California Splittin’

We’ll get to vote to break the place up.

19 comments on this post.
  1. David Spain:

    Awesome. And if it passes the rest of US can prevent re-entry into the union until each of the three new non-congressional territories can get their fiscal & regulatory acts in order. I can imagine each new territory sending emissaries to Russia & China to stave off invasion since we are no longer obligated to defend them and their assinine immigration policies. All sorts of fun scenarios to toy with.

    Rand you might not want to be in a big hurry to unload that Florida property. 😉

  2. David Spain:

    And the best scenario of all. As territories we can sell one or all three of them ’em off! Do I have any takers? Habla Espanol? Mexico? Mexico has always thought it belonged to it anyway… Pay for the border wall! Yes!

  3. FC:

    Si se puede! Si, se vende!

  4. Gregg:

    “And if it passes the rest of US can prevent re-entry into the union until each of the three new non-congressional territories can get their fiscal & regulatory acts in order.”

    Sounds like the EU rules. They are not bad rules…but the EU didn’t enforce them. Perhaps we would do better.

  5. Leland:

    I’m not for it as 3 states. There’s enough Dems in NoCal and Cal to give them 2 extra senators. And I’m sure it is gerrymandered enough to give them 2 more in the third state, after all, most of the DACA’s would be in SoCal.

  6. Raoul Ortega:

    Yeah. Need a fourway split, with the Bay Area its own little city-state to prevent it from imposing its sanctimonious stupidity (especially water policy) on the rest of Jefferson.

  7. Fenster314:

    Exactly. That’s why the plan is for 3 states, not two. Dividing the urban areas from the rural would give conservatives rather than the left two additional senators.

  8. Jim Davis:

    I’m curious as to how this would work constitutionally. Historically, states ceded unwanted territory to the federal government. Specifically, some of the original 13 colonies ceded their western territory to the new federal government.

    So I can’t see how California could dictate how many states and with what boundaries they can divide themselves into. All they can do is cede territory to the federal government. The federal government could in turn dispose of the ceded territory as it wished, create new states or offer the territory to existing states.

  9. David Spain:

    I’ll bet many California’s would not have thought they’d be standing on the wrong side of that border wall that Trump get’s Mexico to pay for! LoL!

  10. Raoul Ortega:

    Texas also sold parts of what are now New Mexico and Colorado to the Feds back around 1850.

    Which leads to an interesting idea- why not have California sell off those parts of the state that just don’t have “California Values”, and which are considered financial liabilities, to the Feds? Would help get rid of some of their debt, too.

    Also look into how Maine and West Virginia were formed. Neither was ever a territory. (The original state constitution of the latter specified the name of the new state was “Kanawha” and that has never been amended.)

  11. peterh:

    There’s a clause in the Constitution the prohibits Congress from re-partitioning an existing State except with consent of the State’s legislature. So splitting a State is possible if both Congress and the State agree to the plan.

  12. Thales:

    Yes, which is why the initiative is meaningless. The Dem CA legislature won’t vote to relinquish its monopoly over the rest of the state, to say nothing of giving away electoral votes!

  13. Gregg:

    It’s a nice thought. But I’ve seen referenda passed by a clear majority in states only to be utterly ignored by the legislature.

    For example here in Massachusetts, there was a referendum to end the 5.3% income tax in Massachusetts on wages, interest, dividends and capital gains. Passed 70% to 30%.

    State legislature totally ignored it. Nothing changed.

  14. David Spain:

    I could see it as a reality only if the controlling CA Democrats see it as a way to increase power in DC. A risky proposition as I point out. Otherwise I agree, a non-binding referendum that won’t happen.

  15. Fenster314:

    Oh that’s nothing. Here in California conservative initiatives were passed to limit illegal immigration. They were immediately killed via the California supreme court.

  16. Kol1939:

    I’m looking at Article IV Section 3 of the US Constitution. Consent of Congress’ consent is needed for this to happen. No ?

  17. Rand Simberg:

    Yes. But step one is to get CA to want to do it.

  18. Raoul Ortega:

    Also, there was an attempt to in 1859 to split off the southern part of California and create the Colorado Territory called the Pico Act. Nothing came of it because more pressing issues became apparent over the next couple of years and the attempt was tainted by the supposed support of Southerners who wanted another slave state.

  19. Fenster314:

    The Dems control California in toto, an extra two senators are motivation enough.

Leave a comment