Won’t make it past the 9th Circuit.

Quote:California’s 168-year run as a single entity, hugging the continent’s edge for hundreds of miles and sprawling east across mountains and desert, could come to an end next year — as a controversial plan to split the Golden State into three new jurisdictions qualified Tuesday for the Nov. 6 ballot.

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.

It would be the first division of an existing U.S. state since the creation of West Virginia in 1863.

“Three states will get us better infrastructure, better education and lower taxes,” Tim Draper, the Silicon Valley venture capitalist who sponsored the ballot measure, said in an email to The Times last summer when he formally submitted the proposal. “States will be more accountable to us and can cooperate and compete for citizens.”

In the initiative’s introductory passage, Draper argues that “vast parts of California are poorly served by a representative government dominated by a large number of elected representatives from a small part of our state, both geographically and economically.”

Keep reading here.....

this one's gonna be fun to watch play out.....

@desperation

(06-13-2018 04:44 PM)usmbacker Wrote:  Won’t make it past the 9th Circuit.

Only 17% of the state supports it. It won't make it past Nov 6.

But as a resident of Orange County, I think I might living in the portion designated as Southern California if I could dump LA and Sacramento...

Not extending "California" a little farther north to include San Fran doesn't free the Northern people.

(06-13-2018 05:05 PM)Paul M Wrote:  Not extending "California" a little farther north to include San Fran doesn't free the Northern people.

SFO would be horrified to be lumped with LA, but you make a good point: "True"northern Californians think of San Francisco as central.

I vote for Hollywood to fall into the Pacific Ocean.

(06-13-2018 05:10 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  

(06-13-2018 05:05 PM)Paul M Wrote:  Not extending "California" a little farther north to include San Fran doesn't free the Northern people.

SFO would be horrified to be lumped with LA, but you make a good point: "True"northern Californians think of San Francisco as central.

which means what??? no chance charlie???

what is a "true" northern cali guy???

you went to Rice, eh?

I'm gonna be fly over this like frisco rice baby.....

this thread's gonna be a hoot+++

ref: see line 1c)

Don’t think it will fly. Ca and No Ca. Will be liberal enclaves, leaving SoCal to the conservatives, thus 2 more Dem Senate seats.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Hey, that would make it 52 states. We'd still need 5 to make Oblunder a "profit" (sic) when he said that there were 57.

I wish there was an earthquake machine...

(06-13-2018 06:48 PM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  Don’t think it will fly. Ca and No Ca. Will be liberal enclaves, leaving SoCal to the conservatives, thus 2 more Dem Senate seats.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

So Cal would be a swing state. No way the Senate approves it.
No way anybody in No. California votes for being tied to San Francisco in a split.

(06-13-2018 07:26 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(06-13-2018 06:48 PM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  Don’t think it will fly. Ca and No Ca. Will be liberal enclaves, leaving SoCal to the conservatives, thus 2 more Dem Senate seats.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

So Cal would be a swing state. No way the Senate approves it.
No way anybody in No. California votes for being tied to San Francisco in a split.

What kind of a vote is needed? This favors Republicans rather heavily, so couldn't they pass this on a simple majority?

Good for them. I actually hope they vote for it. It would be interesting event that would most likely set off similar events nationwide.

Such a stupid idea but I know it won't go anywhere from a legal standpoint. The strangest part is splitting up LA and Orange County, but somehow maintaining that Monterrey is more in tune with LA than San Francisco?

Besides as some story mentioned, they really need to call it Cali-three-nia instead of Cali-for-nia.

(06-13-2018 05:15 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(06-13-2018 05:10 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  

(06-13-2018 05:05 PM)Paul M Wrote:  Not extending "California" a little farther north to include San Fran doesn't free the Northern people.

SFO would be horrified to be lumped with LA, but you make a good point: "True"northern Californians think of San Francisco as central.

which means what??? no chance charlie???

what is a "true" northern cali guy???

you went to Rice, eh?

I'm gonna be fly over this like frisco rice baby.....

this thread's gonna be a hoot+++

ref: see line 1c)

As always, I understand about 20% of what you write. North is, generally, Mendocino county and north of that (at least, with the Northern Californians I know).

This proposition has no chance because it's too crazy, even for California.

That's saying something.

(06-13-2018 08:43 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  

(06-13-2018 05:15 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(06-13-2018 05:10 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  

(06-13-2018 05:05 PM)Paul M Wrote:  Not extending "California" a little farther north to include San Fran doesn't free the Northern people.

SFO would be horrified to be lumped with LA, but you make a good point: "True"northern Californians think of San Francisco as central.

which means what??? no chance charlie???

what is a "true" northern cali guy???

you went to Rice, eh?

I'm gonna be fly over this like frisco rice baby.....

this thread's gonna be a hoot+++

ref: see line 1c)

As always, I understand about 20% of what you write. North is, generally, Mendocino county and north of that (at least, with the Northern Californians I know).

This proposition has no chance because it's too crazy, even for California.

That's saying something.

I wouldn't sell those fruits and nuts short.

(06-13-2018 07:45 PM)oliveandblue Wrote:  

(06-13-2018 07:26 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(06-13-2018 06:48 PM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  Don’t think it will fly. Ca and No Ca. Will be liberal enclaves, leaving SoCal to the conservatives, thus 2 more Dem Senate seats.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

So Cal would be a swing state. No way the Senate approves it.
No way anybody in No. California votes for being tied to San Francisco in a split.

What kind of a vote is needed? This favors Republicans rather heavily, so couldn't they pass this on a simple majority?

It favors Democrats heavily. Instead of one solid Democratic state, you have two solid Democratic states and a swing state. Rural northern California wants to get away from San Francisco, not be even more dominated by it.

Wait are you saying there's gerrymandering going on?

Doesn't matter. In the NK negotiations, NK denuclearizes and gets to annex California.

What's the capital of California and Southern California? And what becomes of USC if it's not included in Southern California?

Make it Santa Barbara and San Bernardino. Give some juice to some new metro areas.

In reality, I'd think it'd be LA and Bakersfield.