Posted on 06/12/2018 6:51:13 PM PDT by ameribbean expat
CAL 3, an initiative spearheaded by venture capitalist Tim Draper, has submitted 600,000 to the California secretary of state, far more than the 365,000 needed to secure a ballot spot, KABC reported Tuesday evening.
(Excerpt) Read more at amp.washingtontimes.com ...
The other 49 states would have to agree to this. There is little chance they will voluntarily dilute their power.
I am okay with it unless they think they deserve 6 senators. If they do, I would suggest Alabama split up into 10 states.
NO, NO, NO! We don’t need 4 more lefty commies in the Senate
Anyone who is for this had better take a look at how they intend on drawing up the lines.
The last I looked, it aint good.
Or Michigan in two.
As a conservative Southern Californian I will vote yes on this measure. Cut out the bay area and you got a purple state!
I will be voting NO. No way, no how. Look at the map. “Northern California” would be a solid blue state. “California” with L.A. and Santa Barbara would be a solid blue state. Only “Southern California” would be GOP-friendly. This would mean a net +2 Democrat Senate seats.
For how long?
Speaking of Michigan, I know there’s the upper peninsula which is geographically separate from the rest of the state.
I’ve never been there, so bear with me. But I’m thinking that Michigan has a few different distinct regions. For example, there’s the Detroit area, the more rural parts of the lower peninsula(if that’s what it’s called), then there’s the upper peninsula.
I know many states have these various regions. Think New York, with the New York City area compared to upstate. Consider how Northern Virginia has become so liberal and urban, compared to the rest of Virginia. I hear that northern Florida is like a part of the deep south, while the I-4 corridor in the center of the state is a distinct region. Then finally, South Florida centered on Miami is a very different area.
Sometimes I wish all states could split up into component parts, because then a number of states, such as New York and Illinois, would not be controlled by their big liberal cities.
With the Rats drawing the lines we could end up with 4 new Senators and 2 new Rat Governors and legislators.
One southern state turning all its counties into states could solve our political problems.
Freegards
I know Congress in Washington would have to give approval, but, just wondering if anyone knows:
If any of the three areas proposed as separate states were to vote against, even if the overall statewide vote is in favor, would it still be considered as passed, and sent to Congress in Washington for action?
Can Congress simply sit on it, without considering and voting on this proposal, if it does pass a statewide vote?
Moi aussi. Looks like it would be relatively conservative Northern California, center-right Southern California (includes inland central areas), and radical Leftist California (Bay Area, LA, and coastal cities in between). It’s got my vote...conservative San Diegan and PDJT supporter.
Can't we just kick California out of the United States instead?
SECTION 1. STATEMENT OF FINDINGS
A. California is the nation's most populous state, nearly six times larger than the average population of the fifty states. However, much of the state's population is concentrated in certain urban and coastal areas, particularly in Southern California.
B. California is the nation's third largest state by geography, over two times larger than the average of the fifty states, with enormous and diverse economies, including agriculture, energy, technology, and entertainment.
C. As a consequence of these and other socio-economic factors, political representation of California's diverse population and economies has rendered the state nearly ungovernable. Additionally, vast parts of California are poorly served by a representative government dominated by a large number of elected representatives from a small part of our state, both geographically and economically.
D. It is not surprising that efforts to divide the state have been · part of its history for over one hundred years. In fact, voters overwhelmingly approved the splitting of California into two states in 1859, but Congress never acted on that request due to the Civil War.
E. The citizens of the whole state would be better served by three smaller state governments while preserving the historical boundaries of the various counties, cities, and towns. _
SECTION 2. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE
A. The people, acting as the legislative body of the State of California pursuant to their reserved legislative power provided by the California Constitution, hereby:
(1) Establish new boundaries for three new states within the boundaries of the State of California;
(2) Establish a procedure for the transformation of the single State of California into three new states; and
(3) Provide the legislative consent for the formation of three new states to Congress as required by the United States Constitution.
SECTION 3. LEGISLATIVE CONSENT FOR THE CREATION OF THREE NEW STATES WITHIN THE CURRENT BOUNDARIES OF CALIFORNIA.
Article 3.1 of Chapter 1 of Division 1 of Title 1 ( commencing with Section 173) of the Government Code is added to read:
§ 173(a) Upon enactment of this section, the legislative consent required by Section 3 of Article IV of the United States Constitution for the creation of three (3) states within the current boundaries of the State of California, as provided by Article 3 of Chapter 1 of Division 1 of Title 1, is given by the people.
(b) The boundaries of the three (3) new states shall be as follows:
(1) A new state, named Northern California, or a name to be chosen by the people of that state, shall include the territory represented by the boundaries of the following forty ( 40) counties: Alameda, Alpine, Amador, Butte, Calaveras, Colusa, Contra Costa, Del Norte, El Dorado, Glenn, Humboldt, Lake, Lassen, Marin, Mariposa, Mendocino, Merced, Modoc, Napa, Nevada, Placer, Plumas, Siskiyou, Shasta, Tehama, Trinity, Tuolumne, Sacramento, San Joaquin, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, Sierra, Solano, Sonoma, Stanislaus, Sutter, Yolo and Yuba.
(2) A new state, named California, or a name to be chosen by the people of that state, shall include the territory represented by the following six ( 6) counties: Los Angeles, Monterey, San Benito, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara and Ventura.
(3) A new state, named Southern California, or a name to be chosen by the people of that state, shall include the territory represented by the following twelve (12) counties: Fresno, Imperial, Inyo, Kern, Kings, Madera, Mono, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Diego, and Tulare.
( c) On January 1, 2019, the Governor shall transmit a copy of the certified election results enacting this Article to Congress, with a request that Congress act upon the consent of the people within twelve (12) months.
§ 17 4( a) Upon enactment of this section the California State Legislature shall provide for the division and transformation of California. If the State Legislature fails to reach resolution of such matters within twelve (12) months of congressional assent to the division of the state, the debts of the State of California shall be distributed among the newly created states based on the population of the new states proportionately to the whole population of California at the time of Congressional action, and the assets within the boundaries of each newly created state shall become the assets of that new state.
(b) The legal relationship between the counties and the State of California shall continue until the organization and establishment of a separate government in a newly created state, including the adoption of a Constitution by convention or popular vote within each newly created state.
SECTION 4. GENERAL PROVISIONS
(a) If any provision of this Act, or part thereof, is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional, the remaining provisions shall not be affected, but shall remain in full force and effect, and to this end the provisions of this Act are severable.
(b) This Act is intended to be comprehensive. It is the intent of the People that in the event this Act and measures relating to the same subject shall appear on the same statewide election ballot, the provisions of the other measure or measures shall be deemed to be in conflict with this Act. In the event that this Act receives a greater number of affirmative votes, the provisions of this Act shall prevail in their entirety, and all provisions of the other measure or measures shall be null and void."
https://oag.ca.gov/system/files/initiatives/pdfs/17-0018%20%28Three%20Californias%29_1.pdf
I would prefer Congress to Revoke Statehood and let CA revert to a Territory so the President can send a Nice Admiral or General to run the Place and straighten it out.
no
You’ll have one state with all the state’s monetary assets, and two states with nothing much.
“Proposal to split California into three states will be on November ballot”
This IS civil war.
Crush the racist Democrats, as before.
JK (sort of) with the last sentence.
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.