Cal 3 divides the state along lines that make geographic, cultural, and political sense. The population is divided roughly into thirds. North and South are still very large states, and what's left of California would be a medium-size state.
Posted on 04/16/2018 10:03:38 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Tim Draper is a rich man, but he understands he doesn't know it all. His first attempt to divide California into six states made little sense. So he went out and got some people who are experts on the subject. The result, Cal 3, is a political masterpiece. This could work.
When California was admitted to the Union in 1850, it had only 92,000 people, most of them scrambling for gold in the foothills of the Sierra Nevada. That's why California's county lines are so screwy. Los Angeles County now has 10,000,000 people. Alpine County has 1,000.
Cal 3 divides the state along lines that make geographic, cultural, and political sense. The population is divided roughly into thirds. North and South are still very large states, and what's left of California would be a medium-size state.
In order for this to work, it will need to get a majority not just of the total vote. Majorities will be needed in all three prospective states. Looking at this map makes me think that could happen, for one important reason: partisan politics.
The Democrats in Washington, D.C. are going to love this idea. Now California has two Democratic senators. Under Cal 3, it will have four Democratic senators from ultra-blue North California and California. The two senators from South California will be up for grabs. Democrats could pick off one of them or even two. The Democrats will not lose Senate seats, but they might gain one or two. For a D, what's not to like? Plus somebody gets to fill these new Senate seats. People's eyes will light up.
If the Democrats win control of both House and Senate this year, they would have an incentive to support Cal 3. The backing of President Trump can be negotiated.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Take that strip they are calling “California” and run it up to just north of Oakland. Then the rest of the state can be another single state.
The old ‘every state needs a Democrat-run shithole’ trick.
The question is why are the Libs grouped the way that they are in the present California? Do they move themselves into those areas or do they brainwash their offspring to be Liberal and to stay in those areas? Same question with most State capitals.
I’ve got a better idea, we vote based on acreage. One vote per acre.
Still got to apply for statehood. I vote nay.
5.56mm
Actually, I would suggest going the other way. California has shown that it is not capable of maintaining statehood, it should be returned to US territory status.
Adding new Dem senators is comparable to FDR’s failed court packing plan imo.
Judicial Procedures Reform Bill of 1937
In fact, note that the admission of Nevada to the Union was an attempt to ensure Lincoln’s reelection and Republican control of Congress.
"Statehood was rushed to the date of October 31 to help ensure Abraham Lincoln's reelection on November 8 and post-Civil War Republican dominance in Congress, as Nevada's mining-based economy tied it to the more industrialized Union.”—Nevada
At this point in time, what reason is there to divide a state into smaller states other than for the post-17th Amendment ratification Progressive Movement to maintain control of state powers and state revenues that the corrupt feds are continually stealing from the states? Insights welcome.
"Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States."Justice John Marshall, Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
"The smart crooks long ago figured out that getting themselves elected to federal office to make unconstitutional tax laws to fill their pockets is a much easier way to make a living than robbing banks." —me
"Federal career lawmakers probably laugh all the way to the bank to deposit bribes for putting loopholes for the rich and corporations in tax appropriations laws, Congress actually not having the express constitutional authority to make most appropriations laws where domestic policy is concerned. Such laws are based on stolen state powers and uniquely associated stolen state revenues." —me
”From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added].” —United States v. Butler, 1936.
Perhaps Texas should have a “nuclear” option to divide into 10 red states?
Yeah, look at each area. Northern California would go dem because of San Fransisco/Oakland, and Sacramento. California would be dominated by Los Angelis voters, so 2 more dem senators. Southern California has San Diego.
They split this up to create 4 new democrat senators.
And it looks like each new state will still be dominated by a large metropolitan area: San Francisco, San Diego, and LA.
How about they are allowed to break into 3 states, but then have to reapply to join back into the union, with one of the conditions to be to cooperate fully with the Federal government on deportations?
That’s why what needs to happen is a two-state solution. SF, Silicon Valley, all the way down to LA should be one state, the rest of the state a completely different state. Call the urbanized area “West California” and the rest of the state “California”. West California would have 2 Dem Senators, the rest of California would probably have 2 republican Senators, maybe a 1-1 split.
The impact of the breakup for purposes of the electoral college would be immense. The fact that 55 EVs would not be “in the bag” would mean that the Dems would be shut out of the presidency for a LONG time.
Won’t fly unless Democrats agree to split up NY and IL to create an equal number of GOP seats.
As a practical matter, the GOP won’t just give the Democrats four new Senate seats in perpetuity.
The Fat Lady would have to sing for that to happen.
It's a Democrat state and Democrats aren't going to do anything that gives them less power.
They aren't going to create some rural state that might vote Republican.
The point of the change won't be to separate Republicans from Democrats or conservatives from liberals, it will be to give San Francisco and Los Angeles more clout in state and federal government.
No, not three states; two. Make it like Michigan, which has two unconnected land masses as one state. The RAT infested LA-Hollywood area, and the RAT infested San Freaksicko north will be New California.
Saves us the horror of a probable four new RAT senators instead of just two.
And their already is an SC (South Carolina), so they can't abbreviate Southern CA to SC.
They may have to do a West California and an East California. WC and EC.
Just thinking the obvious through to a natural conclusion.
Look back to 1820 for the solution.
Let California split 3 ways and have 6 senators.
Just split Wyoming 3 ways at the same time.
No Missouri without Maine.
There would have to be a 1:1 package deal to win GOP support.
Without it, its going to be DOA. Only the seriously deluded would think the GOP would give the Democrats more Senate seats without getting something in return.
Right now there’s nothing in it that makes Republicans want to support it.
A better split would be to give the lower Bay Area to new California, and upper Bay Area to Northern California (Jefferson). The dividing line would be SF Bay. Yes, there are democrats in Marin County to the north, they can move south into the democrat new California. The eastern split of the south Bay Area that stays in Northern California would be near Vallejo along Hwy 580 or so. This would be a fair distribution, giving half the Bay and islands along with waterways to the north.
Ahh, thanks. We’ll need to rely on Congress then. Shudder the thought.
ULTRA BLUE N Calif? Just exactly WHERE is that dividing line? The Northern counties of Calif-—away from the coast are NOT Liberal.
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.