Could California Become Three Seperate States ?

1. 83

   RJ Schwartzposted 6 years ago

   A proposal to split California into three separate states got enough votes on Tuesday to be added to the November ballot.  Adding the proposal to the ballot is the first in a long number of steps that would be required to actually split the state and California legislature would still have to vote in favor of it.  The breakup would also likely be challenged in court and would need congressional approval.
   
   The initiative proposes the state to be split into three new states: California, Northern California and Southern California. Each state, though different in size, would have roughly the same population.  Breaking up the state would add four new members to the Senate.
   
   What are your thoughts on this idea?  Is it just a ploy to gain additional Senate seats for the Democrats or will it create something new?

   replyreport
   1. 81

      Credence2posted 6 years agoin reply to this

      Perish the thought, I am afraid that it may be a ploy by the GOP to water down a firm and reliable Democratic Party stronghold. They tried this stunt in Colorado, rightwingers resentful of the progressive Denver area and the front range wanted to make a separate state out from the rural counties in the conservative  prairie areas nearing Nebraska and Kansas state lines. 
      
      So, NO WAY

      replyreport
      1. 96

         wildernessposted 6 years agoin reply to this

         Which one do you see as going conservative?  Surely neither north nor south - that leaves a net gain of two liberal senators added to congress.

         replyreport
         1. 81

            Credence2posted 6 years agoin reply to this

            If conservatism can take hold in California, it will probably be South California encompassing inland counties and San Diego.
            
            Yeah, you are right, the Dems could gain two new senators. But, knowing all that, I don't like the concept of Balkanization in principle as it might start a pattern that no one would be prepared for. Virginia split into 2 states under the duress of Civil War. Anything less should not be a reason to cut the country into fish-bait.

            replyreport
            1. 83

               RJ Schwartzposted 6 years agoin reply to this

               I just posted a little info about the man who is behind this initiative - he's an Independent but was formerly a member of both Parties

               replyreport
               1. 81

                  Credence2posted 6 years agoin reply to this

                  Thanks, RJ, but I still think that it is a bad idea.

                  replyreport
                  1. 83

                     RJ Schwartzposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                     I agree its a bad idea on many levels.  If we allow states to be broken up, it will redefine our nation and likely lead to serious problems (imagine if a ballot initiative was offered to make the island of Manhattan a separate state or carving up Texas - it would disenfranchise millions and likely redistribute wealth while setting up certain areas to be future power bases - I liken that sort of behavior to what we see in the NBA with players trying to build dynasties)
                     I'm pretty sure Congress wouldn't accept it either.

                     replyreport
            2. 96

               wildernessposted 6 years agoin reply to this

               It is beyond my imagination to think that Los Angeles, San Diego and places in between could be conservative.  Hollywood, full of conservative stars!  Bel Air Road with Chevys and Fords!  Rodeo drive with working class shoppers!  Hollywood Drive with the names of farmers and mechanics!  It boggles the mind.
               
               (Though I will concede that San Diego may one day come to it's senses concerning illegal aliens.  Never LA or SF - not until their hospitals begin to fail and their pocketbooks are empty from providing for them, anyway)

               replyreport
               1. 81

                  Credence2posted 6 years agoin reply to this

                  I lived there for about 5 years in Riverside County. I think that you would find a more conservative take on things in the areas away from the coastline. The situation, though, is that these counties, comparatively, are more sparsely populated.

                  replyreport
                  1. 96

                     wildernessposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                     Understandable.  With massive, disgusting population density comes that peculiar disease of "liberalism" - it appears that it is transmitted only with difficulty, but when people are jammed together like termites in a mound, the mere act of being in contact seems to infect nearly everyone.  It's almost as if it requires periodic isolation, time alone or at most with only a few other people, to remain free of that insidious infection.
                     
                     Thus it is mostly those that live in more sparsely communities that can resist the disease.  You should have stayed there!

                     replyreport
                     1. 81

                        Credence2posted 6 years agoin reply to this

                        Well, i guess  the country folks, conservatives, are unable to avoid the affliction since the vast majority of the citizenry of this country live in urban or suburban areas. So with such odds, can conservatives really expect to prevail over the long term?
                        
                        Cmon, the cities are where the opportunities and cultural exchanges are and where the "action " is, who wants to live in "Petticoat Junction"?
                        
                        In 2010, a total of 80.7 percent of Americans lived in urban areas, up from 79 percent in 2000.
                        
                        Conversely, 19.3 percent of the U.S. population lived in rural areas in 2010, down from 21 percent in 2000.
                        
                        I lived in South East Montana for 2-3 years and still, I was and am quite liberal, although my neighbors in that vicinity were not.

                        replyreport
                        1. 96

                           wildernessposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                           Ah, but there is "urban" and there is "Urban".  I live in an urban area of some 600,000 people...in something like 1000 square miles.  And then there is LA, with what - 1000 times that population density?  Humans just aren't designed to live under such deplorable conditions!  They sicken and mental aberrations abound.
                           
                           Yes, it will take more than a few years to completely clear ones self of liberalism.  Tell you what - about 20 miles from me, across the mountain, is the town of Horseshoe Bend, Id. (population 700)  Come live there for a decade and you'll feel much better!  And you can drive into Boise once a week or so when you're not snowed in - it has a zoo and an art museum for culture.  Even an indoor go-cart track!  And you will have the greatest opportunity of all - to commune with nature and find your spiritual self.  Something you can never do in the Stainless Steel Jungle.

                           replyreport
                           1. 81

                              Credence2posted 6 years agoin reply to this

                              Perhaps, you are referring to Greater Boise? Cities have been around since ancient times, relatively large ones as well. I have lived in the shadow of the nation's second most populous metropolis (LA) as well as lived in splendid isolation just north of the Wyoming line. But due to economic realities,  large cities are not going away any time soon.
                              
                              Well over 30 years ago, I lived in a place called Ft. Smith, Mt.,and was taught how to fly fish and hunt for the first time. Not many more than 500 people. But, economic opportunity was lacking and I had to return to metro Denver to get on the " fast track" for better paying employment.
                              
                              Well, now, being on the retirement track, I have the choice to live wherever I want, within reason, without having to be concerned about being gainfully employed. That, in itself,is quite liberating. When I have the choice, I would prefer a rural setting. We currently live among deer, possum, raccoons as our neighbors in what could pass for rural in Florida. I would prefer a Montana like pristine environment ( the West) now that the craving for the hustle, bustle and rat race is a thing of the past.  I could see myself with the guys sharing BS and a few beers while patiently waiting for the fish to bite at the local pond or river. But, the Missus had  other ideas and I had to pay attention, so here we are.

                              replyreport
                              1. 96

                                 wildernessposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                                 Uh oh!  You're craving the conservative lifestyle, and with it comes the concept of self-sufficiency, camaraderie and a work ethic.  It sounds like you're on the way up the ladder; truly "progressing" conceptually.  Deer and raccoons (not so much possum) will do that to a person.
                                 
                                 You won't find it in Florida, but a lonely, quiet, clean stream back in the woods is far better than a dirty pond with a bunch of beer and guys sitting on their behinds.  The fish are better, too - living in moving water makes a difference in their strength and fighting ability.

                                 replyreport
                                 1. 81

                                    Credence2posted 6 years agoin reply to this

                                    Uh oh!  You're craving the conservative lifestyle, and with it comes the concept of self-sufficiency, camaraderie and a work ethic.  It sounds like you're on the way up the ladder; truly "progressing" conceptually.  Deer and raccoons (not so much possum) will do that to a person.
                                    ------------------------
                                    I would not go so far as to say that. I just want Peace and Quiet, a simple life. For the most part that is what has always been desired but the need to make a living precluded that, until now. Politically, I am far from being 'conservative' from your perspective. Where do you get the idea that liberals don't have a work ethic? What have I been playing at for over 45 years? Comaraderie, does not exist among those that live in urban areas? No, it is there as well.  I got as much of that as I wanted, andit was always available. Now, I don't need it and life becomes simpler without it. So, you can be liberal/progressive and not necessarily be wedded to the urban lifestyle.

                                    replyreport
                                    1. 96

                                       wildernessposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                                       "Where do you get the idea that liberals don't have a work ethic?"
                                       
                                       Probably from the liberal concept that everyone gets an equal share of the pie, whether they work or not.
                                       
                                       "Comaraderie, does not exist among those that live in urban areas?
                                       
                                       Naw - they're too busy shooting each other.  And themselves, with needles.
                                       
                                       "So, you can be liberal/progressive and not necessarily be wedded to the urban lifestyle."
                                       
                                       I'm warning you, Credence - you get out of the city and within a decade you'll find yourself on the conservative side of the fence.  Take Heed! 

                                       report
   2. 77

      jackclee lmposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      I am also against this, even though as a conservative, I like the idea of smaller states.
      I am also aware that California has a large immigrant population and some are undocumented...
      The fact that California played a role in helping Hillary win the popular vote and yet lost the electoral college majority should give some people pause. Why is that?
      
      I am also a believer that States like Corp. has a macimum size. After which it cannot be manged efficiently.
      I think any State getting too big to fail, creates a problem for the rest of the country.
      
      The concept of federalism as created by our Constitution is that States should be the testing grounds for new initiatives. If it works out, it may be adopted by other states or the whole country. If it doesn’t work out, it can be modified without affecting too many people. This breaks down when a State becomes too large to manage.

      replyreport
      1. 81

         Credence2posted 6 years agoin reply to this

         As for a state being too big to fail, we will let the people of California decide this. Even then, they still have to get the OK from Congress to do it. Otherwise, this country will be Balkanized beyond the point of recognition. I guess this can apply to either New York or Texas as well?
         
         This process, while being possible should never become 'easy'.

         replyreport
         1. 95

            Readmikenowposted 6 years agoin reply to this

            Credence,
            
            I don't think this will ever happen in our lifetime.  It would have to be approved by the government in Sacramento, and I don't see that realistically happening.  I would hope what it does is bring attention to those in Sacramento as to how upset much of the state is with Sacramento legislatures.  Maybe the issues important to the more rural areas of the state that were previously ignored by Sacramento will now get attention by them.  I could also be hoping against hope.

            replyreport
            1. 77

               jackclee lmposted 6 years agoin reply to this

               I see signs of change happening already. The homeless problem is San Francisco is one and the rejection by some california local community of the sanctuary state policy for another.
               People will vote for policies and funding that benefits them...and California is a prime example of liberal progressive policies that is destroying their communities...and driving people to move out of state...

               replyreport
               1. 83

                  RJ Schwartzposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                  The people of California need to take back their state from the small group of radical policy-makers who think they can spend without and guidelines - There is a Republican on the ballot for Governor, which will definitely bring out GOP voters for the midterms

                  replyreport
            2. 81

               Credence2posted 6 years agoin reply to this

               Mike, it is just sauce for the goose, these kinds of disputes occur often. Outside of Denver Metro, or Chicago their respective states may be quite conservative. But, policy is driven by smaller areas with larger population over larger geographic areas that are sparsely populated. That is only fair way to do it, one man one vote. A sparsely populated California county, Inyo (Bishop) is not to have as much say as LA county. And I don't like the concept of the 'Electoral College' brought to the state level.

               replyreport
   3. 83

      RJ Schwartzposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      The initiative was brought forward by billionaire venture capitalist and crypto currency investor, Tim Draper who was first a Democrat, then switched to Republican, and then switched to Libertarian, and finally switched to his "own" party (he's basically an Independent)

      replyreport
2. 60

   Live to Learnposted 6 years ago

   I'm with credence. I'd never support it. But, unlike him, I'm afraid of ultimately creating an environment of undue influence by Democrats on the national stage.

   replyreport
   1. 81

      Credence2posted 6 years agoin reply to this

      I hear you L to L, I just feel that way about undue influence from Republicans.

      replyreport
      1. 60

         Live to Learnposted 6 years agoin reply to this

         Say it ain't so, credence.
         
         Just kidding. I knew that.

         replyreport
3. 95

   Readmikenowposted 6 years ago

   Now, as someone who lived in California I can see the desire for it.  The environmental WACO groups have WAY too much power in Sacramento.  Out of dozens of incidents showing the ignorance of Sacramento legislators one sticks out the most.  In the 90s, an immigrant from Viet Nam was a farmer.  A environmental WACO...told authorities they saw a Tipton Kangaroo rat on this man's farm.  A judge told him he had to stop all farming operations because the rat was an endangered species.  This was during harvest season and if this guy didn't get in his crops, he was out of business.  So, while harvesting his crops, the authorities seized his tractors and other farming equipment while they "investigated" the claim.  Well, local farmers weren't too happy with this so THEY brought in the guys crops and authorities were issuing fines and threatening jail time...all because ONE environmental WACO simply claimed to see an endangered species on a farm.  That is just one of many examples of Sacramento insanity.  The other one was when a guy I did business with raised show dogs.  A mountain lion jumped over his fence, which complied with local regulations, took one of his show dogs and jumped back over the fence.  My business client quickly got a rifle, tracked down the mountain lion and killed it.  Took his show dog worth thousands of dollars to the vet and was able to save its life.  He was brought up on charges for shooting a mountain lion, who had his show dog.  This man spent 30 days in jail and paid a huge fine.  I could go on.  California also fined a man and threatened him with jail because he shot a black bear who was attacking him. This is just some of the reasons.

   replyreport
4. 0

   ahorsebackposted 6 years ago

   Brown is working extremely hard to insure that the illegals populate the voters lists in southern cal. , drivers licences etc .  , does anyone realize just how close they are to acquiring more electoral votes for the democratic party  ?  Somethings changing and it may not be for the good.

   replyreport
   1. 81

      Credence2posted 6 years agoin reply to this

      The liberal/progressive advocates in California goes beyond the "illegal alien" explanation that conservatives always put up to explain why California is such a liberal stronghold.

      replyreport
5. 95

   Readmikenowposted 6 years ago

   If this were to happen, what would happen to the state of California's debt?  California has the highest amount of debt of any state, it is over $153 Billion.  Would they divide it 3 ways?  California's economy is moving toward a very serious recession or eve depression.  They are even trying to slow down their spending.

   replyreport
   1. 0

      ahorsebackposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      A failed state , economically,  politically , legislatively  , .......They WANT the feds to step in , I believe .   Anybody remember in the seventies when Gerald Ford refused to bail the state of NY  out  ?

      replyreport