I can think of reasons why Democrats would not like this.
Currently the Democrats can count on 55 electoral votes for president from California. Under this plan, I’m not sure they can count on all three new states automatically voting Democrat.
Notice that miserable Bay Area mess is thrown in with the NorCal region, which guarantees more dem Senators. Only the SoCal area would have a chance of being more to the political center.
It needs to be divided into East and West California. That will truly be a political divide. East California will be more like Idaho.
Ain’t gonna happen......................
What makes them so sure that Sacramento will be willing to diminish its power by 2/3's?
And while not stated above, I believe they need a supermajority in both houses of Congress for this to pass. If not initially, then after Trump vetoes it.
Article IV SECTION. 3.
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 con- cerned as well as of the Congress.
All three remain de facto Mexican colonies.....
If they break up into 3 states, I don’t think they automatically become states. They have to petition Congress. In the meantime, would California have any representation in Congress, since the old California no longer exists?
Dead on arrival.
This is a trap. The primary divide is urban coastal liberal vs Rural inland conservative. Even at that the inland cities are a challenge. Sacramento County for example is reliably liberal. To overcome any defiance in souther California, they’d just import more illegals into Orange and San Diego counties. This plan will just create 6 rat Senate seats instead of 2
We need to be careful about cheering this on. Splitting into three states would give California three times the number of Senators, probably more congressmen, and three separate electoral college entries. Depending on how the borders are drawn, we could be inviting more leftists into the process.
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.
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.
ULTRA BLUE N Calif? Just exactly WHERE is that dividing line? The Northern counties of Calif-—away from the coast are NOT Liberal.
Jerry and Company may have dealt California it’s biggest blow yet since statehood.
It appears they’ve just about destroyed the unified state.
Way to go assholes!
Couldn’t have more contempt for the Leftists in California.
Would these three or four pieces automatically become states or revert back to territorial status pending admission to the Union? As territories, their “delegates” to congress would have no votes on important issues. Then the GOP could perhaps block admission of California pending endless study committees.