Looks more like it could happen every day.
Posted on 08/19/2017 11:12:16 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Tech billionaire Tom Draper filed a measure Friday to divide California into three states.
Draper says the "political representation of California's diverse population and economies has rendered the state nearly ungovernable."
"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," he argued in the proposed measure's statement of findings.
The billionaire spent more than $5 million in 2014 in a bid to split the state in six, according to the Sacramento Bee.
His current measure needs almost 600,000 signatures from valid voters to make it onto the ballot next fall.
Draper proposes naming the three states "California," "Northern California" and "Southern California."
The plan says, pending approval from the U.S. Congress, the three states would remain in the U.S., as opposed to the "Calexit" effort aiming for California's independence from the U.S.
.
great job set up on Kwajalein
.
Did the assignment include catching missiles?
Hi s name is “Tim” Draper, not “Tom” Draper.
California is so totally and completely effed up because of Hollyweird culture and the unfettered illegal alien invasion that there is no practical way it will ever be put right. No amount of district gerrymandering to create new states will make it better because a sizeable number of the people in each and every county in California have lost their collective minds. Even the districts that are ostensibly “red” have 40-45% “blue” populations. If the US insists on having California be part of this country, then it’s better to have all of the jackazzes in one concentration with as few national political representatives as possible to shield the rest of the country from Californication.
The problem is blue California would move to red California and ruin it as they have most western states
The third division< “Southern CA,” would be very close being conservative. Given the higher turnout of conservative/Republican voters, it would be likely to go R.
It would be ok if at least 4 of them served in the Cámara de Senadores.
Central Valley for the most part is very red. Except for the influx of mexicans I suppose.
I sure doubt this. The Central Valley is third world.
Looks more like it could happen every day.
I love the idea of the State of Jefferson. Let northern California become Jefferson. Southern CA can merge with Mexico.
No, and no and no again.
I am not about to give California six U.S. Senators instead of two.
To achieve Draper’s plan on the state level, California can divide itself, within itself, into three jurisdictions above the county level, giving each its own executive, legislature and agencies.
The state governor and nominal “legislature”, functioning more as a state coordinating committee, can be chosen by combined votes of the legislative bodies of the three separate parts of California.
The state can devolve most of its powers and nearly all of its activity, to the three jurisdictions, while leaving itself enough say so to pass muster as a state.
Federal elections and election districts would not change.
Splitting into 3 states and gaining 4 more US senators is more logical than the Calexit catastrophe.
Dems would never allow Calexit because they would lose a net total of 25 US House seats. They currently have 53 seats of which 39 are Democrat and 14 are Republican.
Cal’s exit would also reduce the House majority number from about 218 to 165. The Republicans currently hold 248 seat, so a loss of California would reduce that Republican number to 234 with only 165 needed to be in the majority. That would devastate the Dem party for a long time.
Additionally, if California split, the sub-states could likely increase the senate number for Republicans. That could also be a losing proposition for Democrats.
Calexit and Calsplit are fantasies, because Dems could lose significantly either way.
Agreed. Just have to clear out the southern region of terrorists though.
California isn’t a state it’s a dumping ground for trash that nobody wants.
As I’ve posted before, my idea was for California to be split into 5 states, not 3 (or 6, like someone suggested a few years ago); the “state names” provided are descriptive, but hardly optimal:
1. State of Los Angeles, with all of L.A. County:
10.0 million pop in 2010, 45%-50% Hispanic, 10% black, 12%-15% Asian
16 electoral votes, 29.17% McCain 2008, 35.60% Bush 2004, 32.35% Bush 2000
(I would encourage GOP-leaning L.A. County suburbs to split and form their own county and be able to join the Inland Empire centered state.)
2. State of San Francisco Bay, with all of Alameda, Contra Costa, Humboldt, Marin, Mendocino, Monterey, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, Solano, Sonoma and Yolo Counties:
8.1 million pop in 2010, 21%-25% Hispanic, 7% black, 17%-20% Asian
13 electoral votes, 24.82% McCain in 2008, 29.95% Bush in 2004, 30.64% Bush in 2000
3. State of Inland Empire, with all of Kern, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara and Ventura Counties:
6.7 million pop in 2010, 36%-40% Hispanic, 6% black, 4%-5% Asian
11 electoral votes, 46.79% McCain in 2008, 55.54% Bush in 2004, 50.70% Bush in 2000
4. State of Central Valley, with all of Alpine, Amador, Butte, Calaveras, Colusa, Del Norte, El Dorado, Fresno, Glenn, Inyo, Kings, Lake, Lassen, Madera, Mariposa, Merced, Modoc, Mono, Nevada, Placer, Plumas, Sacramento, San Benito, San Joaquin, Shasta, Sierra, Siskiyou, Stanislaus, Sutter, Tehama, Trinity, Tulare, Tuolumne and Yuba Counties:
6.5 million pop in 2010, 27%-32% Hispanic, 5% black, 7%-8% Asian
11 electoral votes, 48.27% McCain in 2008, 56.92% Bush in 2004, 53.17% Bush in 2000
5. State of San Diego, with all of Imperial, Orange and San Diego Counties:
6.3 million pop in 2010, 30%-35% Hispanic, 4% black, 11%-13% Asian
11 electoral votes, 47.07% McCain in 2008, 55.86% Bush in 2004, 52.57% Bush in 2000
I can provide 2012 and 2016 presidential results in a few days (I have them in my computer at work), but they don’t look anywhere as good as this for the GOP.
My plan, developed prior to the 2012 elections, was, esentially, for comfortably Democrat California being converted into two ridiculously Democrat states (based in L.A. and San Francisco Bay) and three GOP-leaning states, and under normal circumstances the 5 states would give the GOP a 6-4 edge in U.S. Senate seats (the Dems have had a 2-0 edge since 1992) and a 33-29 edge in electoral votes (the Dems got all 55 EVs from CA in 2008 and 2004 and all 54 EVs from CA in 2000, 1996 and 1992). However, in 2012 the GOP and marginal parts of CA voted more Democrat, and in 2016 they gave Hillary hellacious victory margins. If that’s the “new normal” for California, I would oppose any effort to split it up into several states; on a related note, Calexit sounds better and better each passing day.
But I do think that we should split up Texas into four GOP states of around 11 electoral votes each, which would give us 6 new GOP Senators (and increase GOP electoral votes by 6 as well).
No, I would’ve been a Special Security Officer (SSO) in charge of classified document security.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Security_Office
In any event, Jefferson will be named not for Thomas, but for George. It will feature an enormous statue of Sherman Hemsley looking patriotic.
Sweden.
OK, here is the up-to-date presidential-elections data for the five states that I proposed a few years ago to be drawn from California. As you can see, my plan originally created three GOP states and two hyper-Democrat states, but California has gone so far off the reservation that any attempt to split it up would have a minimum positive effect.
1. State of Los Angeles, with all of L.A. County:
10.0 million pop in 2010, 45%-50% Hispanic, 10% black, 12%-15% Asian
16 electoral votes, 22.415 Trump in 2016, 27.83% Romney in 2012, 29.17% McCain in 2008, 35.60% Bush 2004, 32.35% Bush in 2000
(I would encourage GOP-leaning L.A. County suburbs to split and form their own county and be able to join the Inland Empire-centered state.)
2. State of San Francisco Bay, with all of Alameda, Contra Costa, Humboldt, Marin, Mendocino, Monterey, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, Solano, Sonoma and Yolo Counties:
8.2 million pop in 2010, 21%-25% Hispanic, 7% black, 17%-20% Asian
14 electoral votes, 19.47% Trump in 2016, 24.54% Romney in 2012, 24.66% McCain in 2008, 29.95% Bush in 2004, 30.64% Bush in 2000
3. State of Inland Empire, with all of Kern, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara and Ventura Counties:
6.7 million pop in 2010, 36%-40% Hispanic, 6% black, 4%-5% Asian
11 electoral votes, 42.16% Trump in 2016, 46.97% Romney in 2012, 46.79% McCain in 2008, 55.54% Bush in 2004, 50.70% Bush in 2000
4. State of Central Valley, with all of Alpine, Amador, Butte, Calaveras, Colusa, Del Norte, El Dorado, Fresno, Glenn, Inyo, Kings, Lake, Lassen, Madera, Mariposa, Merced, Modoc, Mono, Nevada, Placer, Plumas, Sacramento, San Benito, San Joaquin, Shasta, Sierra, Siskiyou, Stanislaus, Sutter, Tehama, Trinity, Tulare, Tuolumne and Yuba Counties:
6.4 million pop in 2010, 27%-32% Hispanic, 5% black, 7%-8% Asian
11 electoral votes, 44.56% Trump in 2016, 48.44% Romney in 2012, 47.95% McCain in 2008, 56.92% Bush in 2004, 53.17% Bush in 2000
5. State of San Diego, with all of Imperial, Orange and San Diego Counties:
6.3 million pop in 2010, 30%-35% Hispanic, 4% black, 11%-13% Asian
11 electoral votes, 39.09% Trump in 2016, 48.06% Romney in 2012, 47.07% McCain in 2008, 55.86% Bush in 2004, 52.57% Bush in 2000
Hopefully you can all see it. In red we have the Soviet Socialist State of KKKalifornia. I feel bad for San Luis Obisbo. Ventura is iffier, and I've given up on Santa Barbara, which was only as Republican as the State in 2016.
In blue we have the new breakaway state, in light blue are the counties that went Shillery. Nevada, Shillery with 47%, 5 points, had been a very narrow Romney win. Alpine and Mono, they've been nasty lately but luckily they are tiny, especially Alpine. Fresno, Shillery won with 49%, 6 points, narrow wins for Obama.
In green we have optional counties, we'd want the state to be larger and thus have more e votes but we don't want to risk rat victory. We have Lake County, which swung towards Trump, shillery won by under 4 points, was big for Obama, hasn't gone R since '84. Stanislaus County (Modesto), swung toward Trump also, he lost by only 1.81 points, Romney lost by 2.74. Merced county has been rather unfortunate,, I include it as an option mainly cause it would look pretty silly to take Stanislaus but not Merced.
Next we have the big boys down south, they'd add e votes but also risk, I don't know if Trump would have won if you add these. San B was fairly big for Shill, 10.6 points, 7 points for Obama in 2012. Riverside was a 5 point Shill win, 1.65 win for Obama in 2012 (and Romney did a little than McCain), only Hoover county in '32. You could take those 2 without the remaining 3. There's the OC, taken by Shill but I'm hardly ready to write it off. San Diego was very naughty, almost 20 pints for shill, 7.56 for Obama in 2012 (had swung toward Romney). Imperial is disgusting, Trump was at 26%, a full 20 under Bush in 2004, I'd sooner let it be a non-contiguous part of KKKali or cede it back to Mexico.
I'll do some math, Trump and Romney %s and e votes later, if I feel like it.
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.