Third time's the charm:
A California technology billionaire said on Thursday that his longtime and perhaps quixotic effort to partition the Golden State into multiple new states could soon be put before voters.Venture capitalist Tim Draper said he had gathered about 600,000 signatures on a petition to put his proposal to divide California on the November ballot, more than the 366,000 needed to qualify. It is his third attempt to get voters to weigh in on his call to break up the most populous U.S. state.Draper, who in 2014 and 2016 failed in his efforts to win approval for a ballot initiative to divide the state into six parts, said in a news release Thursday that he planned to file the signatures with election officials next week.[...] To go into effect, California would first have to certify the signatures that Draper has gathered, and then voters in November would need to pass the measure. After that, the U.S. Congress would have to approve it.
A California technology billionaire said on Thursday that his longtime and perhaps quixotic effort to partition the Golden State into multiple new states could soon be put before voters.
Venture capitalist Tim Draper said he had gathered about 600,000 signatures on a petition to put his proposal to divide California on the November ballot, more than the 366,000 needed to qualify. It is his third attempt to get voters to weigh in on his call to break up the most populous U.S. state.
Draper, who in 2014 and 2016 failed in his efforts to win approval for a ballot initiative to divide the state into six parts, said in a news release Thursday that he planned to file the signatures with election officials next week.
[...] To go into effect, California would first have to certify the signatures that Draper has gathered, and then voters in November would need to pass the measure. After that, the U.S. Congress would have to approve it.
Also at The Mercury News and SFGate.
Secessionists Formally Launch Quest for California's IndependenceCalifornia Secession Leader has Russian TiesCalexit: the "Bad Boys of Brexit" Throw Their Weight Behind Move to Split State
This is not gonna happen. It's probably never gonna happen.
The three-state solution isn't even the optimal solution from a Balkanization perspective -- the optimal solution is a 2-state solution with a narrow coastal strip from South L.A. up to Oregon serving as the liberal paradise where all the bums and illegal aliens will be shipped-to and cared-for.
The three-state solution is a compromise to benefit Democratic voters, from a representation perspective, a lot more than my proposed two-state solution does but is decent enough if you're from South California. If you're from Redding or Alturas, tough shit, you might as well be the Bay Area. Your nice forests and big trucks would see even more hipster faggot tourist scum.
> where all the bums and illegal aliens will be shipped-to and cared-for.
The illegal aliens are mostly employed in the deep-red agricultural counties inland. They can't afford the coast (except Oxnard)
Silicon valley seems to have a culture of indentured servitude all its own. Californian blues don't get a free pass on this one, especially since at least aggie scum at least try to arrange some kind of housing for their "seasonal" workers.
Well, I doubt that your average 'illegal' Silicon Valley landscaper/poolboy/nanny is homeless either. In fact I'll bet ya that the blues treat their slaves much better than your red aggie scumballs do. And besides, fuck all this 'illegal' bullshit. People have a natural right to migrate to wherever the food is. California is a symbiotic state. One part won't do so well without the others. This is just greedy people trying to hoard money/resources for themselves. Fuck them! We need less borders, not more!
This symbiotic state has an economy that drives the rest of the inbred fat ass states regardless of the immigration issue that seems to bother everyone else in the nation but is a general non issue in California. Aside from NY and Texas, most other states are bland pools of ineptitude driven by federal handouts and pork secured by their greedy reps in Washington. California drives the tech industries, runs with the head of the pack in agriculture, provides healthcare, and a better education to anyone that shows up in a manner that exceeds just about anywhere. That is not to say there aren't problems, like every where else, but I agree more borders isn't going to do anything but make it easier for those cheating to exploit.
Man, am I glad Archfield is here. Never thought that fuck face knew what was up.
at least aggie scum at least try to arrange some kind of housing for their "seasonal" workers.
Yeah, well, I was only contesting your assertion that the blue suburban 'illegals' are any worse off than the ones out there on the plantation doing what should be done by a damn machine... The bullshit spreads very evenly in my view. And since we can only measure things by degree, the aggie scum belongs just a little deeper in the pits of hell. But, who knows? Maybe picking grapes really is better than dealing with a bratty six year old and watering the petunias (and getting a little action while hubby's at work) The things is that the bears will put up with a lot of bee stings to get to the honey. Why people blame them, I'll never fathom. It's a dead cat. So what?
So now you contradict yourself. Your brain must finally be starting the long slide into alcoholic dementia.
I missed you too Ethanol. You're like the inbred Indian cousins I have in Oklahoma.
"Always Two there are, a Master Troll and an apprentice. Fear leads to anger, Anger leads to hate, hate leads to the alt-right side. Do not go to the dank side, the Cake is a Lie!" Jedi Master Yoda
As a Sandy Eggin I applaud anything that gets me away from the Frisco/LA braintrust.
Then again, when I add up the pluses and minuses of both parties, both parties get a No Vote. They both suck 90% of the time, I'm stuck with figuring which 10% I'm willing to hold my nose for.
A bus will do that for you. Just head east until they check your skin color against a Pantone swatch.
Not sure what you are seeing, but SF , and everything north would gladly see the LA area back to Mexico, and the people in LA barely acknowledge the rest of the world even exists. The further north you go in California the more pronounced the disgust for Southern Cali becomes.
Patience patience... San Andreas will take care of everything.
This is gonna happen. If not three new states then six or more. The 38 million people of California have the same two senators as 600,000 or 700,000 people in Wyoming and North Dakota. Time for "Fair and Balanced"
Howdya like those apples.
The 38 million people of California have the same two senators as 600,000 or 700,000 people in Wyoming and North Dakota.
That's exactly how the Senate is supposed to work. The House of Representatives is supposed to have (relatively) proportional representation based on population.
The Senate is where all states are equal. If you don't like it then move to a different state, but don't move to TX or NY or FL or PA or ...
Howdya like those apples.
Go for it.
Sometimes I get the idea that khallow is not a Montanan. That is OK, not everyone can be, because it is a rather elite group. But then I start to think that khallow is not even a Wyomingite, which is well below a Montanan, somewhere down in the "James Watt" or "Dick 'Dick' Cheney", or his useless daughter [note to Soylentils: nothing good ever came out of Wyoming, except women's right to vote!] level. So, khallow, being as you are a FRICKING CALIFORNICATOR!!!. Someone would have to actually be from the intermountain West, an actual homeboy of the Rocky Fucking Mountains, to understand just how hard and viciously I have just dissed the khallow. You are a Californian, an immigrant, a carpet-bagger. A purchaser of 20 acre "horse ranches", one of the bastards that is responsible for driving up property prices to the level that no honest rancher or farmer could actually make a living.
So, being Greek of extrordinary longevity, I have had the opportuity to be present for many of the events you Soylentils regard as "history". But, you know, people actually lived the history you might later study. In this case, during the Great Depression, cattle ranches in the west no longer could make a profit. So they did something like Facebook did: they switched from running cattle, to running dudes. Yes, in the Great Depression, Dude Ranching saved many a spread.
Now the difference is that now the "dudes" actually buy property, whether in such dens of scum and villainy and Big Mountain skiiing as the Whitefish, or the equally perverse "Big Sky" offerings close to some place close to skiiing and Yellowstone, but not actually, you know, close. Montana is fricking Huge, for those of you from Mykonos or New Jersey.
So this is why khallow argues in bad faith. He is the "Whitewater" of the Clintons, the Atlantic City of the Donald, the Tulip futures market of the market that had no future. And to think he wanted me to rent his backhoe! Mendacity, khallow! Lies and untruths! Intentionally incorrect facts! Bubble-fed libertariantard ideological pablum. Perhaps, forsooth, we ought to divide the crumulent and naturally fissured khallow into at least the three states, of the United States, that he has claimed residence in. For tax purposes only, of course, because no one expects
The Violent Imposition!!!In fact, those who do expect it, . . . oh, bugger off, come in again.
The Violent Imposition!!!
In fact, those who do expect it, . . . oh, bugger off, come in again.
So this is why khallow argues in bad faith.
Nothing before that sentence or after was relevant to that assertion. This is what actual bad faith rhetoric looks like.
You mistake humor for bad faith rhetoric. No surprise, being a bot you have a really hard time parsing language that doesn't fit the heuristic patterns you were programmed with.
Obviously you weren't created with Asimov's 3 laws or you wouldn't be capable of spreading harmful bullshit.
You mistake humor for bad faith rhetoric.
What's humorous about it? I grant it could be a bad faith argument masquerading as humor. We see that a lot here.
Is Aristarchus Proof that CWD or mad cow disease is loose in the general public in Montana ? I can almost see the foam on his post, and it wanders in circles like you'd expect the infected animal to do :)
That strip would have to skip over Orange County. It's on the coast.
But there is some precedent for discontiguous states: Michigan's upper peninsula in my understanding lives in a whole different world all unto itself.
Washington State has a little itty bit like that except it's even more drastic -- you have to cross an international border twice to get there.
better map, but you'll have to zoom out manually: https://duckduckgo.com/?q=point+roberts&t=lm&ia=web&iaxm=about [duckduckgo.com]
The Canadian Army turned it over to the US Army when we established our current border.
Vancouver British Columbia was founded much later when this cool frood by the name of Gassy Jack decided that it would be a good place to build a whiskey bar.
He was called "Gassy" because he liked to talk at length while standing atop a whiskey barrel. There's a sculpture of him doing that in today's Gastown.
the optimal solution is a 2-state solution with a narrow coastal strip from South L.A. up to Oregon serving as the liberal paradise
... and the rest would become the poorest state in the nation.
Not if you plan to keep eating.Sonoma Valley, Salinas Valley, San Joaquin Valley, Napa Valley, Central Valley, Coachella Valley, Imperial Valley
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
Splitting doesn't mean trade stops.
Pretty sure that's what I said.
Nice to have you back. :)
There is no way this is possible. California overall trends substantially democratic, so the outcome would be something like "create 2 Democratic leaning states, and 1 Republican leaning state." Would any Republican in the US Senate let that happen?
Alternatively, the outcome would be something like "create 2 Republican leaning states, and 1 Democratic leaning state." Would any Democrat in the US Senate let that happen?
This sounds like a "Texas Independence" type thing... a very Quixotic quest which defies even a superficial reality check. (On the other hand, the same could have been said for a certain recent presidential election.)
Actually what Ethanol-Fueled suggested does make the most likely solution to avoid the deadlock you suggest.
Take a look at this: http://abc30.com/politics/red-vs-blue-california-election/398766/ [abc30.com] The people are already split that way.
Both parts would scream gerrymandering, but they would balance each other out, and nullify that argument.
There is no north vs south split that makes sense, either into two states or three, because of San Francisco and LA would dominate what ever half they were in.Better to leave those two together (they deserve each other).
Imperial county being blue comes as no surprise (we at one time and maybe still now boasted 25% unemployment, the highest rate of teen pregnancy, and one of the most polluted waterways of North America), but Riverside? Come on, you're all White retired military living in McMansions and blowing your VA checks at the local bar all day every day.
Who in Riverside is letting all the Zetas and Sinaloas vote?
LA is going to be its own state. That's the one they have penciled in as "California." I would call it Los Angeles. The State of Los Angeles. That one will start out blue. Not great for me, personally. Because of Trump National Los Angeles. But maybe, probably, we can turn it red. By moving very strongly against the illegals there.
Southern California is going to have San Diego, Riverside, Fresno and Orange County. A beautiful red state.
Northern California, that one will have San Francisco. So it'll be another blue state, right? WRONG! Because it's going to have 39 other counties. And so many of those other counties are very red. They supported me very strongly in 2016. Even with all the dirty tricks the California Dems pulled in that election.
This is coming up for a vote in November. Let's hope it passes. Let's do everything we can. So a Republican Congress gets to vote on it. And I'll get to sign it. I love signing documents! And I'll be waiting, pen in hand. Pen in hand, folks.
You're not the first to think of that.One guy's equal-population senatorial map. [archive.li]
Southern California is going to have [...] Fresno
You're really lousy at geography.
...and the linked map suggests The State of Orange (County).
Would any Republican in the US Senate let that happen?
I don't know, maybe because they don't have a majority after the next senate election?
Keep dreaming, I love our beautiful dreamers. Even the Australian ones.
If your HORRIBLE dream -- for Americans it's a nightmare -- comes true, we can still have Three Californias. Because the election for the Senate and the election for Three Californias are the same election. First Tuesday in November. But we keep all our Senators & Representatives -- except the ones who quit or die -- until January 20. The VERY CROOKED California government gives itself 30 days to certify the results of elections. So even if California drags its heels, we have more than a month to bring it to Congress. To our terrific Republican Congress. And maybe Congress can vote on it before it's certified or even before the election! Our lawyers are gonna look into all the legal. Believe me, we have some tremendous lawyers. The most loyal & smartest.
Not that I disagree with any of your points, but how can it not happen? 90% of California voted Trump. Mile after mile, basically every single country in california feels neglected by their state leadership. How is any government, or political party going to prevent millions of people over hundreds of thousands of square miles from seeking representation?
Politics and political parties are powerful in the States, but are they really more powerful than all the people combined?
> 90% of California voted Trump.
*citation needed*By square mileage ?
Because two thirds of the human beings who qualify and bothered to show up voted D. I'm pretty sure that's what we count.
The problem is that tolerance and understanding is really 1-sided.
The conservative rural people (deplorables) are well aware of the festering cities. This is where they must go for serious airports, advanced medical treatment, large universities, and so on. City life, and especially city values, are featured in most media.
The liberal city people (degenerates) are mostly ignorant of rural life. A small portion of them venture out for stuff like skiing, where they mostly encounter other liberal city people like themselves. Whenever rural life supposedly makes it into the media, it is a caricature based on the prejudices of the liberal city people. It's stuff like "squeal like a pig" in Deliverance, which is actually far more likely in LA.
So we have a bunch of liberal city people making laws that severely affect the people they despise. The city folk literally don't give a shit how much the rural folk are suffering.
I'm sure it seems fine when you are on the winning side. To understand better, picture people like Steve Bannon and Ted Cruz and Sarah Palin (and of course Donald Trump) in every seat of power in your state. No, that isn't enough. They would leave you the option to NOT carry a gun, the option to bake cakes for gay couples, and the option to use a public school. Make it more extreme, taking all that away, and you'll get the idea.
As a rural liberal, I see this divide pretty clearly although to be fair, there is enough shade thrown in both directions to keep Mordor dark for ages, but the core of what you say is true. City-folk can't really comprehend the needs of rural areas, and rural areas can't really comprehend the issues in the cities. It might be for the best to split CA into a number of states (an even number though, designed so that neither side gains some advantage through national gerrymandering).
I want to believe you're trying to be informative. Yet, you've gone so far in your caricature that you negate your point.
It turns out, bear with me on this, that most people, on both sides - fine people on both sides -, do not have an extreme opinion on most of those matters that politicians and media constantly drum up in order to divide us.It also turns out, quite amazingly, that most people setting up rules one way or another, at all levels, do understand that there are people with different opinions, or adversely affected in their habits, by the consequences of the aforementioned rules.
You are ruining their circle-jerk, what kind if minster are you? Can't you let this strange fusion of politics and sexual repression at least get off before you ruin the mood?
In California they count human beings. They let millions of illegals vote. And that's why I lost in California. In the other states, they count CITIZENS. And I won OVERWHELMINGLY there. If they counted citizens in California, I would have won there. Overwhelmingly!!!!
There has yet to be any proof that illegals voted, much less in any great numbers. Get a grip Trumpelstiltskin. I am a part time Californian and yes there are a lot of immigrants, undoubtedly many are illegal but the hype spread by the administration and their tame media is based on hugely manipulated numbers, and the immigrants generally work hard and keep their heads down. If the Feds would get THEIR heads out of their collective asses and do even the most basic job at the border things would get better fast.
Are you expecting millions of people to line up in front of you, each swearing an oath that they committed this felony, and each presenting you with a notarized admission, and each providing unedited video of them casting the vote?
We've caught and convicted multiple people. We know that California gives driver licenses to illegal aliens, and we know that California automatically registers people with driver licenses. Some of the more honest non-citizens (for example, a Chinese student on a student visa) have reported getting automatically registered. We know that there were counties with more voters than people who should be eligible to vote.
Also, it isn't just about them voting. California has several extra people in the US House of Representatives due to illegal aliens. They get counted in the census you see, and that adjusts the representation. This wrongly diminishes the influence of legitimate Americans in other states.
We're going to put a question back on the Census, that we used to have when America was great (1950). Are you a United States citizen? Very simple. Then we can do the House of Reps & Electoral College according to HOW MANY CITIZENS. Not human beings!
There is no way this is possible. California overall trends substantially democratic, so the outcome would be something like "create 2 Democratic leaning states, and 1 Republican leaning state." Would any Republican in the US Senate let that happen?
I'm not convinced. Turning one democratic state into two democratic states and one republican state would not increase the size of a democratic majority in the senate or reduce the size of a republican one. If you have a 40/60 split in the current situation then it would become a 41/61 split afterwards. Whichever party had a majority would still have a majority, but it would increase the chance of one of the 3 Californias becoming a swing state and give both parties a chance to turn that into a 21 or 19-seat majority.
This Draper guy who's been pushing this for the past 15 years is just another right-wing huckster. He raises money and pushes this nonsense every election season. There is no appetite for dividing California.
If you go to the guy's website, it reads like one of those Microsoft sample websites with Latin place-holder text. Draper has his little grift going and he knows it won't happen, but grifters gotta grift.
> There is no appetite for dividing California.> Their have been over 200 serious proposals to divide.> 90% of the current counties in California are ruled over by a governor they voted against.
90% of the current counties in California are ruled over by a governor they voted against.
90% of current counties in California are practically empty.
Jerry Brown has a 65% approval rating in California. If Trump had numbers like that, he'd be putting himself on the $100 bill.
Jerry Brown is more popular in California than Ronald Reagan ever was.
It looks like there was enough appetite to get the required signatures, and then some.
There are 40 million Californians. He claims to have 600,000 signatures.
You do the math. Does that indicate enough appetite for this proposition to pass? Especially in a year where people from coast to coast are seemingly saying (with their votes) that they've had just about enough of these right-wing jackoffs. I don't think so. Not that I'm opposed to there being now 4 Democratic senators from California, but even people I know in Fresno and Bakersfield don't want this. The last thing they need is to go from living in the most prosperous state in the US to one of the poorest, which is what they'd be.
How many miilions of signatures do they need to collect for you to be impressed? There will always be an order of magnitude less signatures than votes.
How many miilions of signatures do they need to collect for you to be impressed?
They've gotten enough signatures to get on the ballot before. And the proposition was crushed.
Signing a petition is one thing, but voting is another.
As I said, Californians do not have any appetite to actually split up the state. It's just a scam.
By the way, the last time Draper pulled this grift, he got something like 1.5 million signatures. Of course, most of them were bogus and fell off in the challenge, but the fact that he's only presenting 600k this time around is an indication of just how badly his hustle is failing.
Oh, and the last time, his master plan was to divide California into SIX states.
As I've said, grifters gonna grift.
Believe me, Tim is no dummy. He's very smart. You've heard of Hotmail. Maybe you've heard of Skype? Those were him. He didn't start them, he made them successful. Because he invented Viral Marketing. He's a HUGE Venture Capitalist. He founded the Draper University of Heroes. And he won the World Entrepreneurship Forum’s Entrepreneur for the World award!!!!
Jerry Brown is a fucking lunatic and the majority of middle class tax payers know this. I'm not linking his policies, when late '70s ridicule from the left will do. [google.com] Yes, gen X covered this. [youtube.com]
Jerry Brown is a fucking lunatic and the majority of middle class tax payers know this.
Jerry Brown has a 65% approval rating here in California. He's more popular than Arnold, more popular than Ronald Reagan.
He's over 60% with the "middle-class", too. People in California love him. He's really popular here.
California is a disaster. I proclaimed it a MAJOR DISASTER. Governor Jerry “Moonbeam” Brown pardoned 5 criminal illegal aliens whose crimes include (1) Kidnapping and Robbery (2) Badly beating wife and threatening a crime with intent to terrorize (3) Dealing drugs. Is this really what the great people of California want? @FoxNews [twitter.com]
If they broke up California where would the vampire farms in the imperial valley get their water from ? It is only the fact that the LA area is able to control the vote that they have the ability to continue to siphon away the water from Northern California.
your sig made me chuckle.
Thanks, but refer to an old journal entry of mine. I use a similar sig on my email, and I got a surprise visit from the local PD when my credit union rep saw the sig and panicked.
First, the evil way: they may have permanent water rights that the supreme court would agree with.
Second, the business way: pay money.
>>to break up the most populous U.S. state.
Just wait for the BIG earthquake: it will either break up along it's own way, or it won't be the most populous state anymore.
Either way, it's just a matter of time.
I used to have a link to a map that was an animated gif but I lost it some time back. 8-(
The San Andreas is a slip-strike fault (lateral movement).The Pacific Plate is headed for Alaska....but it will be several million years before L.A. is Anchorage-adjacent.
So instead of working together, lets separate everyone and ensure everyone digs into their positions even more.
Look what happened when the 2 parties figured out that they can work together:
The result is out-of-control spending; that's what happens when you organize society around a violently imposed monopoly—opposing groups agree to rape the productive at the point of a gun.
that's what happens when you organize society around a violently imposed monopoly—opposing groups agree to rape the productive at the point of a gun.
Perfect time for comprehensive gun control ???
Big words, but you should learn about them sometime.
Cooperation is an act of each individual's will; anything else is just servitude.
exactly. you have to be a drooling invalid to want cooperation between the degenerate scum in washington.
Instead of California segmenting itself, there should be provisions on the federal level for a maximum state size. I'm biased towards balkanization, so I would probably suggest 5% total population. The top states by population are: (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territories_by_population)
California - 12%Texas - 9%Florida - 6%New York - 6%Pennsylvania - 4%
Only two states have been created by the division of other states: Kentucky and West Virginia. Many of the states were drawn in order to deal with the political issue of slavery. Perhaps with some more mechanical rules in place on what constitutes a state political reasons for a state's creation can be reduced, and we could perhaps focus on the long term issues like culture and economy.
Instead of California segmenting itself, there should be provisions on the federal level for a maximum state size. I'm biased towards balkanization, so I would probably suggest 5% total population.
I agree that it's time to throw out the Constitution and start from scratch. A new constitutional convention should be convened immediately after the November elections.
Now, I have a few questions about your proposal, though. First, what is the difference between segmenting a state and having federal limits on state size? Or are you suggesting we should do away with almost half the population of Texas?
And most important, why would you want this federal limit on the size of a state? Can we also have a minimum size? Like, since Montana has practically nobody in it, can we just combine them with the two Dakotas? They still would have less than 20% of the population of New York City. Or are you suggesting that we force people from populous states to move to less populous ones?