Pros And Cons Of Texas Annexation

Oppositions to Texas Annexation
On March 2, 1836, Texas had become an independent nation from Mexico. It had named itself the Republic of Texas and proudly stood between a growing United States, and a conflicted Mexico. Immediately facing problems, Texas had many economic failures, had trouble with nearby Indians, and could not form a stable military. It is for these reasons that Sam Houston, a major political figure and President of the Republic of Texas, decided that Texas could not sustain itself as an independent nation. Sam Houston suggested to the United States to annex Texas. This caused a bit of disruption in the United States, as people who opposed Texas annexation and people who wanted Texas annexation clashed. Many people thought
This was another reason the public opposed the idea of annexing Texas. Most people of the United States believed that annexing was unconstitutional. Martin Van Buren was again, an example of someone who believed that annexing was unconstitutional. He and many others believed that in order to annex another nation, an amendment that says that it is just to do so must be in the Constitution, which currently there was not. President John Tyler, who was the president of the United States during this time, decided to create a treaty for the annexation of Texas. When the attempt to annex Texas by treaty failed to gain the two-third Senate majority required to ratify a treaty, President Tyler accomplished it by a "Joint Resolution" of Congress, which only required a majority. Throughout the debate political parties objected that this method was not Constitutionally appropriate --that such an action required treaties between the two nations involved-- as well as that such a move would undercut national
Many people opposed Texas annexation because it caused an imbalance of slave and free states, some people opposed Texas annexation because they believed annexing was unjust and unconstitutional, and others prospected that annexing Texas meant imminent war with Mexico. Today in Eurasia, Russia is trying to annex Crimea, a section of Ukraine. This has arisen many oppositions and questions on whether annexation is just both morally and politically. This also raises another question, whether there are laws that all nations should follow. Yes, many people believe that freedom of speech is one of the major components of a nation’s laws. The nation is made up of the people who live there and they should have a voice in what the government is doing. They are the ones who are living there and without the nation wouldn’t even be a nation. Citizens should also have the right to bear arms if they do not have a criminal background, have a license and are of-age. If they are in the face of danger then they should be able to protect themselves if necessary, the police are not always around to save lives. Economically, different classes should have different tax rates. If a nation chooses to tax its people, then it would be reasonable to tax people in different classes with different tax rates. Those who are at an economic disadvantage should not have to pay as much as those with economic advantages. These are