Voters in California contemplate forming new state

AP / Yahoo! ^ | May 28, 2014 | Juliet Williams

[bamahead]

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — Residents of California's largely rural, agrarian and politically conservative far northern counties long ago got used to feeling ignored in the state Capitol and out of sync with major urban areas.

The idea of forming their own state has been a topic among local secession dreamers for more than a century. Residents in two counties will have a chance to voice that sentiment next week.

Voters in Del Norte and Tehama, with a combined population of about 91,000, will decide June 3 on an advisory measure that asks each county's board of supervisors to join a wider effort to form a 51st state named Jefferson.

--SNIP--

Many state-of-Jefferson meetings are held in conjunction with tea party groups, who share similar concerns over what Siskiyou County Supervisor Marcia Armstrong calls "so many nanny laws" coming from Sacramento.

"We are very libertarian in view, and we believe that people would have freedom to make their own choices as long as they don't impose on other people's rights," she said.

[justa-hairyape]

The last time those counties seriously tried this, the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor, and it all became just a memory.

[VerySadAmerican]

They should make the capital the city of Thomas.

[exit82]

Article IV US Constitution:

“Section 3. New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new States 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 concerned as well as of the Congress.”

The California House and Senate and the US House and Senate would all have to agree to the formation of a new State from within the borders of California.

[Vendome]

Stupid

[MIchaelTArchangel]

Why don’t we just give California to Mexico as California del Norte? Doing so would solve a host of problems for us and for Mexico.

[snooter55]

I too think it’s silly to “ chop up “ California . . . just let it fall into the sea !

Snoot ;o)

[Resettozero]

Article IV US Constitution:

“Section 3. New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new States 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 concerned as well as of the Congress.”

The California House and Senate and the US House and Senate would all have to agree to the formation of a new State from within the borders of California.

Good thing it's just the U.S. Constitution; they're already well practiced at ignoring that. No problem.

[kingattax]

please form a new COUNTRY and leave real Americans alone.

[KC_Lion]

Ah Yes,

For every Republican State we allow into the Union they will demand we allow a Slave Sta- I mean Democrat State.

A Compromise if you will, that should be held in Missouri......

I have read something about that and where it leads too.....

[Resettozero]

Breaking up the states by county would give us 3143 states, 6386 people in the US Senate, 10,0000 or so people in the House.

The Feds would get nothing done and we would all have home rule.

Now THAT'S the kind of thinking that made America great?

8>)

[Monorprise]

Califorina will be unlikely to permit this, althou we should support it.

Its not in our interest to have 1 state dominate the west coast.

[Resettozero]

i think central PA should have dibs on Franklin cuse he lived here.

Otay, I release the rights to the State of Franklin to Central Pennsylvania. Besides, the territory I mentioned would be landlocked. Which may be why they didn't make the State of Franklin as shown on proposed maps of that time.

[Oratam]

Residents of California's largely rural, agrarian and politically conservative far northern counties. . . Bigfootia?

[who knows what evil?]

Otay, I release the rights to the State of Franklin to Central Pennsylvania. Besides, the territory I mentioned would be landlocked. Which may be why they didn't make the State of Franklin as shown on proposed maps of that time.

Too late...the State of Franklin name is already a part of institutions in East Tennessee...State of Franklin Bank, State of Franklin highway, and so forth.

[kvanbrunt2]

landlocked. so would central pa. but we could blast the dam at conawingo and be home free.

[Resettozero]

Too late...the State of Franklin name is already a part of institutions in East Tennessee...State of Franklin Bank, State of Franklin highway, and so forth.

Ah yes; that OTHER, more subversive State of Franklin!

Californians in the mentioned area might want to take note of that bit of American history!

[RKBA Democrat]

Chances of statehood happening are nil Still, I think they have a right to their own governance if they so choose. So here’s an idea that hasn’t been floated; skip becoming a new state, because it isn’t going to happen. They might seek to become an organized, incorporated US territory instead. We don’t have any since Alaska and Hawaii became states. Doing so would sidestep the question of picking up two senators which is going to be an insurmountable feat anyway.

Interesting trivia point is that our unincorporated, organized territories such as Guam and USVI pay income taxes, but they go to the territory in question, not the Federal government.

[ExCTCitizen]

Upper Michigan has dibs on ‘Superior’.

[Michael.SF.]

The Feds would get nothing done

I'm confused. Is that an argument for or against?

[Oliviaforever]

For.