Skip to comments.Referendum to split Calif into three states will appear on the November ballot
Posted on 06/13/2018 9:02:51 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
A colossal waste of time, money, and the public's attention span is underway in the golden state.
Casey Tolan of the Mercury-News reports:
For the first time since before the Civil War, voters across California will decide in November on a proposal to split up the Golden State – potentially remaking it into three new states.
An initiative dividing California, pushed by Silicon Valley venture capital investor Tim Draper, received enough signatures to qualify it for the November ballot, the Secretary of State's office confirmed Tuesday afternoon.
Supporters of the radical plan submitted more than 600,000 signatures, and a random sample projected that enough are valid that the measure can go before voters, setting up a campaign that is sure to attract a carnivalesque atmosphere and only-in-California chuckles from across the country.
Here is how the measure proposes to divide the land:
Credit: Bay Area News Group.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Four more senators ? And more electoral college votes? Just vote no
That means “California” gets 4 more Senators.
Hope it falls in the Ocean first.
The rural counties would like to break from the liberal coastal cities, but any plan presented so far is gerrymandered to retain liberal control of the resulting ‘new states’.
Now if we could only split up the 9th Circus.
That would be the end of the “bullet train” for sure... :-)
“New” California and Northern California will be solidly Democratic, giving them four Senators instead of two.
Southern California will be a battleground state that inevitably will also turn solidly Democratic, giving them six Senators instead of two.
I’d like to see the population breakouts, to see how many Representatives Northern California and “New” California would have in relation to Southern California. It looks like Southern California would have the least population, therefore the fewest of the 435 House seats of the three Californias.
>>Four more senators ? And more electoral college votes? Just vote no<<
Actually, the electoral college situation is one of the better reasons to split the state up.
Yes, they’d get four more senators, but assuming one of the new states was conservative, that wouldn’t change the balance in the Senate. They have a two-seat advantage in CA now and would have a two-seat advantage after the split (4-2).
They’d also have 59 electoral votes (EV’s) instead of the 55 they now have, but it one of the new states voted GOP, then instead of CA starting with 55 EV’s for the Dem presidential candidate, it would start with about 19 or 20 EV’s (40-19 or 40-20). That would be a significant change in the electoral college situation. And if one of the two remaining states ever turned purple, it could even go to a +20 EV GOP advantage, instead of the present, persistent, -55.
So I say vote to split the state.
Thanks for the clarification
Gotta keep going till we get to 57!
So how does this work? Of the three, California is the only ratified state. Would not the residents of the other newly-formed yet unratified States suddenly become disenfranchised? This is, without a doubt, a power play. The best I would allow is a red Northern California and a blue Southern California.
I’m in San Diego. I oppose the spot;it. Cal has not always and will not always be liberal. Shit happens.
There are 50 states if you don’t like yours move. I oppose splitting states because of short-term political party enrollment.
Absolutely oppose this nonsense. What I would support is kicking much but not all of California out of the Union. San Diego and the rural areas can stay.
New States may be admitted by Congress into this Union, but no new State shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State, nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or Parts of States, without the consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress.
If this is read literally the referendum won't work because the CA legislature will have to consent. Then Congress will also have to consent. Fat chance for all of that happening.
Reminds me of HS.
“Gallia est omnis divisa in partes tres”
Bingo, a huge waste of time.
So why do it?
The organizers are using this political energy to collect names and addresses.
Some of those now labeled voters can be asked for money for all kinds of causes......
Every political movement, march, meeting, rally, etc. has name gatherers....for the purposes of collecting money and driving votes.
RE: Even if it passes, there’s a long way to go because it violates Article IV, Section 3 of the U. S. Constitution.
As the article says in its first sentence — this referendum is a waste of time, money and resources.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.