SixCalifornias - initiative to create six states

http://sixcalifornias.info/

by ca98am79 • 13 years ago

25 55 13 years ago

sixcalifornias.info

Sharlin• 13 years ago

Why?

jaibot• 13 years ago

12 Senators, for a start.

rtkwe• 13 years ago

Which would bring them closer into line with the representation, in terms of electoral and Congressional representation, people in smaller states get.

notacoward2• 13 years ago

Which is exactly why it will never happen. Those over-represented tiny states will oppose it by every means, fair or foul, and there's simply no way that anyone else will find the change desirable enough to join the fight on California's side.

vladd• 13 years ago

In Switzerland, some cantons (their equivalent of a state) decided to split. Before they had 2 votes each in the Council of States; after the split, each half-canton got 1 vote each - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cantons_of_Switzerland#Half-can... .

It would be fair to split California into 2 and then each half would get 1 senator. Otherwise you might try to play the population card, but other states would need to approve (or could veto) the process.

vezzy-fnord• 13 years ago

Elaborate false flag operation to destroy Silicon Valley, of course.

At least, that's what would likely happen if this ever passed. Which it probably won't.

dragonwriter7• 13 years ago

Why?

Create more influence points for business to target, and make it more geographically convenient to play them against each other.

Also, increase the proportion of Republican-majority states, which helps tip the balance of the federal government further to the Right by increasing the structural advantage for Republicans in the Senate and in Presidential elections.

Glyptodon• 13 years ago

I completely agree that California should be broken in to n states, where 2 <= n <= 8.

However, I, and I suspect most people, would draw the lines differently.

In fact, I think most people will agree with the concept of breaking CA into multiple states, but at the same time I think most Californians would rather stay as one state than create new states with boundaries that annoy them.

belluchan3• 13 years ago

California is a beautiful state and I never want to see it broken up. Joshua Trees, Lake Tahoe, the coast of Mendocino, in fact all of Highway 1, Alpine, Torrey Pines, Russia River, the rocky hills of North County San Diego, Red Woods and Big Sur, San Francisco, Balboa Park, White Sands, Death Valley, and on and on. The many missions. The many universities.

Between Hollywood and Silicon Valley, California touches more minds and hearts than any other place in the world.

This state is amazing, so diverse and rich in culture. This six state initiative is such an embarrassment. People that advocate something like this are so out of touch with reality. The New York Times brought this up when they were referring to the weird rich kids that live in the bay area. I'd support California becoming it's own sovereign state before I'd support breaking it up.

oinksoft• 13 years ago

That's all this is, a thinly veiled attempt at keeping tax revenues in the Valley. And the plan is totally impractical given how the state manages its water supply; questions of water supply will keep the state united (unless the northern parts were to dry up in coming decades).

natrius• 13 years ago

If some of the split states will have money but others will have water, that sounds like a problem trade was invented to solve.

protomyth• 13 years ago

The only real benefit I see with the plan is forcing some of the water issues. It would be nice to see some desalination plants pop up to handle the costal city water so the agriculture can be preserved.

Xdes2• 13 years ago

Breaking up the state will provide better democratic representation.

belluchan3• 13 years ago

I'm not sure how that couldn't be an argument to break up all the large states. It would just turn the senate into another house of representatives.

And it's a weird way to fix the senate if you wanted it to be fixed. You should instead get the congress to move over to a parliamentary system where all percentages of votes are counted instead of a plurality takes all. You could ask for more senators. And then you will not be breaking up my home state with these outsider ideas. All of these solutions are about as likely to pass: nil chance. And I'll fight tooth and nail to keep help keep this state together.

someguyonhn7• 13 years ago

Breaking up the state might provide more representation on the federal level. I disagree that it would be better. Also, I don't know if anyone has considered this but, nothing is stopping California from creating six separate localities with their own "governors" and laws under the California umbrella (sort of like mini states within the state).

dragonwriter7• 13 years ago

Adopting a sane electoral system (i.e., not FPTP in single-member districts) will do that. Breaking the state up will not in any significant way do that.

halostatue• 13 years ago

Maybe locally—but nationally, it will reduce California’s voice to an infinitesimal one.

I have a hunch that this is something that Koch allies and the RNC would love to see, as it would mean that a fairly-reliable blue state (with a lot of EVs) would become two smaller blue states and four red states.

This makes even less sense than Prop 13, and will have a substantially worse effect.

carsongross2• 13 years ago

Yes. We must preserve diversity... by crushing it under a single government. Power to the people... the people in Sacramento, am I right?

Keep on trying to control the frame ("weird rich kids", "embarrassment", "hearts and minds"). We've reached peak centralization. The future is decentralization, subsidiary, and localized control.

someguyonhn7• 13 years ago

Everyone already has a lot of localized control. That's how America, and most individualized states, are set up. I assume by control you mean representation. Are you arguing that the representation within the state isn't good enough? If so there are other avenues to fix that problem, such as changing the state legislature where most of the laws that affect the day to day lives of Californians come from, to be more representative. I can't see how creating five new states solves any control or representation problem.

belluchan3• 13 years ago

I'm not sure you actually made a cogent argument I can respond to. The future is whatever we make it to be, and I don't like your vision of the future, and you aren't very good at convincing me to see the merits of what you want. What you want seems to be standard troglodyte big government is bad. This state has its many issues, but it also has many pluses and ruining its identity so you can build your libertarian dream state has already been tried in New Hampshire. It didn't work out.

abdophoto• 13 years ago

Couldn't agree more. Well said.

codereflection• 13 years ago

As someone who grew up in California, and lived there for a total of 31 years, I couldn't agree more.

maxerickson• 13 years ago

Do you think it impossible for such a change to result in the same regional California but more functional government?

I've been places where township governments were basically just an extra layer underneath the county (providing little more than redundant obstruction). I can imagine voices in these townships reaching for similar arguments about how beautiful the township is and how change is bad.

smtddr• 13 years ago

I already debated this before... https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6940199

I hope this doesn't pass because I know how the lines will be drawn. The rich, privileged will be grouped together and will take advantage of the poor.

javert• 13 years ago

The poor have nothing for the rich and privileged to take advantage of. It can only ever happen in the other direction.

dragonwriter7• 13 years ago

So, labor is a new concept to you?

logfromblammo4• 13 years ago

Well, there is probably a greater cultural gap between San Francisco and Los Angeles than exists between Fargo and Little Rock. And I do have a preference for smaller and more responsive polities.

But with my foil hat on, I realize that this is a play by non-Californians to manipulate national politics at the expense of the states. I'll only support it if they do California, Texas, Florida, Illinois, and New York at the same time.

psuter• 13 years ago

I find the idea that political and cultural boundaries should align to be a very sad and unimaginative one.

(Not suggesting you hold an opposite view.)

sp3322• 13 years ago

How else could you do it? Tax only the people in favor of infrastructure improvements and prevent everyone else from using them? Only arrest people using recreational drugs if they voted against legalization?

someguyonhn7• 13 years ago

I agree entirely. I like the fact that as a nation and even in most localities there are people with diverse views, backgrounds, etc. and we all have to figure out how to make this whole living together thing work (or move).

I don't think there's an example of a place that attempted to align in such a way and magically it worked. Even within places where people agree broadly about the role of government, etc. Such as NYC. There are always the same disagreements about how we run the way we live, such as the NYC mayoral primary that happened in 2013.

IvyMike2• 13 years ago

cultural gap between San Francisco and Los Angeles

I'm curious as to what you think this gap is.

logfromblammo4• 13 years ago

Ethnic makeup and degree of local homogeniety. Urban density. Use of public transportation. Historical points of interest. Dominant industries. Automobile culture. Access to green space. Consumer habits. Weather patterns. Air quality. Even the color of the surrounding landscape is different. Is it not clear to you that they just "feel" like completely different places, and that different kinds of people live there?

someguyonhn7• 13 years ago

I find it really odd that anyone would actually think something like this would work. Firstly, California would have to agree to break itself into 6 states. Even if that happened, those six states, which as far as America is concerned are still all part of California, would then need to convince Congress (which are the representatives of the rest of the country with a disproportionate representation of tiny states) to allow them to join the Union. Asking Congress to let 5 extra states join the Union is pretty much asking every state if it's cool that California gets 10 new Senators and 5 new Congressman. It seems odd that anyone would think Congress would be okay with that, especially when it doesn't seem to benefit the country at all.

I also think it's funny that they've hired a PR firm[1] that handles "luxury hotels and resorts"[2], and "Luxury Real Estate Developments and Private Residence Clubs"[2] to contact for information. I can't think of any successful, attempting to be grassroots movement, created to try to improve the lives of others, that hired a PR firm from the start.

[1] - The for press inquiries link at the bottom of their landing page [2] - The PR company's clients section http://www.seahorsepr.com/clients/clients.htm

krupan• 13 years ago

I grew up in Washington state and there were periodic calls to divide it vertically down the middle so that those in the (less populous) eastern (largely Republican) half of the state could be more independent of the (more populous, largely Democrat) western half of the state. The kicker was the proposed name for the new state: Lincoln.

ds9• 13 years ago

To clarify, under that proposal, the "new" state (Lincoln) would be the eastern one and the western one would be still called Washington. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lincoln_%28proposed_Northweste...

lurkinggrue• 13 years ago

This is such a bad idea! Water rights anyone?

dragonwriter7• 13 years ago

Yeah, that's one area where this would be the opposite of local control, as it would essentially federalize the California water issues that aren't already federal (since interstate compacts must be approved by Congress.)

cobolorum• 13 years ago

ITT: people who believe there is a difference between Republicans and Democrats.

jack-r-abbit• 13 years ago

I could see (but not really support) a reasonable argument for making a North California & South California. It is a pretty big land mass with a large population. But I think 6 is overkill.

SixCalifornias - initiative to create six states

Related Stories