Connect with us

A new proposal to break up California into three states received enough signatures on Tuesday to make it onto the November 6 ballot. Now all it takes is a majority of California voters supporting it to start dismantling the country’s most populous, wealthy and radical state.

The Los Angeles Times provides some more details on what would be “the first division of an existing U.S. state since the creation of West Virginia in 1863”:

If a majority of voters who cast ballots agree, a long and contentious process would begin for three separate states to take the place of California, with one primarily centered around Los Angeles and the other two divvying up the counties to the north and south. Completion of the radical plan — far from certain, given its many hurdles at judicial, state and federal levels — would make history. …

The proposal aims to invoke Article IV, Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution, the provision guiding how an existing state can be divided into new states. Draper’s plan calls for three new entities — Northern California, California and Southern California — which would roughly divide the population of the existing state into thirds.

Northern California would consist of 40 counties stretching from Oregon south to Santa Cruz County, then east to Merced and Mariposa counties. Southern California would begin with Madera County in the Central Valley and then wind its way along the existing state’s eastern and southern spine, comprising 12 counties and ultimately curving up the Pacific coast to grab San Diego and Orange counties.

The man behind the proposal is Silicon Valley venture capitalist Tim Draper, who tried and failed in the past to convince Californians to divide the state into six new states — an effort undone in part because of questions about the economic viability of some of the new states, which his new proposal addresses better, and election officials invalidating many of the signatures on the proposal. Maybe the second time’s the charm.

“Three states will get us better infrastructure, better education and lower taxes,” Draper told the Times after he first submitted the proposal last summer. “States will be more accountable to us and can cooperate and compete for citizens.” Draper maintains in the introduction to the longshot proposal that large sections of California are “poorly served” by a government dominated by representatives from only a small part of the state.

In a report worth watching if just for the awesome DC-themed mural at Draper’s headquarters, Reuters speaks with the “Silicon Valley titan” about why he thinks it’s time to do what the Romans did in the final stages of the empire and split the whole thing up. Reuters also mentions that a recent poll found that less than a fifth of Californians liked the idea:

Below are some of the arguments for the referendum presented on Draper’s Cal 3 website:

Stronger Education

In its current state, California ranks last in the country in high school graduation rates and near the bottom in high-priority subjects like math. The California Department of Education simply cannot manage 6.2 million students, nearly 300,000 teachers, and more than 1,000 school districts. Cal 3 will bring critical decision-making closer to home, giving states a fresh start and families better choices, with greater accountability and outcomes for everyone.

Safer Roads & Infrastructure

California’s highways, bridges, freeways, and city roads are ranked among the poorest in the nation. For example, Californians pay $844 a year in wear-and-tear on their vehicles due to shoddy roadways. Cal 3 gives regional governments greater control over critical infrastructure spending that will enhance the safety and security of their citizens.

Lower Taxes

Californians pay the highest taxes in the nation, and yet our tax dollars are mismanaged in every way. Cal 3 would encourage each state set lower tax rates to encourage families and employers to make their home there.

Accountable Tax Oversight, Manageable Budget & Spending

Despite sky-high taxes and hundreds of billions earmarked in spending through Sacramento, Californians see little regional return on our investment. Cal 3 would promote greater citizen oversight of and control over how taxes are being spent, with the result being a more responsive government and elected officials spending in closer alignment with their constituents’ more pressing and important needs.

Local Identity, Autonomy & Diversity

Rather than being managed remotely — and ineffectively — from Sacramento, each state will have the autonomy to make choices based on the most pressing needs and opportunities closest to home. Cal 3 uses the region’s natural geographic boundaries to emphasize local identity, while retaining existing county lines in order to preserve Californians’ natural pride in our diverse population.

Efficient Government & Area-Specific Regulations

California’s diverse regions require government attention that is specifically tailored to address that area’s needs. The economic climate in areas like San Bernardino and Fresno is very different from the economic climate in areas like Los Angeles or San Francisco. Dividing California into smaller states will help elected officials decide which laws and tax regulations best suit that specific region, resulting in more responsive government.

Advertisement
40 Comments

40 Comments

  1. Kaiser

    June 14, 2018 at 1:26 am

    Split the state into two. Give SF down to LA to the Dems and give the rest of California to the Republicans. The way the picture shows would give more Democrats into Congress. We don’t want that.

    • Archangel

      June 14, 2018 at 2:28 am

      This split just ends up giving Dems 4 extra senators – splitting CA is a recipe for disaster – let them secede completely

    • Granny Pat

      June 14, 2018 at 5:21 am

      Amen! Far northern California doesn’t want any part of the SF Bay Area; nor does the inland area. In fact, it could slide into the ocean and that would be fine!

  2. GRA

    June 14, 2018 at 1:29 am

    If none of them honor Amendments 1,2, 4, and 10 then it’s a total waste of time. There can be no sanctuary cities neither at all.

  3. Michael Thomas

    June 14, 2018 at 1:44 am

    Hell no.
    50 states, one union.
    No no no
    Another powerful, rich man with a private, hidden agenda.
    It’s all about him
    Me me me

    • Jerry W Coley

      June 14, 2018 at 10:04 pm

      I don’t think it is,all about him. Just look at how Cailf is now. They care more for the illegles,then Americans. Maybe this will help,???

    • Sharon Steiner

      June 15, 2018 at 2:10 am

      GET THE GOVERNOR ,MAYORS AND ALL THE ELECTED DEMOCRAPS OUT OF OFFICE AND get rid of the iilegals and Cally COULD GET BACK TO NORMAl

  4. Brenda Torres

    June 14, 2018 at 1:55 am

    Include San Francisco with the California segment and we have a deal….

  5. john

    June 14, 2018 at 1:55 am

    What a bunch of idiots. Just leave the shit alone.

  6. Bob D.

    June 14, 2018 at 2:01 am

    Would give them 2 more dem Senators as if the existing fools aren’t enough !!

  7. John Campbell

    June 14, 2018 at 2:21 am

    I’m rather excited about this. Can’t wait to vote for it. I’m in that Southern California part and getting away from lefties and their rights violating laws is a dream come true to me.

  8. Pat

    June 14, 2018 at 2:23 am

    Let’s be honest. California should trade names with the state of New Mexico and call it a day. “New Mexico” can check a second box to seced for the union. Soon enough the well to do former Californians will leave the socialist country for obvious reasons (The same reason Ensenada has a small population on the beautiful California coast.) (The same reason Tijuana is the #1 source of illegal aliens) Aaah……..if only.

  9. Rocky

    June 14, 2018 at 2:29 am

    Even if this happen to pass Congress & Senate would never allow this. It can’t be done without their approval. Great idea and I certainly don’t blame them but it going to take something a bit more forceful to get this done.

  10. Archangel

    June 14, 2018 at 2:33 am

    The US can’t tolerate two more states the crooked Dems manage to F’up and corrupt – we especially dont need 4 more lunatic Dem senators in DC

  11. bety

    June 14, 2018 at 2:43 am

    I have a better idea. Let CA withdraw from the union like some libs were talking about.

    • kotoc

      June 14, 2018 at 11:27 am

      I like your idea better.

  12. Frank

    June 14, 2018 at 2:50 am

    If they divide into 3 states does that mean more liberal congressmen and 4 more liberal senators?

    • Granny Pat

      June 14, 2018 at 5:23 am

      The inland parts of the state are pretty conservative, so no doubt would not have more liberal congressmen or senators.

  13. Samuel Hay

    June 14, 2018 at 3:22 am

    I think its a wonderful idea. I can understand why Californians dont want to live next door to Californians. Maybe one of them can ban fluoride from their drinking water supply and reignite their brain functions.

  14. N

    June 14, 2018 at 3:45 am

    Liberalism is a mental disorder and Pelosi, The pope, Behar, Hillary, Comey, Whoopi, Baldwin, Beck, Waters, mcShame and Griffin are the poster girls!!!Just more liberal useful idiots on display !

  15. Colleen Marie

    June 14, 2018 at 3:54 am

    What the article doesn’t mention is that each separate California ‘State’ would require 2 Senators which translates to 6 (likely) Democrat Senators (an increase of 4). Seems like a way to insure Democrat majority of Congress.

  16. Michael McCallion

    June 14, 2018 at 4:19 am

    It’s a start to cleaning up the foolish things of geography in the North American Continent.

    The next stage of geography clean-up must deal with Canada’s__ itty bitty__ Province of Prince Edward Island.

    Imagine a group of People with a population not even enough to qualify as more than a small urban City has more political clout than Provinces with more territory and resources than many if not all European Countries and smaller in Population and territory than even Rhode Island as a State.

    It might have a recognition as one of the Founding Provinces; but never even demonstrated their commitment to being part of Canada until 1873.

    With the Bridge built connecting the small Province’s Island to the Province of New Brunswick it is a logical move to establish P.E.I. as a Municipality or if it is desired even a Regional Municipality, recognizing the various Hamlets and Towns located on the Island.

    Becoming part of New Brunswick will provide for a more equitable political representation as One Single Federal Riding and One Single Senate seat in Canada’s appointed Senate.

  17. Andrew

    June 14, 2018 at 4:28 am

    Not really. I think the republicans will have a better say on matters in their areas.

  18. Adrew W. Matheson,

    June 14, 2018 at 5:25 am

    Hi All,
    This Would B Most Interesting – If it ever Happened,Two Other States that Could B Broken Up! Try New York State and Illinois! Make Chicago a Separate State and N Y C a Separate State as Well.

    Tnx,
    Operater,
    Calgary

  19. Garrick7

    June 14, 2018 at 6:34 am

    If this sort of thing keeps up, Obama will eventually get his 57 states and actually be right about it.

    • Claire

      June 14, 2018 at 6:03 pm

    • Claire

      June 14, 2018 at 6:06 pm

      Hahahaha! Sorry, I was hoping to use an emoji, but I guess not.

  20. jimmie c. boswell

    June 14, 2018 at 8:05 am

    Texas, was the last state divided. when it became new mexico, and parts of oklahoma, kansas, colorado, wyoming, utah, arizona.

  21. Etnarolf

    June 14, 2018 at 12:02 pm

    What a f**king idiot idea that was, that will never, ever work at all.
    A solution to the current problem in California is so simple, just vote-out all those Democrats in the government and that’s it! Problem Solved!…

    • Ken Boylan

      June 14, 2018 at 1:18 pm

      that would be great – IF – the republicans outs numbered the demonrats – but they don’t – too much mental illness in fornia.

    • Eddie Fast

      June 16, 2018 at 10:06 am

      Each of the 3 states that may be created should have to vote for new senators and representatives. Until then, the current members remain. New states, new senators and representatives. I’m no political expert but I believe this is a scam to put more dems in Washington. The right better be out in force across the country to cut them off.

  22. mike dar

    June 14, 2018 at 1:08 pm

    Each area is already ruled by rich liberal elitists, nothing is going to change except for having more politicians. This isn’t about fixing California at all, this is about dividing up the ‘Booty’ Liberals already have and some want more than they have.
    If more conservative areas are not separated from the existing liberal majority ruled areas, there will be no competition in ideas, or taxations, or effective policies, nothing changes.
    Were there 5 new states formed from California with inland areas having controls, then perhaps the Liberals of L.A. County, the Coastal Rich Liberals and the San Francisco/Sacramento Liberals would have to compete to keep businesses and middle aged middle incomers in their three areas.. but as it stands, any conservatives are still trapped on the Democrat plantation as the three areas are currently planned/defined… nothing will change except…..
    just more politicians.

  23. jerseybadger

    June 14, 2018 at 2:41 pm

    this division is ridiculous , split it into two states , Southern California can have San Francisco . Northern California Can be renamed , some thing with No California in the name

  24. Dan

    June 14, 2018 at 4:00 pm

    I’m in Calif. Anything that gets all those criminal pilfering lunatics in Sacramento is fine by me!! Turd Brown, Senile deranged Pelosi and Witch Feinstein all other criminals in office need to be sent out to pasture!!!

  25. Nancy Hessler

    June 14, 2018 at 4:27 pm

    I still maintain that it makes more sense for the rest of the states to show up to the San Andrea’s fault-line with chisels and mallets. Just sayin’.

  26. keren

    June 14, 2018 at 7:00 pm

    How very hypocritical of the Left!!!!!!!!!!
    They don’t want a wall to keep out dangerous illegals, but they want to split California to keep out other conservative Americans who pay taxes and who are legal??????

    Splitting the state is just like walling out what liberals deem to be “undesirables” to them…… Enough of their bullshit, Just secede and then we can build a wall to keep them OUT OF AMERICA, since they hate the rest of us anyway.

  27. Bryana

    June 15, 2018 at 5:21 am

    I was born in San Francisco, and grew up in San Diego. California being divided into three states is a dopey idea. Just find the happy, common sense middle of two extremes at the polls when you vote state and local… 🙂

  28. Nathan M.

    June 15, 2018 at 4:54 pm

    This won’t happen because the Dems know they’d never win another election if it did, but it should happen. The maniacs in SoCal have been shouting down the rest of their state with their autistic screeching and this referendum would give California’s sane residents a political voice of their own at last.

  29. Betty York

    June 16, 2018 at 5:16 am

    I say build the wall up around the California section.

  30. Betty York

    June 16, 2018 at 5:23 am

    I think the wall should be built up from Mexico to the California section of the 3. Let Mexico have them.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

CF