Jump to content


Three States of California


Recommended Posts

Three States of California

 

So the proposal is to split California into 3 separate states.  The article mentioned that it was done previously with the creation of West Virginia.  There are also, according to the article, provisions within the US Constitution which allows for this.

 

Questions I have:

 

1) Will splitting California into three states give them more electoral votes overall? 

 

2) If California voters pass this, would Congress approve? 

 

3) If this happens, will other states look to split? 

 

4) Does splitting a state into two or more smaller states mean better economies or is it basic tribalism (only wanting to be around people who look and think like you do)? 

 

5a) Why is this billionaire Silicon Valley guy so adamant about splitting California? 

 

5b) What's his true goal/end game/motivation (because I sincerely doubt it is for the betterment of the average person)? 

 

5c) How does this guy stand to financially benefit from this potential splitting?

 

Thoughts?

 

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment

Here's an interesting piece detailing some of this guy's motivations in pushing this initiative:

 

Quote

Draper carved out a space for himself in the Silicon Valley after investing in companies such as Skype, Hotmail and Tesla and investing heavily in bitcoin. But in 2012, he turned his attention to reinventing California.

 

He has described California as a state with crumbling bridges and roads, a struggling, underfunded education system and oppressively high taxes.

 

The only solution, he maintains, is smaller governments better equipped to respond to residents’ specific needs depending on the region of California where they live. The state government, he has said, is “rotting.”
 

“Three states will get us better infrastructure, better education and lower taxes,” he told the Los Angeles Times last year. “States will be more accountable to us and can cooperate and compete for citizens.”
 

On Tuesday night, Grande, the campaign spokeswoman, pointed to recent rankings from U.S. News and World report showing California ranked 50th for quality of life, 43rd for fiscal stability, 26th for education overall and, specifically 44th in Pre-K-12 education.

 

On the surface, this seems like fairly standard conservative rhetoric about how to improve government. 

 

As to whether it would get ratified by Congress if it were to ultimately pass? I'm dubious. Congress right now has an MO of "We're going to do exclusively what we (GOP) want to do & ignore anything else because you don't have the power to stop us." so they'd likely ignore this too. Also:

 

Quote

If the proposal ever makes it to Capitol Hill, one hurdle in a Republican-controlled Congress would be the idea of awarding the deep blue state four more senators, likely Democratic senators.

 

Given how they've elevated maintaining power above all else & the extremely slim split in the Senate right now, that's a hard no.

 

I'm doubt this could pass anyway. I don't think there are enough conservatives who feel the CA state government is so bad this is necessary, plus:

 

Quote

But it probably won’t come to that. According to the Mercury News, an April poll found that just 17 percent of California voters supported the proposal.

 

So to your questions, MC:

 

1. No. Electoral votes are adjusted based on the census every 10 years.

2. Doubt it.

3. Maybe. Texas has had factions constantly looking to secede for a long time. Not sure if they'd look to try something similar.

4. Not really; it may result in different economies regionally than CA as a whole, but there's no boost they'd get specifically from just partitioning up the existing economies.

5.  I'm assuming it's all about financial benefit & more power for this guy. Two new states means two new governments that would need to start from scratch. Money rules everything in politics, so someone with as much money as this guy could throw a lot around and try to install the government he wants. Buying your ideal state government would be a hell of an ROI.

6. Much of CA would be ticked off, but I don't see how this could go any further. They can't just split into unrecognized states. CA would have even more reason to dislike the current federal government.

7. No - see above.

8. More accurately the GOP supports states rights only when they conveniently further their own agenda.

Link to comment

Sure it's covered in the the New States clause of the U.S. Constitution.  

  • Article IV, Section 3, Clause 1 ("New States Clause")
  • 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 concerned as well as of the Congress. 

But I doubt if it will actually happen.  The article points to West Virginia.  But that was a special situation.  When Virginia (which included W.Virginia) succeeded from the Union just prior to the Civil War, the counties of what's now West Virginia succeeded from the rest of Virginia to stay in the Union and form a new state.   

Link to comment

1 hour ago, Making Chimichangas said:

And just for the sake of discussion, here are other questions:

 

6. What if the voters of California approve this, then Congress says no?

 

7. Wouldn't a Republican majority led Congress tend to approve this? 

 

8. After all, aren't Republicans always pushing the "states rights" platform?

 

 

7. They would figure out whether it would help or hurt them in congress, senate, and presidential votes and vote that way, probably.

 

8. Republicans are not pro states rights, as Clifford stated. They're are only that when it's convenient.

Link to comment
10 hours ago, BigRedBuster said:

I don’t know him so I don’t know his motivation. 

 

However, California as a state, is a failed entity financially. 

 

Three smaller dtates would have more local control and input into what happens.....which I tend to think is a good thing. 

 

I find it quite perplexing how a state with vast wealth in natural resources, agricultural products and high technology development can be on the cusp of bankruptcy.   I suspect incompetent and/or crooked politicians played a major role.  

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment

3 hours ago, NUance said:

 

I find it quite perplexing how a state with vast wealth in natural resources, agricultural products and high technology development can be on the cusp of bankruptcy.   I suspect incompetent and/or crooked politicians played a major role.  

 

I would suspect that as well.  I wonder, has anyone in California openly asked for an accounting of where all the money is going?  I also understand there are alot of hands out wanting a piece of that free money pie.  It may also be plausible that there is no graft or corruption (doubtful) but there are just too many social welfare programs and not enough dollars to fund them.

Link to comment

If California was its own nation, it would be the fifth largest economy in the world, distributed across a healthy variety of sectors. It returns more into the federal breadbasket than any other state, thus propping up a lot of states that brag about their lower taxes and pro-business, deregulation attitudes.  Some of the most conservative regions of California also tend to be far more dependent on federal funds. When they interview these people, they are charmingly unaware of that fact.

 

The state is far from failing, but it struggles with its huge budget and all the people and politicians who demand a piece of it. Education is a serious problem, but it's rooted partly in the 1970s tax revolt that limited state funding. Infrastructure is a problem across the country, and I'm not sure if California is uniquely accountable, or how a partition would help -- especially since infrastructure depends on shared responsibility that isn't reliant on the wealth of each region.

 

California is really screwed up because of the ridiculously high cost of housing. That is an old-fashioned supply & demand issue. 

 

Also, this multi-state story comes up in California every few years. Someone had a 7 state partition a few years back. It's good for a feature story or two, but has no chance of going anywhere politically. 

 

I believe Western Nebraska ranchers agitate for secession from the Eastern Nebraska powers-that-be every few years.  

  • Plus1 3
Link to comment

@Guy Chamberlin, that's why I am curious about this Silicon Valley billionaire advocating for this split.  He has to have ulterior motives that, I believe, he isn't disclosing.  So it makes me wonder, what's his game?  People like this don't do anything without a financial motive behind it.  He's playing some angle.

 

And regarding your comment about ranchers in western Nebraska wanting to split from the eastern half of the state...

 

Similar attitudes exist in Oregon as pretty much 3/4ths of the state wants to split off away from Portland.  Much of the state of Oregon is extremely conservative, but because of the city of Portland, it tend to vote liberal.

Link to comment
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

Visit the Sports Illustrated Husker site



×
×
  • Create New...