Posted on 01/07/2016 7:23:43 AM PST by Sean_Anthony
Breaking up California
Successfully amassing support in 21 California counties, proponents of the State of Jefferson movement took their petitions to the Secretary of State and the State Legislature Wednesday.
Channeling Howard Beale, from the 1976 movie “Network,†State of Jefferson supporters might as well have chanted, “I’m mad as Hell and I’m not going to take this anymore.â€
And fed up they are.
California’s northern most counties are suffering from a lack of representation in the state Legislature. Twenty Northern California counties have 6 state level representatives, while the southern 38 counties have 114 state representatives.
That's not really true.
Six representatives are 5% of the 120 combined state representatives, while the population of those 20 northern counties is a little under 2 million, which is 5% of the almost 40mm state population.
That dog won't hunt.
“California’s northern most counties are suffering from a lack of representation in the state Legislature. Twenty Northern California counties have 6 state level representatives, while the southern 38 counties have 114 state representatives.”
Representation is based on the number of people, not the number of counties.
Actually, when I run the numbers more closely it looks like the 20 northern counties are 4.85% of the state population, so they’re slightly overrepresented and have more voting power than actual voters.
There, fixed it!
I support their desire to form another state. Many of us in southern areas also share their desire.
Living in Southern California, but east of the coastal mountain range, we are also under represented, or at least oppressed by an overwhelming number of liberal legislators, both local, state and federal.
Support the State of Jefferson, and then help us with the State of Mojave!
And that would be tough to do, because it would create four new Senate seats that would almost be guaranteed to be conservative Republican seats.
well folks can talk % of representation however it all boils down to leftist urban progressive democrats dictating their failed policies to hard working Californians (yes there are some out there).
California, like the rest of the states, are controlled politically by the largest cities in the state, ie: where the population is. This is especially true of the coastal states, where the majority of the population is close to the coast. Oregon is the same way; most of the population is concentrated along I-5 out to the coast. Same with Washington state.
A push to split off nothern california could work, mainly because of the low population density, lack of a large population center, and limited coastal access. IOW, other than political leverage, you could split northern california and southern oregon off into a new state, and neither state would miss them.
So if you’re against “one man one vote” - how should it be arranged?
It would be about the same size as WA with a population about the size of NM.
They have said how they would like to see it done - modeled after the federal legislature. The lower house would be based on population, the upper house would get 1 representative for each county regardless of population, just as the Senate gets 2 representative for each state regardless of population.
I am for people self governing themselves and not having laws and regulations imposed upon them by those who don't have a clue or follow blindly progressive/socalism. so are you a socalist?
That’s definitely different from how most states run their upper houses, and would be impossible to implement: it would require other regions of the state to surrender a lot of political power from a large number of taxpayers to a much smaller number of taxpayers.
So am I. But that doesn't explain why some people should have more voting power than other people.
and not having laws and regulations imposed upon them
If you're allowed to vote on laws I'm not sure how you avoid majority rule - short of anarchy.
by those who don't have a clue or follow blindly progressive/socalism
"Having a clue" is in the eye of the beholder. In any randomly chosen group of individuals, not everyone is going to agree on everything.
That's just life as a grownup.
so are you a socalist?
That's a really foolish question to ask.
Let's review:
You are against "one man, one vote" but you have absolutely no plan or strategy to replace it. You just want to complain and you have no solutions.
My view, which I believe is just and which would be very unpopular, is that you should only be allowed to vote under two conditions: (a) you are a net payer of federal taxes as opposed to a net recipient of federal payments or (b) you are a combat veteran of the US armed forces.
So my view is essentially the direct opposite of socialism.
Northern California has pot plants. Southern California has people. It's called proportional representation. And it's the law.
They have said how they would like to see it done - modeled after the federal legislature. The lower house would be based on population, the upper house would get 1 representative for each county regardless of population, just as the Senate gets 2 representative for each state regardless of population.
Apparently it was that way until a 1968 change -
Prior to 1968, state senate districts were restricted such that one county could hold at most only one seat. This led to the situation of Los Angeles County, with 6 million residents in 1968, receiving 600 times less representation than residents of Alpine County and Calaveras County, some of California's least populous counties. In Reynolds v. Sims, the United States Supreme Court compelled all states to draw up districts with equal population. As such, boundaries were changed to provide more equitable representation.
Thanks ag. I didn’t know it was a blanket federal ruling.
“representation is based on the number of people”
Well, that’s true since the Warren Court abolished State Senates in 1964 (Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U.S. 533).
However, it was never true before that, because every state had a Senate based on geography and/or particular interest, as opposed to population.
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.