Anyone can start a petition, and if it gets enough signatures it goes on the ballot, for the voters to accept or reject. I suppose in theory there could be multiple division petitions on the ballot at the same time, which would have to be sorted out if more than one of them passed (it is California ). While California allows some amendments to become law solely through the referendum process, it's being debated whether that could apply to something as profound as dividing the state.
If competing petitions pass, the one with the most affirmative votes gets the nod. Oregon schooled them in 1908.
Just to clarify for me, the conservatives (some at least) don't want to be in the minority so they want to secede from their current state and make one in their image. If that's correct it's gerrymandering gone mad.
No, Tim Draper's idea has supporters across party lines...He sees California as having become to big to be governed effectively as is. He sees breaking up California into smaller pieces as the way to create more effective state governments. Basically, this is a streamlined version of his failed "6 Californias." Six Californias - Wikipedia
You just pointed out in an earlier post about the same very thing being done in West Virginia in 1863. If the rules in California allow such actions, what’s wrong with them trying it there? Going their own way that is.
I think eastern California is pretty conservative all the way south. On another board someone said that when California was admitted to the Union it was with the provision that they could break up into multiple (2 or 3 states). I think they said Montana and Texas had similar options but could break up into 5 parts. Haven't actually checked it out myself so it may just be an urban legend in the making.
Don't know what is in the State's constitution, but they will still need Congressional approval to be admitted as a state.
Doesn’t really matter why. The northern part of the state feels left out from the state government in Sacramento, and totally disconnected from the southern and coastal areas. Just as the western part of Virginia felt they were alienated from the Tidewater areas. So they split off, the Weevees did that is. Popular thing back in those days. And if their constitution allows for such, that’s their business. Furthermore, I don’t see how the San Francisco Bay area could or would want to be included in the northern largely conservative part of the state.
I’ve never read anything like that yet. But then again I haven’t read everything either. Mostly just about the disconnect, differences and such.
Ummmm...Democrats will outnumber Republicans in all three proposed states, the Dems are weakest in Southern California with only about a 200,000 voter advantage. As to Senators, some say it is the Dems who will benefit most, with 4 fairly solid Democratic and 2 contested senators(although others say that it is the Republicans who will gain 2 and contest 2). The Dems will also gain more electoral college votes by breaking up the state, while others say the Dems stand to lose electoral votes. What is certain is that both stand to win big, but at the same time, both stand to lose big. Question is, do either part want to take that chance? Win big or lose big, that is the question. However, as I said earlier, it's not that...This has bi-partisan support. Some folk are tired of paying high taxes and they don't see that they are getting their money's worth in return. Draper uses the example of taxes vs. public education...CA ranks 5th or 6th in taxes, but their public schools are ranked 42nd(or there abouts) in the nation. Lots of Californians are unhappy with the way the tax pie is being sliced and the state government is being run, so they are making their voices heard. I think, being a bigtime venture capitalist, he is looking to loosen rules and regs with regards to Silicon valley & business in general.
Does California still have free community college for residents? That could have a pretty significant impact on the taxes vs schools issue. LA could be dragging their rating down as well.
It was free for low income students...now, it has been expanded to all new resident students for their first year - tuition only. Expected costs will run between 31-46 million.
It won't happen, politically it would be nice; but, logistically it would be a nightmare. there would have to be 3 new state constitutions, 3 new governors, all of the current state infrastructure would have to be divvied up, laws ratified, etc, etc, etc...… total goat rope
But ... people get along so well! We should be able to set down and iron things out smoothly and with general concord among all. And then the little boy fell out of bed and woke up.
So, just to further my point: California has 33 prisons housing 165,000 inmates from 58 counties and employing 26,000 peace officers and about another 7,000 non sworn employees; it is an enormous operation that would have to be trifurcated. 2/3's of the inmates in every prison would have to either transferred or subject to an interstate compact which would allow them to be held in a different State; assuming that the crime they were convicted of was still a crime. It would take decades to get the prison system figured out and the impact on the State Court system would be unimaginable. That's just one State Agency and there are so many more that are just as big. It can't be done …. the last best chance would have been in 1940
The soviets did it...and they even had nuclear weapons and military assets to divvy up...now there are free states.
