Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Saturday, April 14, 2018

Californians may get to vote on a plan to split the state into three smaller states this November. Venture capitalist Tim Draper, who previously pushed a proposal that would split California into six states, says that his three-state proposal has enough signatures to qualify for the November ballot. On Thursday, Draper said in a statement that the "CAL 3" initiative has collected over 600,000 signatures from Californians who would like to see the state split into three. An initiative needs 366,000 signatures to appear on the ballot. "This is an unprecedented show of support on behalf of every corner of California to create three state governments that emphasize representation, responsiveness, reliability and regional identity," Draper said. If voters pass it, CAL 3 would begin the process to divide California into "Northern California," "Southern California," and just plain "California."

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

If California does this several other states, including Florida, will too. We'll fix that Electoral College that way. We'll fix Congress that way. Six Senators from "California" sounds great to me. Maybe "Florida" should get six too.

#1 | Posted by danni at 2018-04-14 02:09 PM | Reply

The red parts of CA are looking at states like AL and MS and thinking "wait, we can pay less taxes but Hoover up more federal dollars? Yes please!".

After about ten years they'll wonder why their standard of living is in the tank.

#2 | Posted by jpw at 2018-04-14 02:48 PM | Reply

Danni,

Do you really think they're being split to give the Dems the advantage?

#3 | Posted by jpw at 2018-04-14 02:48 PM | Reply

My block could use two Senators... Why not just make each school district into its own state. 13,000 states, sounds pretty efficient.

#4 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-04-14 03:59 PM | Reply

"Do you really think they're being split to give the Dems the advantage?"

They would be stupid if it didn't cross their mind.

#5 | Posted by danni at 2018-04-14 04:29 PM | Reply

The Senate should have some connection to population regardless of the way it was originally set up. We were a tiny nation at the time, we are a completely different nation today and small minorities in states like Wisconsin should not have equal representation in the Senate with California.

#6 | Posted by danni at 2018-04-14 04:32 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

We were a tiny nation at the time...

Which is why the requirements for amending the Constitution seamed reasonable at the time, but are virtually impossible to meet in today's world.

#7 | Posted by REDIAL at 2018-04-14 04:36 PM | Reply

I don't think this would make any difference as far as federal representation. California would need to officially secede from the union before the smaller states could join and be recognized, and there's no guarantee they would be

#8 | Posted by sentinel at 2018-04-14 05:29 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

"California would need to officially secede from the union before the smaller states could join and be recognized, and there's no guarantee they would be"

I suspect that a post Trump electorate will think very differently about the EC and the vast majority will want to eliminate it. Yesterday's missile attacks might just be the beginning of that change in opinion. Russia is going to respond, then what?

#9 | Posted by danni at 2018-04-14 05:50 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

I wonder if Southern California and "California" know where their water comes from. SF does not require the financial resources of the other two, but Bakersfield and SD do need the natural resources from the North.

Do it. Let the other two grow cactus and flush their toilet once per day all while watching their costs increase.

#10 | Posted by worldasifindit at 2018-04-14 05:55 PM | Reply

California would need to officially secede from the union...

Alas, the Constitution does not allow that.

#11 | Posted by REDIAL at 2018-04-14 06:11 PM | Reply

#5 a venture capitalist who supports school vouchers. Yeah I'm sure he's in the bag for Dems.

#12 | Posted by jpw at 2018-04-14 06:31 PM | Reply

Based on the 2016 POTUS election map it looks like the split would make one solid red state, one solid blue state and a competitive state.

#13 | Posted by jpw at 2018-04-14 06:32 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

After about ten years they'll wonder why their standard of living is in the tank.

#2 | POSTED BY JPW

For millions it is already in the tank

California is far and away the king of welfare states: www.marketwatch.com

Then there are the tens of thousands of middle class citizens fleeing the state already every year because of current state of affairs in the state.

Want to talk about the ever growing homeless population next?

#14 | Posted by Kaikane at 2018-04-14 07:10 PM | Reply

"Alas, the Constitution does not allow that."

I don't think this is actually in the Constitution....

#15 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-04-14 07:18 PM | Reply

I don't think this is actually in the Constitution....

Hence the Civil War.

#16 | Posted by REDIAL at 2018-04-14 07:20 PM | Reply

"California is far and away the king of welfare states: www.marketwatch.com"

California may have more people on welfare but it still contributes more to the federal government than do the red states and is still a net positive in contributions to that federal government unlike almost all of the red states.

#17 | Posted by danni at 2018-04-14 07:28 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Russia is going to respond, then what?"

Got a funny flag.

Just wondering, when Russia does will the person who did that funny flag identify theirself? Do you honestly believe Putin won't?

#18 | Posted by danni at 2018-04-14 07:32 PM | Reply

For millions it is already in the tank

So by all means tank it for the rest, right?

#19 | Posted by jpw at 2018-04-14 07:37 PM | Reply

will the person who did that funny flag identify theirself?

Kaikane. You can actually look them up.

#20 | Posted by REDIAL at 2018-04-14 07:38 PM | Reply

#14 raw dollar amounts are impressive but what's the per capita?

Because even your linked article points out that the highest spenders are the most heavily populated.

#21 | Posted by jpw at 2018-04-14 07:50 PM | Reply

#18, I was almost tempted to mark it funny myself, not because there's anything funny about the situation with Russia but because you think it has anything to do with the electoral college or have any effect on it. If Russia does attack, the country is more likely to focus on them than they are on Trump.

Anyway, I thought this thread was originally more about representation in congress and the pipe dream of California having six senators than it was about the EC.

#22 | Posted by sentinel at 2018-04-14 07:54 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

"If Russia does attack, the country is more likely to focus on them than they are on Trump."

Yeah, in the same way when Bush invaded Iraq America focused on Saddam more than the stupidity of the invasion. In the end the stupidity proved to be the far more important topic.
Trump's missile shots into Syria will be viewed historically as unimportant but the reaction to them will be quite consequential. And please tell me, what do you think those missiles accomplished? Do you think they are going to change Assad's behavior?

#23 | Posted by danni at 2018-04-15 09:18 AM | Reply

Anyway, I thought this thread was originally more about representation in congress and the pipe dream of California having six senators than it was about the EC.

#22 | Posted by sentinel at 2018-04-14 07:54 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

I think it's clear this is about several things: 1) Break the hold of the large population centers like LA and SF over state politics; 2) through the previous, to help break the influence of California on national regulations/business, such as the emissions regulations on cars; 3) create a reliably "red" state within the Electoral College and the Senate, as well as open up some contested seats/EC votes in another; 4) further dilute the influence of the large population centers in national politics - that is, create more low-density states to further unbalance the EC versus population; and 5) also dilute the large population centers influence in the House, since they are unlikely to increase the size of the House sufficiently to re-balance the representation.

In the end, it looks to me like an effort by Republicans to break up a reliably Democratic state to weaken the Democratic party in both sate-level and national politics. It wouldn't be much different from a proposal to break NYC off from the rest of NY. I haven't done the math, but my suspicion is the proposed boundaries would further empower low-density population areas where Republicans believe they will have more influence. It opens California's EC votes up to challenge without dividing the votes for a reliably-Republican state like TX. The biggest EC prize now becomes TX, and it's not turning "blue" any time soon.

This looks a lot like the redistricting fights - attempts to divide the population in such a way as to dilute the power of a particular group or groups in favor of a different group. "Big data" statistics used to political advantage.

#24 | Posted by StatsPlease at 2018-04-15 11:06 AM | Reply

California is HUGE. From the map, I can imagine the central coastal region having a common political agenda. Even LA and and Bay Area share common problems, but not with the Northeast Sierras, Northwest Coast or Central Valley.

Meanwhile, the water crisis compounds as California's population just keeps growing. My Father's $11,000 house in Cupertino goes for $2 million now. His house mortgage was $80/month. The economy serves only paper shufflers in finance, insurance and real estate.

#25 | Posted by bayviking at 2018-04-15 12:03 PM | Reply

Need to break up the republic of Texas into 3 states.... or they can secede.

#26 | Posted by aborted_monson at 2018-04-15 07:44 PM | Reply

"Yeah, in the same way when Bush invaded Iraq America focused on Saddam more than the stupidity of the invasion. In the end the stupidity proved to be the far more important topic."

What does Bush's invasion of Iraq have to do with a scenario where a country like Russia attacks us? Anyway, you're even wrong about that, since America reelected in Bush in spite of his incompetence in the Iraq invasion.

"Trump's missile shots into Syria will be viewed historically as unimportant but the reaction to them will be quite consequential. And please tell me, what do you think those missiles accomplished? Do you think they are going to change Assad's behavior?"

What were the other options? Besides do nothing or take Assad out? Which are you advocating?

#27 | Posted by sentinel at 2018-04-16 01:40 AM | Reply

So once again we would give the northern California conservative minority 2 more senate seats.

#28 | Posted by hatter5183 at 2018-04-16 03:28 AM | Reply

This will never ever happen.

I'm guessing this goes does down in flames: 95-5% at very best.

#29 | Posted by Sycophant at 2018-04-16 12:30 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2018 World Readable

Drudge Retort