'New California' Movement Wants To Create a 51st State (wqad.com)
PolygamousRanchKid, Ayano, and an anonymous reader all shared the same story. Tribune Media reports:
A group has launched a campaign to divide California into two states. It isn't the first attempt to split California, but unlike a failed campaign in 2016 to divide California into six states, the campaign to create New California would split the state into one made up of rural counties and another made up of coastal counties.
USA Today provides some context: Breaking up California remains no easy task: A formal secession means getting approval from both Congress and California's legislature itself. But that hasn't stopped folks from trying. Hundreds of times... Monday's declaration of "the State of New California" marked the latest in more than 200 long-shot efforts to split the Golden State. All so far have failed.
USA Today provides some context: Breaking up California remains no easy task: A formal secession means getting approval from both Congress and California's legislature itself. But that hasn't stopped folks from trying. Hundreds of times... Monday's declaration of "the State of New California" marked the latest in more than 200 long-shot efforts to split the Golden State. All so far have failed.
Splitting California's electoral votes is a right wing wet dream. Makes you wonder if it's the Koch family or the Mercers behind this push. Or some combination of billionaires and Russian foreign intelligence.
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
All of these split-state movements make no sense as long as we're keeping Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa and the US Virgin Islands in territory hell. If anyone deserves statehood, it's these places, not some disgruntled counties in a long-established state.
That state has the most electoral votes and it is always a democratic state. If they split it into 6, they could probably get 2 of those new states to be republican states.
What horse crap. Can we do that with Florida too?
Better idea: Split the US in two countries. The Red States and the Blue States. And build a wall between the two.
It is obvious that conservatives and liberals have two fundamentaly different and irreconcilable ways of seeing the world, two completely different and opposite cultures, and that their union will never be anything else but a neverending compromise between the two that satisfies noone and only breeds frustration, anger and hatred. The civil war never really ended, people just stopped killing each other. The US is simply living under a century old cease fire.
Let the two countries in one part their own ways amicably. This way the red states will be able to continue electing their beloved Donald Trumps and the blue states their Harvey Weinsteins, and everyone will be happy.
Electoral votes are the same as the number of representatives in the house. Since most of the power in that area lies in the urban areas that they want to split from, I would expect the electoral shakedown to stay about the same. Urban California would lose some electoral votes to rural California I doubt it would be enough to change the college vote that much.
I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
A state consisting of rural California only would be one of, if not the poorest state in the nation.
The video shows the area around San Jose as part of the New California, which is, I assume an attempt to gerrymander a new state in which San Jose pays the bills, while the rest of the state sets the policies.
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
Paul Preston and Tom Reed are two cranks who have been at this game since the early 90s. If you go to their "movement's" website you will find that their various "regional committees" are almost completely made up of Paul Preston and Tom Reed. Their previous efforts consisted entirely of raising money.
The funny part of this story is that Russian bots were pushing the story on Twitter and Facebook that this "New California" officially seceded from the rest of the state. Scamsters selling swag quickly got in on the fun:
https://twitter.com/GrantJKidn...
State secession has long been a favorite trope of the Russian bots. I'm sure you remember this story about how they pushed for Texas to secede. Turns out their Facebook page was run by the "Internet Research Agency" run out of St Petersburg, Russia.
https://extranewsfeed.com/how-...
https://washingtonmonthly.com/...
No collusion...
http://www.businessinsider.com...
You are welcome on my lawn.
Think of all the 1-star patches that would have to be sent out to update all the US flags and all the problems that would cause. Many companies can't even apply OS patches and most people can't even patch drywall w/o problems. Flags will be messed up for *years*. They probably won't all get patched exactly the same way, and improperly patched flags would look funny and could even fly all wrong. As a sysadmin, and someone who sometime sews, I'm against this.
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
If you dig into the details of the current California budget and look at the cash flows for roads, schools, medical care, and a couple of other things, what you find is a huge amount of money transferred from the coastal areas that would be in one new state to the rural areas that would be in the other. This is not unusual; it happens in a lot of states. (I used to do that kind of study professionally.)
Split the way it's drawn, the rural need for subsidies would remain largely unchanged, but the burden to provide the money would fall solely on the few cities (San Jose, San Diego) and their suburbs that got stuck in the rural state. Given a choice after they see a draft budget, San Jose and San Diego are going to scream about being included in the rural state.
In 1819 the Massachusetts legislature voted to enable Maine to become an independent state. However is this would have changed the balance in the Senate between slave and free states, Congress wouldn't admit Maine without admitting an additional slave state, which is what you probably learned in school was called the "Missouri Compromise".
However ... since Republicans currently control Congress, a different limitation comes into play, From Article IV Section 3 Clause 1:
New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new States 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.
Since California is an overwhelmingly Democratic state, it's highly unlikely that the legislature will consent to increasing Republican power in the US Senate.
TL;DR: It can be done, but it won't happen unless another, Democratic-leaning state is admitted (e.g. Puerto Rico).
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
The second right-wing billionaire plan in three months to gerrymander the entire state of California. But who can blame the right? Gerrymandering is the one thing they know, and can do well. Cracking and packing is a right-wing way of life.
Last time it was an attempt to create two new right-wing states. Both schemes use the same strategy of packing the majority of the population of California into one nearly completely blue state, creating one (or two) slightly red majority states, but with a wealthy deep blue urban center captured at its edge like a hostage to pay the bills.
Starships were meant to fly, Hands up and touch the sky - Nicky Minaj
Austin is more populous than five different US states.
Support a few technologists in Washington.
"While we have far more protections for small voter blocks" I would argue with the electoral college, that you went a step too far, and that at least for the current set up of presidential election, you have a tyranny of the minority. In most place of the world where a president is decided by election , 1 person is 1 vote. But with your electoral college, this is not true and small state people count for more than big state. In fact I can't think of any other democracy where that happens. The result is actually that the minority can decide election against popular vote. And that's royally screwed from a democratic point of view IMO.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org