern economic and cultural connections in the regions of Texas. San Antonio-New Braunfels-Austin is basically considered a single metropolitan area by the residents(officially it's 2 metro areas), dividing San Antonio from New Braunfels and Austin is a hard sell. San Antonio, while it is on the border of the hill country, DOES actually extend into the hill country, and is therefore still a part of the hill country. Also note, the Texas Triangle(DFW-San Antonio-Houston) is a major economic powerhouse in itself with extensive trade/business between the cities within that region. The entire Texas Triangle is a megalopolis that is home to between 70 and 80% of all Texans. Economically and culturally, it would make the most sense to keep this region in a single state. While your division makes sense from a historical and geographic perspective, I think economically and culturally, it does not work. Just my critique. I don't really have a way I'd divide the state, but I can say that the Texas Triangle is not exactly culturally homogeneous. San Antonio and Austin share a lot culturally, whereas, San Antonio and Houston don't share nearly as much. But you go further south and San Antonio shares a lot with Corpus Christi. Any division is going to be imperfect, but I think it would make sense to at least factor in economy and culture, rather than just history and geography.

[@timothykeith1367]

I-35 is the "Inland Empire" of Texas

[@gregsells8549]

Austin's northern suburbs in Williamson County would be split off from Austin in your plan. Also, New Germany wouldn't all be liberal. While Austin is famously blue, the German Hill Country has historically been conservative and Republican. For example, Gillespie County, home of LBJ and Fredericksburg, voted for Nixon over Kennedy in the 1960 election. This year, lots of Hill Country ranches bore Trump signs, offsetting the Biden signs around Austin. And in the 21st Congressional District, Republican Chip Roy rode the rural vote to defeat Democrat Wendy Davis, who was stronger in Austin and San Antonio portions of a district gerrymandered to benefit the GOP.

[@timothykeith1367]

@@gregsells8549 Some rural Central Texas counties also never voted in favor of succession from the Union.

[@gilrios64]

I agree on most. San Antonio and Austin would likely not join up but instead somehow split the hill country. San Antonio area would likely be left but much more centered because conservative elements are still strong in most hispanic and latino culture.

[@lincmad]

It’s all a fantasy exercise to begin with, because Texas DOES NOT have any special rights to split into multiple states. The video is just flat wrong.

[@emptytissuebox3966]

Next you should do, What if Oklahoman joined Texas. ECONOMY, LIFE, LAND AREA.

[@TheAmeliaMay]

Might as well get the whole Transmississippi gang back together and throw in Arkansas and Louisiana.

[@Perririri]

That won't happen; the Republicans would lose two senatorial seats

[@holtby6955]

@@Perririri But then Texas will not be a swing state if it happened. Because Oklahoma is very Republican.

[@MajesticSkywhale]

yeah because of the electoral college what we'd have to do is divide the red areas as much as possible for more senators, house seats, and electoral votes lmao (don't do this though rofl it's sure to backfire somehow)

[@SquidProQuo80]

As a member of the Texas delegation we warmly except your proposal but reject your offer altogether. I do hear that New Mexico may be seeking to expand your way so I would encourage you to ask them. It's not you; it's me... good look in all your future prospects.

[@greggibbs3639]

Small detail. The "Alamo" fight and the independence of Texas was heavily based on the need for slavery. Mexico did not have slavery. Texas became a slave state outside and inside the U.S. until Juneteenth.

[@octavianova1300]

The fact that Texas was initially formed by a bunch of illegal immigrants from the US adds a whole new layer of bitter irony to the fact that the Texans of now are so rapidly opposed to illegal immigration.

[@MewxPro]

Technically Texas as we know it formed as early as 1813. Look up the Republican Army of the North. You may recognize some names in there. Also there was legal immigration into Texas. Before the Revolution started, two parties formed. The War Party that wanted to leave and was willing to fight with Mexico, and the peace party that wanted reform in Mexico, but eventually fell on deaf ears in the Mexican government. So the War party gained more traction and the rest is history.

[@VenomSnakee]

I think we should break up Austin into 'New California' and then invade it

[@texassteven8988]

Right away please

[@BoldOne8760]

Texas : *Votes for a Democrat President* Texan Government : Gentlemen, synchronise your death watches.

[@BoldOne8760]

@The One it is now but it may go blue in the future.

[@texassugarandvice8006]

Texas has voted for a democrat president, to our shame. Remember LBJ, who would have never been in politics if we did not also have a disgusting history of corrupt elections. It seems some things never change.

[@rodrigo445678]

@CommandoDude He was a terrible president. His only great achievement forced him to work with Republicans since many Democrats opposed the Civil Rights Act.

[@paulengstrom432]

@CommandoDude you tell him, CommandoDude. Rod96 needs to be reminded that the Republicans have dragged their feet every inch of the way to progressive and enlightened reform of this nation. The Republican leadership in Congress is the chief impediment to progress for most of our history. Even when we manage to get a decent Republican president, those SOBs in Congress screw him over as much as they would a Democrat. These fossils must GO!

[@danadcock9743]

The right of Texas to divide into five states was, as you said, retained when it was admitted to the USA by treaty between two sovereign nations in 1845. Since it seceded and subsequently was brought back into the USA (more or less kicking and screaming) after the South was defeated in the War of Southern Aggression, the rights Texas had under the treaty by which it was originally admitted were lost so that now it could divide only in the same way all other states could do so.

[@tanbanz9184]

Where my Texans at

[@mexicanmedic]

Right here Partner

[@donleenygard4110]

Me

[@taylor41]

hi 🗿

[@kashi9447]

Howdy lol

[@200CACH]

Right here partner

[@TonyF1MMA]

At 11:50 you said San Antonio was the first settlement but we were always taught that Nacogdoches was.

[@mickeyd1232]

Correct Nacogdoches is the oldest settlement in Texas

[@peanut71968]

Sorry, Texas won’t be divided.

[@nickconkling4107]

As a Texan, I can say that the thought of splitting up our home is abhorrent. Our common heritage is beloved in all corners of the state and it binds us as a culture. While a Texan will entertain you with an amusing discussion of secession, the topic of partition would silence cicadas on a hot summer day.

[@bobbywise2313]

Well at least some West Texas HS football teams could win state again. They can't seem to compete with the DFW, Centex and GHA teams these days.

[@jimbig3997]

I agree, Texans don't like the idea of splitting Texas. However they do like the idea of succession.

[@kutterswindell5261]

@@bobbywise2313 A year later and I feel like this comment is spcecifically calling me out

[@bobbywise2313]

@@kutterswindell5261 Are you a West Texan by any chance? I love West Texas BTW.

[@danbobway5656]

As a Texan I can say I would be 100% on board to split Texas. Right now my vote means nothing, we are being held hostage by land so that millions of Texans voices don't matter. If we split Texas into even just 2 states much less 5 peoples voices would be heard and their votes would matter and actually represent Texans. I prefer that over "common heritage". Us native Texans are being silenced because conservatives flock here from other states and vote red while native Texans vote blue at a higher %.

[@nikolausfrank9722]

"unhappy with the rule of santa ana" = mexico banned slavery and the whites got mad

[@MikeV8652]

However, Santa Ana was a horrible despot. Patriotic Mexicans spit at the mention of his name.

[@MikeV8652]

@97RAVINEAVE No, that valley was named after St. Anne by no less than Junípero Serra himself, not at all after Antonio López Santa Anna.

[@MikeV8652]

@97RAVINEAVE Your quarrel, then, is with a couple of Popes for making him a saint, not with me. I'm not even a Catholic! Remember this quote by L. P. Hartley: "The past is a foreign country; they do things differently there."

[@MewxPro]

Not the only reason we left Mexico. Hell, it wasn’t even in our Declaration of Independence. Read it sometime.

[@owlman_]

@@MewxPro Read the congressional minutes from the Coahuila y Texas state constitutional convention. The state wanted to abolish slavery but Austin himself threw a hissy fit and said Americans would "rightfully rebel" if slavery was abolished. So instead, slavery was only abolished in the south and Americans in Texas got a 6-month extension to import as many slaves as they could... not that they stopped smuggling them after the deadline anyway.

[@jerrygray5510]

I grew up and lived in the DFW area of Texas from the mid 1960’s-2002. Before I retired from work, one of my careers was in corporate adult education. Whenever I had to give a demonstration of my teaching skills, I would always do a PowerPoint presentation of the state of Texas. It included it’s history and geography. These demos were in Virginia, Chicago, Los Angeles, and Detroit. Most people think Texas is just flat cow pastures and cotton fields and oil rigs and petroleum plants. They were always surprised to learn that it is only one of two states that used to be its own country, and that it has mountains, canyons, deserts, hills, thick forests, swamps, and beaches. I enjoyed your video very much.

[@kennethsideas84]

Lol you put my hometown of Llano, Texas outside of the new state of Llano

[@cisco747]

Because llano is named after the river I believe which drains part of llano escatado.. the llano escatado which is in northwest Texas

[@kennethsideas84]

@@cisco747 mmm that makes sense, nice insight

[@bluemoro973]

ehh he did say LANO so like... not the only messed up part

[@kennethsideas84]

@@bluemoro973 you mean the pronunciation? He’s right about that part. Everyone from Texas, especially those from the city of Llano pronounce it “lano” not “yano”

[@T1_Productions]

I Would Name The 5 States “East New Mexico”, “West East New Mexico”, “South East New Mexico”, “East East New Mexico”, and “Very South Canada”.

[@ub3rleopard]

To be honest, I would've named New Germany Fredericksburg after the town, which has a deep German heritage in it

[@a-liberal-patriot]

Flint, you make a good point, especially since Fredericksburg would demonstrate much more significance than New Germany. Having said that, personally I lean more toward calling it Travis, because of the history. But since Fred* includes Travis County, that makes it easier to use your suggestion.

[@nitroxylictv]

@@a-liberal-patriot New Travisburg wait.... travis scott burger

[@chloedegurechaff1941]

Also With how he drew the lines it would exclude New Berlin. which would be a sin to do for a New Germany.

[@simonsauter3229]

My father taught me never to ask a stranger if they were from Texas. If they are they will tell you if their not don’t embarrass them.

[@marzolian]

There is some question among legal scholars whether Texas retained that right after it seceded from the Union and then asked to be readmitted in 1870.

[@MewxPro]

Knowing secession isn’t outright mentioned in the constitution, the 10th amendment would come in letting the individual state decide wether or not it wants to secede. Texas v White can easily be overturned like any other Supreme Court ruling, especially when there was a bias in said ruling.

[@bozimmerman]

​@SLAMO The 10th amendment Literally, and in plain English, gives the states every right you can think of, as well as all the rights you can't think of -- excepting only what the U.S. constitution explicitly denies them. Seriously. Go read it. It's short. It's in English and everything. Anyway, since there is no explicit denial of a right to secede elsewhere in the U.S. constitution, the 10th amendment plainly gives states that authority.

[@jakehix8132]

@@bozimmerman In the words of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, "If there was any constitutional issue resolved by the Civil War, it is that there is no right to secede."

[@smc1942]

In the Texas Constitution, there is a clause that allows Texas to Secede; Because Texas WAS an Independent Nation BEFORE joining the Union. Even post civil war, this was approved when the state returned to the Union. It's still there. Don't be fooled, in spite of people moving there, Texas will always be Conservative.

[@marzolian]

@@smc1942 show me the law that says Texas can still do it.

[@christopherkeller6367]

This would break the Spirit of Texas. Yes, most of us feel very strongly about that.

[@RR64434]

A couple of corrections. 1. El Paso is not the 5th largest city. That would be Fort Worth. 2. DFW is not the 6th largest metro in US; it is 4th. Finally, It will never happen because Texas would lose one of it’s biggest monikers and selling points... “Everything is Bigger in Texas”. That is a symbol of Texas Pride.

[@lincmad]

Also, it will never happen as described in the video because any division of Texas would absolutely require the consent of Congress. (Article IV, Section 3)

[@lincmad]

@@YukonGhibli No, you are wrong, flat wrong, absolutely and completely wrong. First of all, Texas was NOT annexed by TREATY. The treaty that proposed to do that was REJECTED by the Senate in June 1844. It was reintroduced as a JOINT RESOLUTION, which cannot void anything in the Constitution. Furthermore, the terms about Texas being able to split into up to five states applied ONLY AT THE TIME OF ANNEXATION. A joint resolution of the 28th Congress, waiving certain prerogatives, was not binding on the 29th Congress, let alone on the 117th Congress. Furthermore, the plain text of the resolution says that “New States of convenient size not exceeding four in number … [may] be formed … which shall be entitled to admission UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION.” In other words, with the consent of the Congress at the time of the division.

[@lincmad]

Beyond that, the Treaty of Annexation provided that Texas would be admitted as a TERRITORY, not as one state nor as up to five states.

[@lincmad]

@@YukonGhibli You can type it all you want, but that does not make one single word of your point true. YOU clearly have NOT actually read the source documents you claim to cite. I have. You are not wrong because I say you are wrong, you are wrong because YOU DO NOT HAVE THE FACTS ON YOUR SIDE.

[@lincmad]

By the way, not only did the TREATY not provide for statehood, it specifically provided that the United States would own ALL PUBLIC LANDS in Texas. Obviously, both of those points were changed in the Resolution of Annexation, but that’s precisely the point: Texas WAS NOT annexed by treaty.

[@Zetact_]

Giving each segment of five Texases a metropolitan area kind of kills the purpose of splitting the state (i.e. people in rural areas not liking their votes being completely overpowered by huge cities that have absolutely no idea of what life outside the cities are like)

[@RR64434]

Actually it’s the other way around... Rural areas have much less people and their votes have much more power. I can also say the opposite (Rural residents have no idea what life in the cities are like.)

[@nicholastrudeau7581]

Actually, that gives a clear indication of how this could indeed work.

[@tomatosteve3444]

@@RR64434 yup. A vote in Wyoming carries a lot more weight than that of a California citizen

[@RR64434]

@@tomatosteve3444 Exactly. The county I live in in North Texas has more people than North Dakota, South Dakota and Wyoming combined but yet between them they have 6 Senators. They also have little diversity in those states. Talk about a huge imbalance in controlling the National narrative.

[@NorEasterReaper]

Metro areas are economic centers. Unless a purely rural spin-of state from Texas happened to have the oil fields it would be less economically well-off than the states that have metro areas. Personally I'm only in favor of states breaking down into new states if both the new and old (if the old is still around) have roughly equal metro and rural populations. This would mean the Senate doesn't disproportionally dip further in favor of rural areas than it already is, and it would mean each state is a swing state, meaning Presidential candidates would actually care about their needs.

[@plant.hacks.4.ur.environment]

You should do a video like this about California as well.

[@dean1039]

😏

[@dmacarthur5356]

Got to love the irony of a nation that declares independence from its government, fights two wars to remain independent, allows states to voluntarily join a union then declares it illegal to leave the said union.

[@mph7282]

Most of this is complete bunk. The resolution to annex Texas allowed them to petition Congress to admit up to five states at the time, but it was not a blanket condition to divide itself up in perpetuity. It was an opportunity in 1845 to do so. The official Act that admitted Texas as a state contains no such provision, and is specific that Texas is one single state. The U.S. Constitution is crystal clear that only Congress can further divide and admit new states, and the annexation resolution was not Congressional pre-approval for Texas to break itself up any time in the future it felt like doing so. Furthermore, Texas seceded from the United States in 1861 and was re-admitted in 1870, rendering the original Annexation Resolution and the statehood act moot anyway. Texas is a state by re-admission in 1870, not by the annexation resolution of 1845. On a side note, you completely missed the reason Texas wanted that provision in the first place, which was to have the opportunity to increase the number of slave states to try to counter potential new states in the west being admitted as free states. It was entirely slave owners worried that they'd lose influence in Congress.

[@lincmad]

Even the video’s reading of the resolution of annexation is flawed, because it glosses over the phrase “[up to 4 additional states] shall be entitled to admission UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION.” Thus, even if this provision were somehow miraculously still operable today, it would require the consent of Congress as unambiguously provided by Article IV, Section 3. So, yeah, Texas could split into five states, but under the exact same terms by which California could split into twelve.

[@MikeV8652]

@@lincmad What y'all are missing is that the constitutionally required consent of the Congress for any state to divide has already been given to Texas in 1845, and its progeny shall be ENTITLED to admission. It's a done deal in Washington and at the sole discretion of Texas. The "readmission" argument won't fly either, because it presupposes that secession was constitutionally valid and that a purported "readmission" was necessary. It was actually the readmission of the state to it representation in the House and Senate.

[@lincmad]

@@MikeV8652 No, what Y’ALL are missing is that that consent of Congress was not consent in perpetuity. It was consent that lasted only from the annexation of the Republic of Texas until the admission of the State of Texas to the Union. Texas DOES NOT have - and has not had since 1845 - any special right to split into multiple states.

[@MikeV8652]

@@lincmad There was no territorial period between the annexation of the Republic and the admission of the State. Those events were simultaneous. Congress, in its prior approval of annexation, had written [emphasis added] "New States of convenient size, not exceeding four in number, and having sufficient population, may HEREAFTER, by the consent OF SAID STATE, be formed out of the territory thereof, which shall be ENTITLED to admission..." The state could not give its consent until after it was admitted. Any state may ask consent of Congress to split off any number of new states. If that is all that Texas may do, why is Texas limited to four?

[@lincmad]

@@MikeV8652 The bill for annexation (containing the provision in question) was signed on March 1, 1845. The bill approving statehood was signed on December 29, 1845, containing no such provision. So, once again, you are wrong. Also, neither the 28th nor the 29th Congress had the Constitutional authority to bind a future Congress to consent to a purely hypothetical future proposal.

[@valta5063]

Let’s split up California as well

[@californiamade5608]

No

[@mrdankraccoon9144]

@@californiamade5608 yes

[@jimbig3997]

Having grown up in South Austin, I can definitely see Town Lake (Colorado River) dividing two different states/countries within Texas.

[@Damianoutlaw]

It would be like Philly and New Jersey

[@93Deli]

great vid! as a native texan, i’d say your borders need a bit of adjusting - Bastrop, Lee, and Williamson counties should all be in New Germany as they’re part of Greater Austin, and McLennan/surrounding counties are culturally much more like Texlahoma than they are Galveston. other than that, great job!

[@anthonylovavto3228]

New mexico has always been it's own independent region first as a province under Spain until 1821, 26 yrs as a Mexican department, largely autonomous and a territory under the US until statehood! Although Texas tried to claim New Mexico after the Mexican war and during the civil war. Citizens of New Mexico will have none of that! So bogus claims and maps mean nothing to citizens of New Mexico!

[@texassteven8988]

Let’s do it, get 10 Senators!

[@CameronAB122]

I am too fond of the shape of my state than is reasonable lol. Maybe if there was a layer of government between state and federal level so states could be split up and still have larger regional interests.

[@lukeporras1288]

There is a group that wants to do just that in New York. It's called Divide NY Caucus and they want to divide New York State into 3 autonomous regions- basically states inside a state.

[@CameronAB122]

@@lukeporras1288 interesting!

[@cowburn28]

Just a small correction. You said that the US wanted Texas, but the Texans weren't in any hurry to be annexed. The truth is actually the exact opposite. The Texas Republic asked for annexation almost immediately, but the US wasn't too keen on taking land that the Mexican gov't still considered to be part of Mexico.

[@ryanrapp1158]

While the idea of including each of the five largest cities in each state seems good in theory. Austin and San Antonio are quite close to each other. They would easily become the two closest major cities in different states west of the Mississippi by a large margin and in fact only Washington, DC and Baltimore are the only pair of major cities nationwide currently that aren’t in the same state as each other that are closer to each other than Austin and San Antonio. The two cities suburbs are practically indistinguishable from each other and your literally have to put next door neighbors in the same subdivision in different states trying to create a border between San Antonio and Austin. Most of my aunts uncles and cousins live in the South Austin and North San Antonio and from visiting them frequently I can tell you first hand that the two metro areas are too intertwined both culturally and geographically to be able to split them.

[@737smartin]

As a long-time and (and often) Austin resident, I strongly disagree with terms like “virtually indistinguishable” and “intertwined” r.e the Austin-San Antonio relationship. The two city centers are 80 miles apart. There are many miles of undeveloped and under-developed land along this corridor, separating the several smaller towns like Kyle, Buda, San Marcos, and New Braunfels along the way. They are separate media markets with separate commercial airports serving them. IMO, their economies are FAR from intertwined. Austin = state government, high tech, and live music. San Antonio = HUGE military influence and tourism, including the Riverwalk.

[@ryanrapp1158]

@@737smartin while each city has its own economy and maybe intertwined isn’t quite the right word to say they are “far from intertwined” is a bit of an exaggeration. I have family in Buda, Kyle, and New Braunfels, etc. and have visited them many times. Many of my family members work in one city while the other spouse works in the other. While maybe they aren’t quite one continuous metro are they are both growing quickly enough to where it won’t be long before that’s the case. You could create some line that splits them for the state line but it’d almost certainly result in a situation where many people living between San Antonio and Austin would suddenly have close to half the people they work with, socialize with, etc. suddenly live in another state than them. While the city centers are 80 miles apart, like most western cities they are fairly spread out which means the South Austin suburbs and the North San Antonio suburbs are quite close to each other and rapidly growing closer to each other. Sure maybe someone in North Austin or South San Antonio wouldn’t be affected very much but to act like the South Austin and North San Antonio suburbs and communities aren’t close enough or tied to each other culturally and economically is disingenuous. Like I said in my original comment, no two major city centers in different states other than D.C. and Baltimore are closer to each other than Austin and San Antonio. You can theoretically separate them but you can’t practically separate them.

[@737smartin]

@@ryanrapp1158 I hear your take. It’s ALL a theoretical thought experiment, so I hope there are no hard feelings, but MY AUS/SAT experience is just completely different than yours. I’ve had fun in SAT, lived there for a few months of military training and more. My two kids attended UTSA for a year, my sister graduated from UTSA and lived/worked in SAT for many years, and I visited SAT when I proposed to my wife 32 years ago at the Tower of the Americas. Still, I feel no tighter Austin bond to SAT than I do to Dallas or Houston. They’re just other Texas cities to me. Eceryone in my family, and everyone I know feels the same. For us, Austin is Austin, and San Antonio is San Antonio, and they’re way more different and independent than they are similar or intertwined.

[@heyy8101]

i would let east texas (not including dallas area or houston area) be its own state as it is culturally very close to louisiana and other deep southern states

[@Rad509]

Well, I'm not saying it's a bad idea but I lived in super east spring (Spring is a suburb of Houston if you didn't know), and it had a ton of potlucks, Cajun cultures, mardi gras decorations, and a ton of my neighbors and friends were from Louisiana and Alabama. Not saying your wrong, but I am saying that Greater Houston is pretty southern.

[@mickeyd1232]

I agree 💯 east Texas and deep east Texas is very different from the rest of Texas

[@thomasaquinas5262]

Texas could be 100 small states, but it is Texas and won't be dividing ever. As GW said: don't mess with Texas...

[@ACoroa]

My state will NOT be split!!!

[@mikeifyouplease]

Your division of Texas into five states is one of the most intelligent and logical that I have ever seen. However, I believe that most any state or country can insure a better future for itself, the larger that it is. With size, comes the probability of more natural resources, more agricultural lands, and more area for growing cities and towns.

[@hsein3838]

Loved the video. And you fixed the sound volume, it sounds great.

[@ThatIsInterestingTII]

Thanks! And yeah, I did try to fix the volume. Glad to hear that it works.

[@RyanValizan]

Texas would declare independence again before it split into multiple states.

[@Levitiy]

I prefer the American federation to an unfettered Texas. So I'd definitely secede with south Texas.

[@chrissr318]

To me this is one of the most interesting things in America is Texas power to break up into a max of 5 states

[@joewatson7676]

North Texas, West Texas, East Texas, South Texas, Central Texas. These already have names. Nobody wants any part of "...lahoma" in a name!!!

[@stargazer-elite]

Finally, someone covers this that annexation treaty never said that Texas could leave whenever it wants. No state is allowed to leave the union however, Texas can split itself into up to five different states thus “succeeding from itself” that is probably where the misconception came from.

[@StevenWSmith]

I think there would be a substantial question whether the Texas Legislature could unilaterally subdivide the state. My opinion is that the Texas Constitution would have to be amended to subdivide the current State of Texas into two or more states. That would require a two-thirds vote of the legislature plus voter approval rather than a simple legislative majority plus gubernatorial approval.

[@lincmad]

Actually, there is not a substantial question there. Neither the Legislature nor any other body representing Texas could unilaterally divide into multiple states. Any such action would absolutely require the consent of Congress. The video is just wrong about that part.

[@StevenWSmith]

@@lincmad I'm no expert on the issue but the relevant document (in substance a treaty between the Republic of Texas and the United States of America) plainly states: "New States of convenient size, not exceeding four in number, in addition to said State of Texas, and having a sufficient population, may hereafter, by the consent of said State, be formed, out of the territory thereof, which shall be entitled to admission under the provisions of the Federal Constitution." There may or may not be scholarly articles that opine on what that language was intended to mean.

[@lincmad]

@@StevenWSmith No, that’s incorrect. The document was specifically NOT a treaty - the treaty was proposed but rejected by the Senate in June 1844, so annexation was effected by an ordinary bill. The Congress had no authority to give the consent of a future Congress to a hypothetical future division of the state. There is no ambiguity.

[@StevenWSmith]

@@lincmad That's interesting. So a material provision of the document annexing Texas is unconstitutional (i.e., an exercise of authority that Congress does not possess under the federal constitution). Do you know of any scholarly articles on the issue?

[@lincmad]

@@StevenWSmith No, something that never was a material part of the document would be unconstitutional if in fact it said what you think it says. The 28th Congress consented to splitting Texas into up to five states. That consent was binding only on the 28th Congress, which is to say it expired almost as soon as the ink was dry.

[@annoyingperson2255]

Well from what I heard about this election from a Texan friend is that some of the semi republicans would not vote because the bushes said so

[@caseysmith544]

so did they vote?

[@jerrymiller276]

With all the Californians moving to Texas, one of the states could be New California.

[@agentic_state]

That would be the Austin Area, lol.

[@paulengstrom432]

great. let's cut the heart out of Texas!

[@youmaybehighstrungbutimlok1601]

Down with the Californians!!

[@californiamade5608]

Fun fact. All those who are moving to Texas from California, are not even from California. Lol. Californians don’t care about your state.

[@digigirl3588]

The Californians are turning Texas blue.

[@eseguerito2629]

So basically it’s a super mega gerrymandering scheme.

[@ThatIsInterestingTII]

Yeah, it pretty much is.

[@voidvector]

It only works once, since they cannot adjust the boarder afterwards. Given the demographics, a division might give Dem 3-4 Senate seats immediately. Also the smaller states would mean it will be easier for relocating Californian/NYer to turn blue.

[@Perririri]

More like a literal *Super MAGA!* If Texas split into five states, the Republicans would gain eight senatorial seats!

[@noahwinberry2475]

@@voidvector I feel like the short-sighted GOP thing to do would be to try lumping all the major urban/Democratic areas into one state and let the other four be safe GOP states until (like you said) retirees and the liberal migrations make another Democtatic urban center pop up in the mini-Texas capitals and turn them purple

[@paulengstrom432]

@@noahwinberry2475 divide and conquer, baby!

[@JTL1776]

Texas. North Texas. West Texas. South Texas. East Texas. You get texas plus 5x the federal power.

[@ilect1690]

if texas was ever divided into five states you'd bet it'd be gerrymandered into oblivion!

[@luannkelly5071]

It will NEVER happen. Texans take great pride in the huge size of the state. Most of Texas is conservative with the exceptions of Austin, Houston, and a few other towns. Austin is a blueberry in a sea of strawberries. There is more interest in Texas leaving the United States. If you drive around Texas you will notice the Texas flag flies high, and the American flag is secondary. For example, our mail carrier trucks say U.S. Mail on the sides, but they display the Texas Flag, not the American flag. You just don't see that in other states.

[@deborahlagarde7182]

Yep there are "Texit" signs all over this far west Texa area... Just don't let "Republic of Texas" Rick McLaren run the show! He was a scammer from the beginning.... (and they better keep him in jail--for life!)

[@rosereaper188]

Love Texas from California

[@lambotama]

Texan here, I hate everything splitting up the state and your way of splitting and naming

[@dead-ishchannel6212]

I can't believe my part of the state was named after Galveston. It's a decent city, but its beach(s) is a shithole lol

[@RyanValizan]

I’m not even from Texas and knew this would be the standard response from Texans; and any politician trying to sign off on this would be committing political suicide in Texas. My 2 cents at least, there isn’t a year(semester?) of Texas history for a HS education for a reason - I can’t think of any other state that dedicates that much time to their states history.

[@joze838]

I would like to know why you hate the idea of splitting up! Do you feel like it destroys your identity or what exectly is the problem? (On a rational point of view, I only see benefits for Texas and Texans, but I would like to understand the maybe more important sentimental side.)

[@a-liberal-patriot]

Native Texan here. I agree that his way of splitting and naming is terrible. But the attitudes (which don't coincide with his splitting choices) already exist. El Paso, Hudspeth and Culberson counties are considered "Far West" or "The Other" Texas. Dallas County considers itself "the real" Texas; they consider the rest of the state is just a poor wannabe. And so on. Having said all that, I disagree with Texas being divided. The way it is now is how it's been for quite a while, it's working (despite attitudes), why change it?

[@furrycircuitry2378]

@@a-liberal-patriot its true though im on traveling work coming from dallas and the lower down texas you go the poorer it gets

[@janeeley1604]

Fascinating! 54 States. Wow. Love the names too.

[@steveystovey]

Possible new state names, from a non-creative Texan who knows nothing about Texas: Texlahoma: Red/Redd or Texoma Llano: Bend/Big Bend or Chihuahua Galveston: Marais, Trinity, or just Houston New Germany: Hugel, Hugelig, idk what else Texas: Tejas, Nueces, Padre, Christi/Corpus Christi, Aransas Note: I live in Corpus Christi. I do not know much about Texan geography or really anything.

[@TheGreatDevlin]

Singular: Texas Plural: Texasses Wait...

[@PrezVeto]

Secession is _not_ clearly illegal. It's debated by scholars to this day. The Civil War did not decide any questions of law, only questions of might.

[@manilajohn0182]

You're mistaken. See "Texas vs. White". Unlike in 1861, secession is illegal today- by legal precedent.

[@PrezVeto]

@@manilajohn0182 SCOTUS took one side in that highly flawed opinion that begged more questions than it answered and quoted law remarkably little. It is not clearly the correct side. It is, however, the side that gives them more power. Funny how good they are at finding those.

[@manilajohn0182]

@@PrezVeto Will, it's certainly your right to call their decision "...highly flawed" and "...not clearly the correct side". The fact remains however, that the ruling was entirely within the bounds of Federal law. SCOTUS exercised their lawful power of judicial review and declared secession illegal.

[@Mockingbird_Taloa]

A video on Texan independence that went into the often-overlooked pro-slavery factor would be neat. Texas History classes like to leave that bit out!

[@jimbig3997]

Slavery is such a highly charged word these days. No one wants to be called a slave, but when it comes to getting taken care of by the man all their hands are out begging for the scraps.

[@AtlasAccord]

Fun Fact, when it was first added as a state, it was going to be divided into 5 states. However, out of fear of the North/South outnumbering the other, the plan was abandoned.

[@untitleduck9623]

I've seen many Texans in this comment section say that the idea of Texas splitting up is terrible, a clear indication that they're not gonna consider drawing a map, but imagine this: An independent federal republic of Texas I'm saying this just so that ppl would seriously consider drawing what such a map would look like.

[@jimmeade2976]

If Texas split up, California (which has been proposed to split into 3 states) would be close behind ... gotta maintain that political power

[@ryhol5417]

This is awesome. Only Texas could have this built into its “welcome to America “ document

[@paninidagoat8780]

6:20 the class when the textbook mentions your name

[@michaelbrennan6123]

Can Texas break up? They already did. The land annexed was carved into Texas, part of New Mexico, part of Oklahoma, part of Kansas, and part of Colorado.

[@VersedNJ]

They also had to swear allegiance to the US government and constitution before they could send their congressional delegation, which would mean Texas, their new States and Congress would have to agree. Heck they can't agree to face masks during the Covid 19 Pandemic.

[@macrosense]

That would put an additional 8 southern seats in the Senate. That would drastically reduce the quality of United states

[@zkosn]

The legislature would love to divide Austin into 5 different states

[@PrezVeto]

No, that would give the Dems 10 additional senators.

[@shamusmichaelrichardduffey5353]

This is honestly one of the best videos I've ever seen on KZbin.

[@codyvenrick4611]

Yeah... I don’t think New Germany would go over so well in Texas

[@keithwalker280]

Don’t bring that democratic shit to Texas

[@jwilleseries7764]

It should be called Texas Germany rather than New Germany becuase we already have a place called New Germany here is South Africa but if Texas broke up then I defineftely think East Texas should be it's own state

[@oscareduardole]

I wish people would stop glorifying and/or avoiding the truth of Texas independence. Texas fought it's independence for slavery, which was outlawed Mexico in 1829. Anglo-Americans were upset and took arms. It's the same reason Texas joined the Confederacy. Texas succeeded twice to preserve slavery.

[@Alex-jb5tb]

As a German who travelled Texas long ago, and fell along with it and Louisiana, I do not understand this contribution. Better focus on Greater Idaho.

[@michaelf7093]

This was true, from 1845 to 1861. But Texas seceded, and was readmitted in 1870, on condition of "equality with other states". > It no longer possesses this special privilege. Any state can divide, with Congressional approval. But for 16 years, Texas had "Pre-approval". Now, it must do what any other state must do, i.e. ask permission.

[@hs5312]

Due you think secession is valid? your argument only works if secession is valid, if it was never legal in the first place than Texas still has this privilege

[@michaelf7093]

@@hs5312 no. But it was decided that it constituted "state suicide". The state only exists on the basis of re admission. The alternative was continued military occupation. I think they got a good deal.

[@hs5312]

@@michaelf7093 I think the issue would end up going to the Supreme Court, if a split up of Texas ever occurred

[@IDrinkandKnowThings]

Thank you for finally answering a question to my satisfaction why my dad moved the family 750 miles to Texas when I was 8 years old.

[@HeneryPhilllips]

Ain’t no way us North Texans are gonna name our state anything close to Oklahoma. We are North Texas and that’s it

[@MrDariolett]

I’ll never happen plain and simple. The state of Texas combine is a powerhouse and they like it like that.

[@eduardtokaryev7948]

Honestly I'm down for the split of Texas, it would bring balance in the region. They are still culturally similar though so not much will change except borders and governments.

[@zefrum3]

balance? like center of mass balance? please explain

[@AllisonAKUMATUWarden]

Five States of Texas: Austin Texas (just the City of Austin and 5miles of surrounding suburbs); Panhandle Strong Texas (Lubbock and north, including the panhandle); DFW Texas (includes Wichita Falls and the entire DFW metroplex, including Abeleine); El Texas (includes El Paso, Marfa, Midland, Odessa); Big Coast Texas (all cities on the ocean); Great Texas (includes San Antonio, most of hill country). To be clear, as a Texan, I am not behind dividing up Texas into 5 states, esp with anything that has a olhoma!

[@marvwatkins7029]

Culturally at the least, yes, as can be said of many states: California, Illinois, New York, Florida, Pennsylvania amongst others. And this includes not just the most populated.

[@texassugarandvice8006]

I would never break up Texas, however, interestingly enough one of the reason that Texas wanted to join the union was that the Texicans thought that doing so would improve their economy since Texas coffers were empty at that time. Ironic, isn't it? Well, at least we have our own grid.

[@moorecasa4126]

Texas is turning Purple because Californians who can’t afford Cali move to the much cheaper Texas in City’s Dallas, Austin, and Houston. If you look at all the main county’s for these main city’s they are all Blue surrounded by Red.

[@deborahlagarde7182]

But now it's 2022 with illegals being hailed by 'president' Biden and Hispanics leaving the Democrat reservation, turning the border areas red (they are sick of illegals destroying their properties)...even Presidio County! No amount of Commiefornians are gonna turn Texas blue (but "Beto" might still steal the governor election like Biden stole the prez election in 2020).

[@abbeykinchen5891]

the split looks great, but as a native texan, im taking issue with the names. - Llano is perfect, except that llano, texas is in the austin state it seems. I havent been much to west texas so i dont know too much about its history, but i think Llano fits straight off of vibes - the Dallas state is actually the one i think should stay called Texas. thats the part that feels the most Stereotypically Texas to me so i think they need to keep this. - the Austin state it getting called Balcones after the balcones fault line that helped form the hill country that state is home to. (though i love the nod to our german history. most speakers stopped teaching Texas German to their kids during wwii to avoid being associated with…the bad germans…) im just calling the Houston state “Houston”. it fits. it relates to texas history. you change Houston to Houston city and give everyone there a NYC complex and they just start calling it “The City”. if they cant be called that i would call it Waterloo after Austin’s original name since texas’ first capital Washington On The Brazos is located in that state. - the San Antonio state is getting named Crockett after davy crockett who (in)famously died at the alamo. this gives it a connection to texas history without being “obscure”. most americans outside of texas would probably make the connection between the state of Crockett and Davy Crockett just was we do with Washington and George Washington. i would also name it Laredo just straight off of vibes. i think it would make a good state name

[@ccosephvv]

I’m all for state splitting. You can split your state but you can not secede from the country as a whole

[@Koutouhara]

We already refer to the parts of Texas in 5 names. North, South East, West, & Central Texas. Done. One of the most common questions after being asked 'where you're from' is 'what part?' and 90% of the time they say one of the above. The other 10% is that they will tell you their town & how many hours it is from a major city. I'm from Central & an hour 40 from Austin.

[@mattdajedi]

I’m from San Antonio, that’s usually what I say or I say South Central Texas as well

[@Koutouhara]

@@mattdajedi Yep! It's just so much easier since it's straight forward! Texas is large & we've adapted to that. We measure a lot by time from a major city. When I go back to NC to visit they all use distance & get confused when I say something like I'm an hour from so & so. They're like, 'uh how many miles is that' . 😅

[@Rickey1]

I feel like the southern state would have something to do with the Rio Grande, considering the general area is already called the Rio Grande Valley.

[@MrPrivmack]

I say, split up California!

[@j.s.c.4355]

I would accept your basic regions and names but I would make sure that each of the five regions had approximately equal populations. And I would only be in favor of Texas breaking up in the five if the same happened in California and perhaps Florida broke into three and other large states broke down too. In fact, I would love to see all of the United States re-organized into states of approximately 6 to 7,000,000 people each. This proposal require some states to combine.