Should California be divided into three seporate states?

[Foxfire]

We need more purple states. I can't vote red or blue anymore. Neither is an accurate representation of my political views.

Who knows? :idunno:

If Cali is successful, it could start a trend.

There are more than 30 states that have, at one time or another, contemplated partitioning into two or more smaller states.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._state_partition_proposals

 

[The Barbarian]

We need more purple states. I can't vote red or blue anymore. Neither is an accurate representation of my political views.

You nailed it. One of the worst things about Gerrymandering, is that it enables the worst actors on the right and on the left to succeed.

The more competitive the district, the more American the representative will be.

 

[Town Heretic]

I'm leaning more toward consolidation of the states we have. lain: I think that at minimum we have at least 5 states too many. Possibly as many as 10. I mean, just look at New England, won't you? Which, as it turns out, is the area's new tourism slogan.

 

[annabenedetti]

We need more purple states. I can't vote red or blue anymore. Neither is an accurate representation of my political views.

Purple is the result of people voting red or blue.

 

[annabenedetti]

Per capita distributions aren't always an accurate measure of real impact. States with low populations can be said to have more congressional representation "per capita" than higher populated states. Particularly as per the Senate.

Not quite sure if states and counties are comparable. Can you explain?

One of the major complaints espoused by proponents of the measure is the imbalance of political representation in both statewide and national arenas.

That's just the way it works, though. Is it an imbalance if the majority votes for their representation? Genuinely curious, not trying to be contrary.

 

[annabenedetti]

The diminished influence in the election is exactly why I wouldn't want to see Cali split up. Too. Many. Red. States.

Pretty sure we'd end up with six Dem senators, though the ratio of representatives could shift.

 

[drbrumley]

CalExit
By Brion McClanahan
July 27, 2017


California Attorney General Xavier Becerra has given the green light for CalExit proponents to begin collecting signatures for a California secession ballot initiative in the 2018 general election.

This is good news. California is the logical place to begin having a conversation about secession, and every red state American should be actively supporting the proposal.

As California goes, so goes Oregon and Washington, and in the not so distant future perhaps Massachusetts, Connecticut, Maine, Vermont, and New Hampshire. Maybe Hawaii might finally get the chance to regain its independence.

One can dream.

Every American gets it on a personal level, so why can’t it be expanded on a larger scale?

The answer is that Americans have been taught that secession is illegal and the “Civil War” solved the issue. Even the CalExit folks believe that it would require a constitutional amendment to secede.

Tell that to the founding generation, Ellsworth and King among them, who thought secession was not only moral but entirely legal and possible. Just read the Declaration of Independence.

Some suggest this would weaken security or destroy the American financial sector and ruin the economy.

News flash, the American economy is already in the tank. Federal bankruptcy is not too far in the distant future.

 

[annabenedetti]

Check out the "NOs" which were as adamant as mine. :chuckle:

http://fox40.com/2018/04/18/three-californias-local-lawmakers-business-leaders-weigh-in/

The lone "yes" questioned why the inland had "to throw money at the coast." :chuckle:

 

[Foxfire]

Pretty sure we'd end up with six Dem senators, though the ratio of representatives could shift.

Pretty much my assessment too. That's more than enough to tip the Senate.

 

[Foxfire]

CalExit
By Brion McClanahan
July 27, 2017


California Attorney General Xavier Becerra has given the green light for CalExit proponents to begin collecting signatures for a California secession ballot initiative in the 2018 general election.

This is good news. California is the logical place to begin having a conversation about secession, and every red state American should be actively supporting the proposal.

As California goes, so goes Oregon and Washington, and in the not so distant future perhaps Massachusetts, Connecticut, Maine, Vermont, and New Hampshire. Maybe Hawaii might finally get the chance to regain its independence.

One can dream.

Every American gets it on a personal level, so why can’t it be expanded on a larger scale?

The answer is that Americans have been taught that secession is illegal and the “Civil War” solved the issue. Even the CalExit folks believe that it would require a constitutional amendment to secede.

Tell that to the founding generation, Ellsworth and King among them, who thought secession was not only moral but entirely legal and possible. Just read the Declaration of Independence.

Some suggest this would weaken security or destroy the American financial sector and ruin the economy.

News flash, the American economy is already in the tank. Federal bankruptcy is not too far in the distant future.

Actually, in this case, it's not the same thing as secession at all. There have been at least three states whose origin was founded in "re-partitioning" an existing state following constitutional protocols as per Article IV, Section 3 clause 1 of the U.S. Constitution.

 

[Foxfire]

Check out the "NOs" which were as adamant as mine. :chuckle:

http://fox40.com/2018/04/18/three-californias-local-lawmakers-business-leaders-weigh-in/

The lone "yes" questioned why the inland had "to throw money at the coast." :chuckle:

I'm gonna go with the closing statement. :chuckle:

 

[Foxfire]

Sure. It is likely to reduce their influence in elections. Northern and Southern Cali do not march in lock step so who knows. Could be interesting. New flags and all.

From "the golden state" to 'the three bears'?

:Shimei:

 

[CabinetMaker]

Purple is the result of people voting red or blue.

I tend to vote purple meaning I frequently vote for a third party candidate who has more reasonable and workable policies.

 

[annabenedetti]

Pretty much my assessment too. That's more than enough to tip the Senate.

What's your vote? Yes or no?

 

[annabenedetti]

I tend to vote purple meaning I frequently vote for a third party candidate who has more reasonable and workable policies.

I understand your point but I don't know how you're getting there. Voting third party should be another color entirely. If you were a moderate who voted the candidate rather than the party but stuck to the two main parties, I could see you as a purple individual.

But you said we need "more purple states," so if you're voting third party how do you get a state to purple? A more even distribution of red and blue votes makes for a more purple county or state.

 

[CabinetMaker]

I understand your point but I don't know how you're getting there. Voting third party should be another color entirely. If you were a moderate who voted the candidate rather than the party but stuck to the two main parties, I could see you as a purple individual.

But you said we need "more purple states," so if you're voting third party how do you get a state to purple? A more even distribution of red and blue votes makes for a more purple county or state.

Red and Blue have come to represent the extreme conservative and liberal policies. Third party candidates frequently incorporate less extreme conservative and liberal policies into their platforms making them purple in my mind. My comment was meant to imply the need for more moderate candidates. There is a green party but i don't support them overly much.

 

[Idolater]

A division into three separate states would create four additional U.S. Senate seats.

The geographical area that is presently California would then be represented by a total of 6 U.S. Senators instead of two.

Plus four more electoral votes. I say :down:

 

[Foxfire]

What's your vote? Yes or no?

I'm leaning slightly in favor although I doubt that anything will come of it, other than lip service from . It's not the first time this sort of thing has come up in Cali and I'm sure it's not the last.

Luckily for you, I'm limited to an opinion and not a vote.

 

[annabenedetti]

Luckily for you, I'm limited to an opinion and not a vote.

Good thing. :chuckle:

 

[rexlunae]

Could California do this unilaterally, or would it require congressional approval? a constitutional amendment?

Congress would have to approve it, and it could be challenged in California's courts.