Plan To Split California Into Six States Gets OK To Gather Signatures

CBS Local (San Francisco) ^ | February 19, 2014 10:23 AM | Secretary of State Debra Bowen

[OneWingedShark]

Without knowing the political demographics of current California or the proposed new states, I would figure that they would gerrymander the new states in such as manner as to decrease the Republican influence and increase the Democratic influence.
Does anyone think they would intentionally create Republican strongholds?

Given the lack of opposition by the Republicans, I have to ask: would it matter?
In fact, I think The Tao of Republican Orthodoxy adequately shows the lack of difference between the two parties — but in case it doesn't convince you, how about considering this:

1. They claim to be for government accountability, yet their opposition has been nonexistant on:
   1. Fast & Furious, the easiest treason case in 70 years and easily provable as state-sponsored terrorism.
   2. The DEA laundering money to the drug cartels.
   3. The NSA domestic-spying.
   4. The IRS politically-motivated targeting.
   5. The arbitrary alteration of law via executive fiat (eg: Affordable Care Act).
   6. The arbitrary alteration of law via judicial fiat (eg: Affordable Care Act).
   7. The imposition of laws dangerous to liberty (eg: the NDAA's suspension of Hebeus Corpus and allowance for assassination of citizens).
   8. The constant/consistent raising of the debt ceiling, selling every taxpayer and their decedents into slavery as it is guaranteed by taxes… which you are forced to pay under penalty of law. (Ironically, they could claim that by their position as representatives the incurance of such crushing debt is voluntary and the 13th Amendment therefore does not apply.)
2. They claim to be for the second amendment — yet they do not fight things like the GCA or NFA, nor other current gun-laws. Instead they buff up their reputation, citing things like Clinton's Assault Weapons Ban… which had a sunset clause and therefore they literally had to do nothing to end it.
3. They claim to be against abortion — even going so far as to add no exceptions to that party-plank.
   They do not mean a word of it: they nominated, indeed pushed, Mr. Romney, who is well know as being for abortion in the case of rape, incest, or the mother's health*.
   (* The mother's health is actually code-word for at will, both politically and legally.)
4. They claim to be for fiscal responsibility, yet are willing participants in the ever-increasing government spending. —Moreover, look at how they react to the idea of auditing the Federal Reserve (which would reveal much).
5. They claim to support the Constitution, yet they support a set of policies that has damaged 90% of the Bill of Rights.
6. They claim to respect the military — yet have commissioned a literally unwinnable* war: The War on Terror.
   (* There is no victory condition, no way to say "we won".)

IN THE GRIM DARKNESS OF THE FAR FUTURE THERE IS ONLY GOVERNMENT. [Direct Link]
The Tao of Republican Orthodoxy [Direct Link]	The Modern Democratic Party & You [Direct Link]

[Domandred]

Actually this might benefit us.

Look at a county map of Cali and it’s LA and San Fran metro areas that vote overwhelmingly blue. Rest of the State is red or swing. So that gives them 4 more senators, and us 8 more.

House they’d get more on because of population, but it’s so full anyways may not make a difference one way or the other.

[oldenuff2no]

I am more than ready to be a resident of Jefferson. Where do I sign. There is only one relevant question left. How much can we charge the arrogant liberal a holes for each drop of water?

[oldenuff2no]

Twelve more Democrap Senators elected by illegal aliens.

Where did you get that. Most of the counties in cali are red. It may be a push but if there is a gain In the Senate it will be on the conservative side.

[Izzy Dunne]

The President, the Governor, and the people (via referendum) have no role in the determination.

Are you taking bets on that?

Sounds like you're talking theoretically.

This President has a PEN, you know.

[macglencoe]

Obama just wants to fix that statement he made about there being 57 states.

[DemforBush]

I’d like to see California split up, but not the way these folks want. Let eastern, more conservative areas (like Kern and Inyo counties, etc.) merge with Arizona or even Nevada, and leave the “Blues” to their own devices.

[macglencoe]

Try North Colorado for the extra state.

[Blood of Tyrants]

Article IV of the US Constitution requires any changes to a state’s boundaries to be approved by the State legislature and Congress.

West Virginia seceded from Virginia in the Civil War without receiving permission from Virginia.

[macglencoe]

The question is will they split their present 13 electoral votes or get more. They were the state that sealed our doom with Obama.

[Izzy Dunne]

Most of the counties in cali are red.

New States:

• Los Angeles
• Hollywood
• East L.A.
• San Francisco
• Siliconia
• Farmville

[ZULU]

Are you sure?

I am not from California.

San Francisco is bad news, so is San Diego and Los Angeles, no?

[Publius]

The secession from Virginia received permission from the Wheeling government that claimed loyalty to the Union, as opposed to the Richmond government that claimed loyalty to the Confederacy. Lincoln -- obviously -- recognized the Wheeling government as the legitimate government of Virginia.

The Supreme Court took the case after the Civil War and accepted the legitimacy of the creation of West Virginia.

[MeshugeMikey]

VOILA!

[TexasFreeper2009]

There is no escape.

There is no place for free men to run.

Even were you successful, each new state would choose a capital and each capital would then grow into a vile nest of bloodsucking serpents like all capitals do.

The infection would then spread across each new state, aided by refugees from other places that will bring their viral liberal voting habits with them, until all you will have accomplished is to give the liberal animals 10 more Senate seats.

[Vigilanteman]

Two more. California divided by six is a net gain of five states.

Now, if we could only force the Philadelphia and Scranton areas to join New Jersey, the rest of us could outvote Pittsburgh, Erie and Harrisburg . . .

[irishjuggler]

I’m somewhat sympathetic to the concept of splitting the state, as under the status quo, Republicans have near-zero power in Sacramento. However, six states is insane. Two or three might make sense. Also, any sort of split would also mean having to split all of the statewide organizations (DMV, CHP, UC and CSU systems) into autonomous entities in the new states. And that would likely mean even more wasteful bureaucracy.

[edh]

“A more sensible plan, nationally, would probably be to expand the number of House representatives, which I understand is constitutionally permissible.”

Expansion of the House was supposed to occur each census. Expansion should have never stopped. When one person represents something like 50,000 people, you are going to have a far more accurate representation of the population.

Yeah ... I’m sick ... I’d be thrilled to see around 6,000 reps in the House ... nothing would get done @ the Federal level :-). More importantly, good luck corrupting that many people, best of luck maintaining a two party stranglehold in the House, and blessed are those that would want to stay in that madhouse for more than a couple of terms :-).

This nonsense where 1 person is representing ~ 715,000 people is part of the reason we’re in a fine mess :-).

[Envisioning]

Then Texas will just have to divide into 5 or 6 or 7 to counter it. :-)

On second thought........no to both.

[afraidfortherepublic]

There is no Republican influence.