SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
California Supreme Court blocks proposal to split state in 3 from November ballot
The California Supreme Court on Wednesday blocked a proposal that would split the state into three from the November ballot.
The court wrote that it took the step "because significant questions have been raised regarding the proposition's validity and because we conclude that the potential harm in permitting the measure to remain on the ballot outweighs the potential harm in delaying the proposition to a future election."
Last week, an environmental group sued to have the measure removed from the ballot. To substantially alter the state's governance under the California constitution, the group argued, a constitutional convention would need to be called -- and that requires a supermajority of both houses of the state's legislature. A ballot initiative, the group said, was constitutionally insufficient.
See also: Billionaire Tim Draper Abandons Push to Split California Into Three
Asked if he would continue fighting for the measure, Draper said in an email to Bloomberg News that "the same six lawyers are going to make the decision. What would be the point? They have just proven that California has a runaway government and the people have no say."
Draper, a venture capitalist, sought the initiative because he said the world's fifth-largest economy is "nearly ungovernable" under the current system. Asked if there was anything else he planned to do to make the government more accountable, he said he was "still recovering from the shock."
Previously: Proposal to Divide California Into Three States Could Land on the November Ballot
Ballot Measure to Split California Into Three States Will Appear on the November 2018 Ballot
(Score: 4, Insightful) by opinionated_science on Tuesday July 24 2018, @12:24PM (3 children)
the very fact you think red/blue is the reason shows perhaps a lack of understanding.
I saw the map and thought "money".
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 24 2018, @01:21PM (1 child)
The divide has nothing to do with money, unless it's to make sure enough of it, and the people who control it, ends up in all three states.
This is gerrymandering. Silicon Valley is not "Northern California". Cut the state along ideological lines and let the coastal democrats and rural republicans go their own ways. This proposal just found a way to alienate rural voters in three states instead of one.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 24 2018, @04:32PM
California is controlled by democrats who are don't wish to let the republicans leave. Think of the advantages:
1. Democrats always control the vote outcome.
2. Electoral vote totals are based on population.
3. The population happens to include many angry miserable republicans. Ha, ha! Their electoral votes go to people they hate.
If the state were split, national politics would change. Of course, this does not mean that democrats would lose more often. It means that the democratic policy positions would change as required for getting elected in the new reality.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday July 24 2018, @02:28PM
Exactly. There was a grass-roots movement back in the 1940's, where the northern part of California was going to secede from the state. The division line made some kind of sense - the more conservative north, breaking away from the liberal south. Whether one agreed with it or not, it made some kind of sense, for the people.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jefferson_%28proposed_Pacific_state%29 [wikipedia.org]
This three-part division wasn't anything the people thought up, or wanted. It was entirely corporate driven. No people were going to benefit, only corporations, and the top 1% would have derived anything "good" from it.