Proposal to split California into three states makes November ballot

Kind of a damning comment on our political system underlying this - that political unities with different demographic and political philosophies consider splitting the state a more palatable option than working with the other side. That being said, depending on what kind of neck-so-red-it-looks-like-they're-wearing-a-scarf voter group one was dealing with, I kind of get it. Is California really this split ideologically?

I think this is a predictable result of highly centralized government running a large geographical entity. The entire US is facing these kinds of pressures. I think federalism has been an effective safety valve in the past, but neither side seems to care for it much these days.

California itself seems to have undergone dramatic demographic change in just a few decades. I wonder how much that adds tot he normal political strife.
 
this would still have to pass Congress, right?

"New States may be admitted by the 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"
 
regardless, i'd still be in likely the worst part of SoCal........so good times?
 
Can we just solve this by making all 50 states electoral votes be by proportion instead of winner take all....

But then how are you going to make sure no third party becomes viable? you cant threaten the 2 party system, thats the most bipartisan thing around.
 
Agriculture would be huge. Wine industry would be huge. Marijuana industry would become largest in the world. Combine wine tourism + cannabis tourism, and then tourism becomes a massive economic industry. Lets not forget the Giants Redwoods. Also the Sierra Nevada mountain range provides amazing skiing and Lake Tahoe. Furthermore, there are other natural resources like a massive timber industry.

Also, Nevada, Oregon and Texas are pulling tons of businesses out of California with easier regulations, rules and taxes. Jefferson would be built on values similar to Texas. It would be all about small government, less regulation and it would be massively pro business. This would draw all sorts of businesses out of the other parts of California and pull back lots of productive people that had to leave California.

Meth is also a major export.

How would agriculture be huge? Most of the geographical area sucks for agriculture. Wine country is mostly south of the map. Weed is available all over Oregon, Washington, and the rest of California, so how exactly would that put it on the map? The giant Redwoods are only located on the coast and, newsflash the counties they are located in are among the poorest in the state.

Sounds like a prosperous "state" to me!
 
Im not sure i want that to happen due to electoral college issues and not being sure the break down or if this makes it so that California types decide everything from now on


Can the rest of us vote on No ya cant ?

Likely a shift toward Republican in the EC. The will now get some rather than no EC votes from the new South California.
 
The proposed "Southern California" couldn't have been named better- it would truly resemble a southern state in the west coast considering all the red neck racists and diehard Republicans who live in those counties.
 
On one hand I see the idea that a state with that many people in it can become hard to manage.

On the flip side, we are giving Democrats extra US senators, no thanks.

You are misreading the result. Current California provides 2 Dems to the Senate. Under the 3 state plan the likely outcome is 4 D's and 2 R's to the Senate which is still a +2 D margin provided by "California" so there is no net change in influence.
 
LMAO! Fucking Bay Area is like an open-air mental assylum that nobody wants.

Anyway, this idea of 3 Californias will never fly, because ain't nobody with elementary knowledge about this state's history would want a Water War 2

NorCal would be a poor state without the Bay Area.
 
Last edited:
seems like an odd way to divide the state. Why not just 3 even chunks?

Partly to give each State an equal population and partly to not change the net +2 Democrat advantage that California gives to the Senate.
 
LMAO! Fucking Bay Area is like an open-air mental assylum that nobody wants.

Anyway, this idea of 3 Californias will never fly, because ain't nobody with elementary knowledge about this state's history would want a Water War 2
It could work but "California" and "Southern California" would absolutely require a 100-year guarantee that the aqueducts stay full to the brim, at whatever cost to "Northern California".
 
The normal people want to be separated from the crap ones
 
how many will each new state have ? im feeling like this would magnify Californians power by 3

6 anti gun senators instead of 2 too right ?

I am pretty sure Northern Cali would be pro gun, I think there would be 2-4 anti gun, with Northern Cali being pro. Southern Cali might go pro as well.
 
The proposed "Southern California" couldn't have been named better- it would truly resemble a southern state in the west coast considering all the red neck racists and diehard Republicans who live in those counties.

Now now, we all know Orange County, San Diego, and the Inland Empire are the only CA counties still sane enough to resists the batshit-crazy ideas concocted by the Bay Area, promoted by L.A celebs, and rubber-stamped by career politicians in Sacramento.

In fact, very few (if any at all) of the most idiotic California laws (like decriminalizing the willful spreading of HIV), policies (Sanctuary), and white elephant billion dollars projects ("High-speed Rail") that embarrassed us all actually came from the "redneck racists" in the Inland Empire and "diehard Republicans" in Orange County.

Can you name any?
 
Last edited:
Norcal (especially the bay area) and socal should be split. They are so different. Also many bay area firms are beginning to realizs that norcal and its extreme politics is detrimental for continuing the business friendly enviorement in the area. That is why google is spending billions building in LA and socal.
 
The proposed "Southern California" couldn't have been named better- it would truly resemble a southern state in the west coast considering all the red neck racists and diehard Republicans who live in those counties.

Uh no. The rednecks are in inland cali, in the desert.

Socal is also starting tk steal investment from norcal and its extreme political ideology. Google is spending big in socal and it seems other firms are following.
 
Has no chance, I don't know why people keep wasting breath talking about this.
 
Why would it do that? Northern California is as die hard, neckbearded Republican pro gun as you can find. That's one of the reasons this is being pushed, Because the majority of the population is in L.A., San Diego and San Francisco, thus the state is a shoe in for the Dems every 4 years.
Does it really need to be three states to do that? Just break up the electorate, and have the candidate win via who wins that particular congressional district
 
Back
Top