Skip to comments.Do you think California should split into multiple states?
Posted on 06/15/2010 10:21:39 PM PDT by Ancient Drive
We gotta staunch the bleeding somewhere right?
The libs maybe willing as long as they can divide up the debt evenly. Right now, they would consider it a bailout of last resort.
Why not East CA and West CA....as well as East OR and West OR, and East WA, and West WA?
I’m leaning towards the split idea. I mean California is too damn bloated to be saved. Split the State, restart the local economies..etc..
Naw. I think the libs oughta just move to the workers paradise of Cuba or Venezuela or Massachusetts, and leave the Golden State to us conservative natives who remember it when...
Makes it easier for the Mexicans to claim a part.
The Alamo should be turned into a medical clinic for illegals. You know, give something back to the community.
If these earthquakes keep up, God maybe doing it whether we want it or not.
What a knee slapper!
I’m all for that. But damn it! We Republicans, are in the minority here. It’s freaking Commiefornia!
There’s nothing in the Constitution that says a state has to be contiguous. Look at HI. You could lump Oakland, SanFran, most of Humboldt and all of LA and San Diego Counties into Kalifornia, and leave the rest as California. Problem solved.
I’ve lived upstate and it’s a different world.
That way the libs could have like 4 or 6 senate seats...
As for WA, we just need to get rid of King, Pierce, and Snohomish Counties.
You people are just jealous of our beautiful state.
I love my California, it’s sunny ALL the time, never gets cold, and the people I know still have jobs and money.
So go pick on on another state.... like North Dakota
Let’s at least wait for redistricting before we start carving the state up...not that it’s anything more than academic.
They’re not going to let you break away.
They need your money and your population (to keep 54 House seats/electoral votes).
True. California has enough resources to function as a powerful nation, all by itself. To divide it would be to ruin that completeness.
Split or not, you got that right, Libs go home to NY,MA,NJ,De,etc, etc, etc....
We’re gonna start on Babs Boxer in Nov..... when she gets a pink slip and a ticket back to Brooklyn, NY.....
“They need your money and your population (to keep 54 House seats/electoral votes).”
We have 9% of the population but only hold 2% of the Senate seats.........
Course maybe thats a good thing seeing those seats are held by the likes of Babs Boxer and Diane Feinstein......LOLOLOL
No. I live here pretty much in the middle and even though it is a liberal cess pool and overrun with illegal immies and Mexi gang/traffickers, it is California—spanning, variable, and diverse. We just need to let them shoot themselves in the foot until it is nearly dead and keep working and turning it red, red, red. There is hope until death.
Yes. Well said.
No. Just use the bay area and LA for strip mining, wind farms, oil exploration, etc. And ship the citizens thereof to Cuba or Mexico.
Yes, the bay area can from it’s own SR, leaving the rest of us with at least the possibility of being a real state.
We have 9% of the population but only hold 2% of the Senate seats.........
But, the Senate was designed that way on purpose ... You can't expect anything different than the founding fathers put together. You may be thinking about the House of Representatives, instead ... :-)
“But, the Senate was designed that way on purpose ... You can’t expect anything different than the founding fathers put together. You may be thinking about the House of Representatives, instead ... :-)”
I understand that, and agree with it’s purpose of leveling the power between big state v small state in the upper house (Senate).....Yet at the same time, I don’t think that the founders envisioned a mega state like California with a 38M population being represented by just 2 Senators when that compromise was made .....
The solution is not more Senators for each state, it is smaller (population wise) states. Time for California to be divided into 3 parts.... 6 senators and 54 House members Total.... Southern California, Northern California, and the State of Jefferson (with portions of southern Oregon)....
Even then, two of those would have just 2 Senators as the Founders envisioned for still very large states, (~15M+ each N & S California)
Just rename the state Mexiformia and give it to Mexico.
In fact, that's exactly what the Founders envisioned when they decided on equal state representation in the Senate.
I’m just tired of the votes of conservative middle California being over-ridden by LA and SF.
I’ve been to CA many times. Let me assure you, I am NOT jealous. The traffic is horrendous, the pollution is horrible. Yes, the weather is nice, but YES it does get cold there. It is beautiful, but it’s becoming Little Mexico, and you can’t deny that.
No No No. They should be joined with Oregon and washington so the whole flock of Liberals only have 2 Senators.
No!! Two senators is too much already. We should trade California to Canada for Calgary.
In fact, that’s exactly what the Founders envisioned when they decided on equal state representation in the Senate.”
Baloney! They were dealing with 13 small (in modern terms) states when they wrote the Constitution and thought in terms of the states as they knew them.
When the founders wrote the Constitution do you think they envisioned that there would be enormous states like California in terms of both area and population? Modern day California is larger both geographically (or nearly so) and population wise (most certainly) than the entire original 13 States.....
The fault lies not in the Federal system of determining representation of each state, and that is not my argument, but in letting such large tracts like California with the potential of huge population growth, enter the Union as one single state. The Bear Flag Republic should have entered as at least two states.....Like the Dakotas (North and South), like the Utah Territory (Utah, Nevada)....
My point is that California should be broken up into smaller political units that reflect their separate regional concerns.....There are great differences between Northern/Central/Southern California, as well as coastal v inland California.
The state is so large that it has become politically unmanageable/disfunctional. (Unchecked illegal immigration hasn’t helped) On both the State and Federal level it makes sense to break up California into 3 new States. It has been done before....witness Virginia/West Virginia......(Hmmmm the original State of Virginia now has 4 Senators, 2 each from WVa and Va. Did the Founders envision/intend that? How is that situation different than modern day California?)
This issue has come up many times in the past 60 years....in the 1950’s Northern California and Southern Oregon floated the Idea of Creating the State of Jefferson breaking away from the population centers of LA/SF/ Portland and representative goverments that no longer addressed their concerns or met their needs.... the idea still has great merit for the inhabitants of that region, and there are those that continue to push for it.
Change a word here and there and you have the same sentiment here in Pennsylvania.
Im just tired of the votes of conservative middle
California Pennsylvania being over-ridden by LA and SF Philadelphia and Pittsburgh.
San Fran should be turned into a safe haven for queers and liberals...................oh, wait-a-minute.
Just rename the state Mexiformia and give it to Mexico.”
Begining in the 1700’s California was first a Spanish, and then a Mexican settlement/territory (and later,in the northern part of the state, Russian Territory), In 1846 it revolted, and became the independant Bear Flag Republic. There are many Californians of Spanish/Mexican descent dating back to those days, and they don’t like illegal immigration any more than anyone else.....Careful with your slurs, they do not solve anything, and are not appreciated in this quarter.....they serve only to expose your not so soft bigotry.......
As I said,in 1846 we became an independant Republic. Four years, and a Gold Strike later, in 1850, we became the 31st US State. (Take that Texas! 5 flags over California! LOLOLOL....Oh, we’re one shy 1 aren’t we? Nevermind! LOLOLOL)
Are you seriously trying to blame California for the Federal Goverment’s inablity to control the border? How’s things in your state? Write your Congressman/Senator and demand secure borders/deportation of illegals! No amnesty! No “Path to Citizenship! No anchor babies! Get on it today, or are you just a no action, flip wit, with a smart mouth?
Liberal Californians bother you? Ask your former neighbor/cousin/sibling/monkey’s uncle that you kicked out of Kansas (sic) because of their offbeat political views and/or bizzare, uhumm, lifestyles to come back home.....once they leave we’ll go back to being majority conservative native Californians in a heartbeat. If you can’t/won’t do that, I’d suggest you keep your mouth closed, lest your foot winds up there.
You’re way to optimistic. The defining characteristic of Californians is apathy. Nobody gives a damn.
It’s GOOD that conservatives are TIRED of the override button.
What you're complaining about is that you want your state to have more representation in the Senate than it deserves. Good luck convincing the other states of that.
As for splitting into multiple states, it's possible if the state passes such a measure and Congress agrees (by the Constitution, Article IV, Section 3). Again, good luck convincing the other states of that. West Virginia was a special case and you ought to know it; it was created during the Civil War when western counties of Virginia decided to support the Union cause. The Virginia legislature was deemed to be invalid because it was in rebellion, and West Virginia was therefore formed by Congressional fiat. Still, the creation of the state was certainly challengeable on Constitutional grounds, if there were anywhere to make the challenge. Neither the Supreme Court or the Congress of the day would have accepted it.