Plan to split California six ways is closer to vote

[XemaSab]

Could “Silicon Valley” become its own U.S. state?

That’s what a ballot measure, approved this week for signature gathering, is seeking to do. That, and carve out five other regions of California into their own independent U.S. states — with their own laws, politicians and capitols.

The idea was pitched by venture capitalist Tim Draper, who is now expected to throw his money toward collecting the 807,615 signatures required to put the plan before voters. He has until July 18.

That’s not the only hurdle. Not only would California voters have to approve the initiative, so would Congress.

http://blog.sfgate.com/stew/2014/02/19/plan-to-split-california-six-ways-is-closer-to-vote/

(This is an asinine idea and I am posting the article for teh lulz.)

[Timez Squarez]

1. It'll fail. and fail badly. Hopefully Draper has all of his assets tied up to this stupid idea

and see him go broke for it.

[JI7]

2. i hope he wastes a lot of money on it

[warrior1]

3. Never happen

[Agnosticsherbet]

4. So, it would add ten senators, with six of the probably Republican.

It would split California's electoral college votes into five, designed to give Republicans the lions share. Sounds like another attempt to fix the elections by separating low population Republican areas and condensing high population Democratic areas.

I don't think it has a chance of passing, should they get enough signatures. But it is pretty clear what's going on.

[Coyotl]

24. Gerrymandering experts drew the lines, no doubt.

[upaloopa]

5. It's like those wealthy neighborhoods that don't want to

pay to send poor kids to school.
Gentrified CA doesn't want their taxes going to poor counties for services to needy people.

[NYC_SKP]

6. Won't happen but if it did I'd be in that pretty golden yellow state on the coast!

[Scuba]

7. The Senate would see it as 20 new Senators, reducing the bribe money available. Fail.

[Dawson Leery]

8. Not happening.

[Xithras]

9. Like all attempts before it, it will fail.

There are actually some very good arguments for splitting California into multiple states, but they'll never pass for one simple reason: There is no way to divide the state without providing political advantage to one side or the other, and no plan to divide the state can pass without broad support from both sides of the political aisle.

[Jenoch]

18. When has this already been attempted?

Frankly, it has not yet been attempted as far as I know, unless there is already people colle ting authorized signatures.

This will never happen. The water issue alone will keep it from happening, and I'm not even considering the U.S. Senate ramifications.

[Xithras]

25. A quick check shows that this is the 10th serious attempt to partition the state.

1. In 1854, the California Assembly passed a plan to split the state into the states of "California, Shasta, and Colorado" (this was before the current state of Colorado existed). It failed to gain the popular support it needed.

2. In 1859 a related plan to split California into two states at the Tehachapi's made it all the way through the state government and was signed into law (the southern state would have again been called Colorado, after the river). That attempt failed because the country was in a runup to the Civil War and the southern states wouldn't approve the creation of another "Free State".

3. In the 1890's there was another serious attempt to split the state at the Tehachapi's. That attempt gained support in both houses of the state legislature, but was too late in the session to get passed. Some of its supporters weren't reelected, and it wasn't brought up again.

4. In 1941, the infamous State of Jefferson secession was attempted. That attempt went as far as the residents taking up arms against the State of California, but was abruptly ended by the bombing of Pearl Harbor.

5. In 1965 the State senate again voted to divide California into two states at the Techachapi's. It did not make it through the Assembly.

6. In 1992 the Statham bill was proposed to split California into three states. That bill passed the state Assembly but did not pass the State Senate.

7. In 2003, an attempt to split California into four states gained a lot of support on both sides of the aisle before petering out. That plan was initially popular because it would have created two conservative states and two liberal states, preserving both the local and national political balances while increasing local representation.

8. In 2009 the Assemblyman Bill Maze's plan was introduced to split California lengthwise into "Western California" along the coast, and "Sierra" for the inland counties. It enjoyed popular support among conservatives and got as far as initial signature gathering, but quickly faded out. The proposal would have only benefited Republicans, and was doomed from the start.

9. In 2013 Modoc and Siskiyou County officially voted to secede from the state of California. That movement is still ongoing, and the spokespeople for the State of Jefferson movement have confirmed that they plan on proceeding to both the state Legislature and the national government once they get a few more counties onboard.

10. This new Draper Plan is serious proposal number 10.

And there have been HUNDREDS of calls by politicians and business people to do the same. Few of those moved past the "idle discussion" phase.

Like all attempts before it, I expect this plan to make a bit of noise and then fade away. People have been trying to split the state since it was created, and those attempts have never gone anywhere.

[nadinbrzezinski]

27. And this one also creates one incredibly

Wealthy "gated community" and two incredibly poor states.

Yes, Silicon Valley would be that gated community.

Oh and draper is reserving the right to defend this in court if it passed, assuming the state does not want to, last para.

https://oag.ca.gov/system/files/initiatives/pdfs/13-0063%20%2813-0063%20%28Six%20Californias%29%29.pdf?

[yuiyoshida]

10. This IS A Republican's idea right?

I has to be.

[nadinbrzezinski]

28. Actually, a Libertarian idea

Some of the shit I need to read for work at times boggles.

[Duer 157099]

11. They got the colors mostly wrong

the emerald triangle is blue?

And I can think of a better purple area than the one they put.

The red is mostly correct

[Warren DeMontague]

16. Oooh, we need names, Stat.

1) "The Independent Duchy of Humbudistan!"

2) "Mendacitino!"

3) "Really Really Expensive"

4) "Bakerfrensofield" or .... "Who knew pigs could smell so bad"

5) "10 Million People, Yo"

6) "Sand Diego"


California, you know I

[Jenoch]

19. I do not believe that whomever prepared that graphic

used colors denoting any political leanings.

[Dprang]

12. Who or what groups benefit from splitting california?

What a waste of tax dollars! USA already has enough problems with the number of states in the union. Adding to this number only makes for more complexity, division and overhead costs.

[Jenoch]

21. If Californial is split up

and either D.C. or Puerto Rico is given statehood the we would have the 57 states that President Obama once mentioned.

[MiniMe]

13. I wonder how much of this has to do with splitting California's electoral votes

And this would add 10 additional Senators.

[nadinbrzezinski]

14. Hold it, it was resubmitted?

It was submitted in 2013 and pulled back. Some of the shit one gets to read due to our local idiocy.

[jsr]

15. Tim Draper has too much money

[Skip Intro]

17. No chance of it happening though, right? n/t

[XemaSab]

22. I can see major problems with all 6 states

For example, I live in Shasta county (in the "blue" state), where there is already a statehood movement led by teabaggers.

No way do people on the coast in Humboldt and Mendo want to be stuck in a state with the people here, and the feeling is probably mutual. There would be literally one highway connecting the coast with the interior that wouldn't involve leaving the state.

We'd immediately be one of the poorest states in the country with an economy entirely built on forestry, ranching, and weed. We'd have two small state universities and two major prison complexes.

We'd have 927,851 people in 39,562 square miles, or a population density somewhere around Nebraska.

At least 15,266 square miles would be forest service land, 4,145 square miles would be BLM land, 733 square miles would be park service land, 240 square miles would be refuge land, and well over 308 square miles would be state park land, so over half the land area would be public land. Right now Idaho, Alaska, Nevada, and Utah are the only states with more than half their land area in public land.

In summary, it's crazy talk.

[Egalitarian Thug]

20. It is impossible to underestimate the stupidity of the American public.

Doubly so for California, the midwest and the south.

[Iggo]

26. Yeah, we're stupid.

[Egalitarian Thug]

29. A paraphrase from 1926 in which Menkin writes about USAToday 60+ years

before it came to be. And we've been proving it true with ever-increasing gusto since.

[Coyotl]

23. Strategic move to bring redneck voters to the polls?

To counter the other ballot measures drawing liberals to the polls this time, such as marijuana?

Definitely a go-nowhere stupid idea.

[ErikJ]

30. Could be a great idea for Dems.

Its unfair that Calif with a population 100 times bigger than Wyoming only gets 2 Senators the same as Wyo. meaning Wyo and all the rural states get a lot more Senate representation.

This from Thomm Hartmann:
Every ten years - the House of Representatives get reshuffled. Based on census data - states may gain or lose Congressional seats depending on how many people enter or leave certain states. This ensures that the House reflects the changing population in America. As a result of last year's census - the state of Ohio is slated to lose two Congressional seats in next year's election. And since Republicans control the state legislature in Ohio - they're picking off the progressive districts - most notably the 10th district of Ohio - a district faithfully represented by Dennis Kucinich for more than 14 years. Now Kucinich - a leading voice among progressives - has to look for a new district to represent just to stay in Congress - rumor has it he's been looking near Seattle in Washington State, which is gaining a congressional seat because that state's population has grown. So while the House is constantly adding or subtracting congress people depending on how many people have moved into or out of the various states - guess what the Senate is doing? Absolutely nothing. If we broke up the bigger states last year - then the make up of the Senate would have been 69 Democrats and 41 Republicans - more than enough to overcome a filibuster - and we'd have a public option - heck we may even be on the road toward a single-payer system - we'd have a clean energy plan - a limit on corporate campaign donations - stronger Wall Street reforms - and a New Deal to put Americans back to work. So let's get to work breaking up the biggest states - it's a straightforward way to fix the Senate - and help fix America.

[WillyT]

31. K & R !!!