Upstate seccession

[Greenville]

What if we annexed Chattanooga and southeast Tennessee along with western North Carolina. Given the complicated trip from Greenville to Chattanooga, that would make for quite an adventure between two cities in the same state!

[mcashlv]

In which state is this NOT the case to some extent? Furthermore, if you mean that Charlotte and the Triangle have little in common with the rest of NC economically, I would agree with you--and to a much higher extent than the Upstate's relationship to SC. Charlotte has the 2nd and 4th largest banks in the U.S. located there and the Triangle has Research Triangle Park, which employs at least 40,000 easy. Economically, the Upstate cannot compare to this, so again, what benefits Charlotte and the Triangle here? Hey, while we're at it, why don't we also include Atlanta and Birmingham since they are the prominent economic generators of their respective states? That would certainly make for one funny looking state.

But hey, this IS all hypothetical, so carry

Greenville-Charlotte are fairly close to each other. Raleigh not too far from Charlotte. Just because Charlotte is bigger, doesn't mean there isn't plenty of synergy between the two. What is the per capita productivity of Greenville vs. Charlotte--that's much more important than the relative size of each town. Raleigh-Durham are important because of their scientific educational establishment. Look what Stanford/Berkeley did for the Bay area. Including Atlanta would be interesting--but I'll wager the per capita productivity of Atlanta is lower than either Greenville or Charlotte. Atlanta has a lot to offer, but also a lot that nobody would want.

[UrbanSoutherner]

There seems to be a general assumption within this thread that the Upstate is the economic powerhouse of South Carolina. I have to dispute that as well as the wisdom of breaking up South Carolina.

First, let's define the Upstate, or the new state that we will call West Carolina. I am going to assume that secessionists will want the Greenville - Spartanburg - Anderson CSA counties, so they get Greenville, Spartanburg, Anderson, Pickens, Laurens, Oconee, and Cherokee Counties. In addition, let's assume that the secessionists want suburban Charlotte, so they also get the Charlotte CSA counties of York, Lancaster, and Chester. Lastly, we will give them Greenwood, Abbeville, and McCormick. This rounds out the bounder against the Augusta MSA and Columbia CSA counties. So, the secessionists get 14 counties, leaving SC with 32 remaining counties.

The population of the two states based on 2004 census estimates would end up approximately as follows:

West Carolina - 1,557,768

South Carolina Remainder - 2,640,300

First of all, I would not consider breaking up what is already a modestly-sized state (both geographically and population-wise) into two states a great idea. This is especially true given that one of SC's real problems is that it is somewhat overshadowed by its two larger neighbors that are each twice as large in population with booming large metropolitan areas.

Now, let's start looking at some hard statistics to compare the two states.

What about population growth between 2000 and 2004?

West Carolina - 67,235 or a 4.511% growth rate

South Carolina Remainder - 118,821 or a 4.712% growth rate

What about average unemployment over last full year (i.e., 2004)?

West Carolina - 6.944% unemployment

South Carolina - 7.065% unemployment

Note the amazing similarity in these statistics. West Carolina has lower unemployment, but not by much. South Carolina has a higher population growth rate, but not by much.

What about total gross sales in 2004?

West Carolina - 17,966.57 per person

South Carolina - 26,145.46 per person

Not bad for the economic basketcase area of the SC I would say. Indeed, the Columbia MSA has a higher per capita income that the Greenville, Spartanburg, or Anderson MSAs.

I could go on with the numbers, but my point is that the proposed state of West Carolina would be slightly better on some hard core statistics and slightly worse on others relative to the remainder of SC. Rhetoric aside, the truth is that the Upstate is not all that different from the rest of the state. And neither West Carolina nor South Carolina can measure up in terms of the numbers to SC's bigger neighbors with their booming metro areas. To put it bluntly, there is no reason why Charlotte or the Triangle would want to merge with the Upstate into one state (dump eastern NC on the other hand, probably so...).

Upstate boosters tend to get so excited about BMW, ICAR, main street Greenville, etc., that they forget that the Upstate has its economically troubled areas as well. There are counties with double-digit unemployment to match the Lowcountry's poor rural counties (e.g., Union County had an average 12.9% unemployment rate during 2004). For every wonderful new European-owned factory that opens in Greenville or Spartanburg, there are textile mills closing in other areas of the Upstate. West Carolina's economy would be heavily dependent on manufacturing. Despite Greenville's success in gaining European investments, a manufacturing-heavy economy is probably not a great place to be in a post-industrial national economy.

Likewise, the other regions of the state have prosperous areas in addition to their struggling areas. Some of the wealthiest counties in the state are elsewhere like Lexington and Beaufort. There are major new economic developments occurring in Charleston and Columbia and Myrtle Beach, not just Greenville.

And lastly, does the Upstate really want to give up the state's largest and most important research university, two of the top tourist destinations in the eastern US (Myrtle Beach and Charleston), a major Atlantic container port, Spoleto, and the state's only two full medical universities which could fuel biotech research and investments?

Sources for the Number-Crunching:

http://www.ors2.state.sc.us/abstract/chapt...mployment21.asp

http://www.ors2.state.sc.us/abstract/chapter4/business7.asp

http://www.ors2.state.sc.us/abstract/chapter13/income10.asp

US Census Website for Population Estimates

[GvilleSC]

Upstate boosters tend to get so excited about BMW, ICAR, main street Greenville, etc., that they forget that the Upstate has its economically troubled areas as well. There are counties with double-digit unemployment to match the Lowcountry's poor rural counties (e.g., Union County had an average 12.9% unemployment rate during 2004). For every wonderful new European-owned factory that opens in Greenville or Spartanburg, there are textile mills closing in other areas of the Upstate. West Carolina's economy would be heavily dependent on manufacturing. Despite Greenville's success in gaining European investments, that is probably not a great place to be in a post-industrial economy.

And lastly, does the Upstate really want to give up the state's largest and most important research university, two of the top tourist destinations in the eastern US (Myrtle Beach and Charleston), a major Atlantic container port, Spoleto, and the state's only two full medical universities which could fuel biotech research and investments?

The Upstate does have its economically troubled areas. But, with a smaller state, more attention could be given to those areas, recruiting investment and lowering unemployment... And yes it is possible, With Knox White as Governor the new Carolina could push forward with huge strides.

I'm not sure why we wouldn't want to give up MB or Charleston. What exactly do they directly give to the upstate? A new state isn't going to change the distance to the port or the time it takes to reach those destinations. The only reason that USC would hurt the upstate is because they just announced that 5 colleges in USC are partnering with the Greenville Hospital System to offer classes and whatnot at the new campus being built here and then probably the USC campuses that are around... New colleges can be started (with better funding too).

[Greenville]

And lastly, does the Upstate really want to give up the state's largest and most important research university, two of the top tourist destinations in the eastern US (Myrtle Beach and Charleston), a major Atlantic container port, Spoleto, and the state's only two full medical universities which could fuel biotech research and investments?

While the University of South Carolina is larger than Clemson in terms of enrollment, it is certainly not "more important" as a research university.

[GvilleSC]

I think the real question is... does SC want to lose Clemson... Clemson's Architecture facility in Charleston- which Charleston's mayor is really excited about- among other things across the state. Clemson is definitely more important to SC as a whole rather than Carolina who really just invests in Columbia in comparison.

[UrbanSoutherner]

I think the real question is... does SC want to lose Clemson... Clemson's Architecture facility in Charleston- which Charleston's mayor is really excited about- among other things across the state. Clemson is definitely more important to SC as a whole rather than Carolina who really just invests in Columbia in comparison.

That depends on whether you consider the branches of USC located around the state as part of USC. Technically, they are.

My point about the universities boils down to USC's size and the fact that there are only 3 real research universities in the state (USC, Clemson, and MUSC). And West Carolina would take only one of them.

I'm not sure why we wouldn't want to give up MB or Charleston. What exactly do they directly give to the upstate? A new state isn't going to change the distance to the port or the time it takes to reach those destinations.

You do loose tax revenue from the tourists. Better the tourists pay than local taxpayers.

[Charleston native]

There seems to be a general assumption within this thread that the Upstate is the economic powerhouse of South Carolina. I have to dispute that as well as the wisdom of breaking up South Carolina...

...Likewise, the other regions of the state have prosperous areas in addition to their struggling areas. Some of the wealthiest counties in the state are elsewhere like Lexington and Beaufort. There are major new economic developments occurring in Charleston and Columbia and Myrtle Beach, not just Greenville.

And lastly, does the Upstate really want to give up the state's largest and most important research university, two of the top tourist destinations in the eastern US (Myrtle Beach and Charleston), a major Atlantic container port, Spoleto, and the state's only two full medical universities which could fuel biotech research and investments?...

I'm sorry, but I definitely take issue with Greenville people thinking that it is the sole center of the universe. Sheesh, and people say us native Charlestonians are self-centered!

Without a port, your precious BMW plant would have to travel through 2 states and pay taxes in order to export and import cars, parts, and machinery. Additionally, who will subsidize taxes for all of the utilities, roads, and facilities? The residents with property and auto taxes. Much of the state revenue comes from tourism dollars, and without MB or Chas, you will end up without a viable source of revenue besides taxing your citizens. And considering how conservative everybody says the Upstate is, I doubt they would approve.

I don't want to burst people's bubbles, but the coastal parts of the state are one if not THE economic driving force in the state. MB and Chas are the fastest growing areas of the state and have the highest additions of jobs in the state (and no, in Chas it isn't mostly hospitality jobs). Also, your state would not have a single medical university. All students would have to go out of state for medical, dental, and legal education.

To say that secession would be quite alright and that the area could do quite well without the state iis rather self-righteous and arrogant. Sorry, that's just MO.

[krazeeboi]

Great analysis, UrbanSoutherner. I really didn't have time to crunch numbers or anything. It's obvious that the Upstate makes valuable economic contributions to the state, but it's certainly not a North Georgia (Atlanta)/South Georgia situation. While tourism isn't exactly the wave of the future when it comes to economies, it IS the #1 economic generator in the state, thanks in no small part to our coastal cities: MB, Charleston, and Hilton Head.

Charleston_native, your last statement is definitely on the mark.

It's easy to imagine a new state with the Upstate and the Charlotte metro, but how can the Triad be excluded and the Triangle included? That's why I say it would make for one funny looking state.

[krazeeboi]

I think the real question is... does SC want to lose Clemson... Clemson's Architecture facility in Charleston- which Charleston's mayor is really excited about- among other things across the state. Clemson is definitely more important to SC as a whole rather than Carolina who really just invests in Columbia in comparison.

Ummmm.....no. USC-Aiken, USC-Lancaster, USC-Salkahatchie (two campuses), USC-Sumter, USC-Union etc. USC has more regional campuses than Clemson and it provides educational opportunities for the rural residents of the state. Because Clemson's other campuses are more specialized in nature, it isn't really able to do that to the extent that USC's campuses can.

[Jerseyman4]

The Delmarva pennisula deserves to secede first

[GvilleSC]

Ummmm.....no. USC-Aiken, USC-Lancaster, USC-Salkahatchie (two campuses), USC-Sumter, USC-Union etc. USC has more regional campuses than Clemson and it provides educational opportunities for the rural residents of the state. Because Clemson's other campuses are more specialized in nature, it isn't really able to do that to the extent that USC's campuses can.

Regional campuses are totally different-- they are their own seperate schools.. I'm not sure what you're trying to say here.

[krazeeboi]

But they all fall under USC's umbrella. In other words, if there were no USC in Columbia, none of those regional campuses would exist. So USC isn't just contributing to Columbia, but to various other areas in the state by way of those regional campuses.

From USC's website:

USC has a rich tradition of serving South Carolina, from its main campus in Columbia to senior (four-year) campuses in Aiken, Beaufort, and Upstate (Spartanburg) to regional campuses in Lancaster, Union, Salkehatchie (Allendale and Walterboro), and Sumter. USC's campuses provide outreach opportunities across the state in areas of community and economic development; the environment; health and wellness; K-12 programs for students, teachers, and administrators; science and math; and music, reading, and writing.

The South Carolina College of Pharmacy is a joint program between USC, the Medical University of South Carolina in Charleston, and the Greenville Hospital System. USC's new research initiatives include plans for health science buildings on the campuses of MUSC and GHS in addition to three primary research blocks in Columbia. USC has long-running field study sites at the Baruch Institute in Georgetown and Pritchards Island in Beaufort County.

[GvilleSC]

Here's what CLEMSON offers to SC--

there are extension service offices in all 46 counties (in association with SC State, I think). plus there are additional extension centers: Coastal, Pee Dee, Edisto, Sandhills, Simpson (Pendleton), and the Institute of Coastal Ecology and Forestry.

There's the Greenwood Genetics Center.

There's the Charleston School of Architecture Campus.

There's Greenville's Graduate School of Automotive Engineering.

Also, Clemson has its own campuses in Genoa and Barcelona. I'd definitely say that Clemson's presense there creates a great bond for SC and future investment.

Both schools add to SC. Take it for whatever way you see it.

Back to this origin- SC would lose more from Clemson's leaving than the Upstate would lose from USC's absense IMO.

[krazeeboi]

That's great, I mean it really is. SC is blessed to have Clemson here. My only point in listing USC's contribution to the state as a whole was to show that the institution doesn't just contribute solely to Columbia.

If the Upstate were to secede, much of Clemson's extensions would cease to be. Also, there would no longer be a USC-Upstate (Spartanburg or the proposed Greenville campus) or a USC-Union, and the medical profession in the Upstate would also suffer, no longer benefitting from the SC College of Pharmacy, USC's research initiatives, or MUSC. So again, what is the benefit of the Upstate seceding (remember, the Midlands isn't trying to secede here)? And I still see no logical reason as to why Charlotte and the Triangle would even consider hooking up with the Upstate to form a new state. But as I have stated, this is all hypothetical.

[Spartan]

Typical Clemson superiority complex. SC would loose a lot from either school's absense, there is no question about that. The USC system provides more opportunity to those that need it.

The great thing about Clemson and Carolina is that they have very little overlap, and between the two you can get a good education in almsot any field you are interested in.

I just don't understand why you would get Charlotte and the Triangle and not the Triad? If you did that you'd basicly cut NC in half.

[mcashlv]

I'm sorry, but I definitely take issue with Greenville people thinking that it is the sole center of the universe. Sheesh, and people say us native Charlestonians are self-centered!

Without a port, your precious BMW plant would have to travel through 2 states and pay taxes in order to export and import cars, parts, and machinery. Additionally, who will subsidize taxes for all of the utilities, roads, and facilities? The residents with property and auto taxes. Much of the state revenue comes from tourism dollars, and without MB or Chas, you will end up without a viable source of revenue besides taxing your citizens. And considering how conservative everybody says the Upstate is, I doubt they would approve.

I don't want to burst people's bubbles, but the coastal parts of the state are one if not THE economic driving force in the state. MB and Chas are the fastest growing areas of the state and have the highest additions of jobs in the state (and no, in Chas it isn't mostly hospitality jobs). Also, your state would not have a single medical university. All students would have to go out of state for medical, dental, and legal education.

To say that secession would be quite alright and that the area could do quite well without the state iis rather self-righteous and arrogant. Sorry, that's just MO.

This is actually humorous. For a "native Charlestonian" (one of the most obnoxious and unpleasant subtypes of the entire human species, and I mean that in a nice way), to accuse another of being arrogant and self-righteous is rich indeed. Culturally the Upstate has never had much in common with the Lowcountry, even going back to the Civil War--the Upstate had many people with pro-Union sentiments. The ancestral myths of genteel Charleston are largely fictions, the city's early fortunes were created by the advent of the cotton gin and slave labor--not much to be proud of. Charleston does have one big ace in the hole--it's charming downtown and beaches provide the high-end lifestyle that appeals to senior executives of large corporations (and more importantly, their wives) , and this may encourage large businesses to relocate operations to Charleston in the next few decades.

[Charleston native]

This is actually humorous. For a "native Charlestonian" (one of the most obnoxious and unpleasant subtypes of the entire human species, and I mean that in a nice way), to accuse another of being arrogant and self-righteous is rich indeed...

Hence, the reason for my statement. However, I don't recall placing personal attacks on Upstate residents such as calling them "obnoxious" and "unpleasant subtypes of the entire human species". I just merely stated that the idea of secession is quite arrogant. Why is SC the only state that obsesses over secession, anyway? You don't see other Charlestonians, native or otherwise, even suggesting an idea of secession. I think it would be a detriment to the region that did secede, no matter if it's the Upstate or Lowcountry. Like it or not, the Upstate is dependent on the Lowcountry, ports and all, just as the Lowcountry depends on the Upstate for exporting manufactured goods and the like.

Culturally the Upstate has never had much in common with the Lowcountry, even going back to the Civil War--the Upstate had many people with pro-Union sentiments. The ancestral myths of genteel Charleston are largely fictions, the city's early fortunes were created by the advent of the cotton gin and slave labor--not much to be proud of...

Uhh, Charleston's early fortunes were from it being an international port and the entire Southeast region's cultural center. Chas was the 4th largest city in the country in the late 1700's through the early 1800's. It was only until the 1800's that the city imported slaves and relied more on plantations...definite shortsightedness from my hometown's early leaders.

[UrbanSoutherner]

Culturally the Upstate has never had much in common with the Lowcountry, even going back to the Civil War--the Upstate had many people with pro-Union sentiments. The ancestral myths of genteel Charleston are largely fictions, the city's early fortunes were created by the advent of the cotton gin and slave labor--not much to be proud of.

I think that you may have exaggerated the cultural and economic differences between the Upstate and Lowcountry leading up to the Civil War. You should read "Unification of Slave State: The Rise of the Planter Class in the South Carolina Backcountry, 1760-1808" by Rachel Klein. She details how the slave-based, cash crop agricultural system that started in the Lowcountry spread throughout the entire state by the early 1800s and effectively provided a great deal of unity. Unionist sentiment in SC was very little anywhere in the state. There were no large numbers of Unionists in the Upstate. While Greenville did produce prominent Unionist Benjamin Franklin Perry, Charleston had its abolitionist Grimke sisters. The fact is that these folks were all extreme minority voices in the respective regions of the state. The state as a whole supported slavery and secession. The only places that you really had truly strong Unionist sentiments were in the real mountain regions, like in western NC, eastern TN, and western VA (which secceded from VA to form its own state during the war). So, while Charleston may have benefited the most from slavery in a sense, the Upstate has its hand in it as well. And then when the Upstate moved beyond agriculture, it did so with the textile industry--a racially exclusionary industry that benefited massively from child labor in the early years. What a legacy!

[Charleston native]

^ Thanks, Urban! Right on the money, dude.

[UrbanSoutherner]

One more interesting comparison between the proposed state of West Carolina and the remaining part of South Carolina is the political angle. If you look at the 2004 presidential election returns and see what the percentage breakdown is between Bush and Kerry (ignoring the other candidate amounts), you get the following:

West Carolina: Bush 66%, Kerry 34% for a 32-point gap

South Carolina Remainder: Bush 55%, Kerry 45% for a 10-point gap

Together, SC is in the middle of the southern states in terms of the split. But separately, West Carolina becomes one of the most Republican states in the South along with Oklahoma, and the rest of South Carolina becomes one of the more competitive states in the South along with Arkansas, Virginia, and Florida. Of course, much of this is likely due to the strong Democratic loyalties of the large African-American population in the non-Upstate SC areas.

[mcashlv]

I think that you may have exaggerated the cultural and economic differences between the Upstate and Lowcountry leading up to the Civil War. You should read "Unification of Slave State: The Rise of the Planter Class in the South Carolina Backcountry, 1760-1808" by Rachel Klein. She details how the slave-based, cash crop agricultural system that started in the Lowcountry spread throughout the entire state by the early 1800s and effectively provided a great deal of unity. Unionist sentiment in SC was very little anywhere in the state. There were no large numbers of Unionists in the Upstate. While Greenville did produce prominent Unionist Benjamin Franklin Perry, Charleston had its abolitionist Grimke sisters. The fact is that these folks were all extreme minority voices in the respective regions of the state. The state as a whole supported slavery and secession. The only places that you really had truly strong Unionist sentiments were in the real mountain regions, like in western NC, eastern TN, and western VA (which secceded from VA to form its own state during the war). So, while Charleston may have benefited the most from slavery in a sense, the Upstate has its hand in it as well. And then when the Upstate moved beyond agriculture, it did so with the textile industry--a racially exclusionary industry that benefited massively from child labor in the early years. What a legacy!

Part of my post is actually in jest somewhat, regarding the famous exclusiveness of "old Charlestonians" who aren't used to criticism, it seems. Read more histories and you will find that there was a large contingent of pro-unionists (mostly lower-class & small property owners) in the western SC-N. GA areas that were terrified to speak out after the hotheads in places like Charleston pushed their seccession agenda through the state. The mountain folk were stridently ambiguous toward the Confederacy. One of my great grandfathers in Iva owned 12 slaves, lost 3 children in the War, including a daughter who was somehow killed in battle, so I am not claiming familial Unionist sympathies. There was vigilante violence and economic sanctions against people who made their pro-Unionist views known. It was the famous Pro-Unionist Petigru (from Charleston, I believe) who said of SC at the time " It is too small to be a republic and too large to be an insane asylum". And regarding child labor, at least it was voluntary servitude, they weren't flogged or manacled for not working.

[Charleston native]

Well, it's not that we're not used to criticisms...but the whole notion of secession of the Upstate is really absurd. By stating that Upstate people don't need the rest of SC, that sounds pretty elitist to me, i.e. arrogant and self-righteous.

I'm a native that happens to understand that Chas is not the center of the universe, but it is a pretty darn good place to live...it's underrated in many aspects, actually. I'm definitely not a "blue-blood", so I don't have this aristocratic mentality which elevates Chas to the practical pearly gates of heaven. I know there's quite a few people in my hometown which have this reputation, but believe me, they are the minority of the people living there today.

If you're going to joke, please communicate that a little more clearly. However, like I said before, every city in this state needs each other, and it would not be a good idea for the Upstate to secede. For Upstate people to say that they could do fine without the rest of the state is blatant arrogance. Sorry, there's no other way to describe it.

[Spartan]

Why is SC the only state that obsesses over secession, anyway?

We're not! We get that label because we have a history, and a rather vocal minority who get regonition only because of that history. Texas has a reputation for touting secession as well. I searched the internet and came accross these state's secession sites:

• Hawaii

• Alaske Independenve Party

• Second Vermont Republic

• Republic of Texas

• Michigan

• Free State Project (New Hampshire)

• Cascadia (Oregon, Washington, British Columbia)

• California

I left out the Christian Exodus, and SC since we are talking about other states here. There are also many Canadian movements for secession via independence ot joining the USA. I have read that if Quebec were to succeed in secceeding, the rest of Canada would fall as well and we'd end up with a very much enlarged US- except Ontario.

[Charleston native]

...However, like I said before, every city in this state needs each other, and it would not be a good idea for the Upstate to secede. For Upstate people to say that they could do fine without the rest of the state is blatant arrogance. Sorry, there's no other way to describe it.

Yes, I'm quoting myself, but I just realized this......if Greenville is truly the economic engine that some people have said here and can do just fine without the rest of SC, why would they also need to acquire all of NC's major cities?

Hmmm...I think that speaks for itself.