Are You Ready for Six Californias? Plan to Split State Gains Momentum

Reports Reuters:

A long-shot effort to break California into six separate states got a boost on Monday, when the billionaire venture capitalist behind the proposal said he had gathered enough signatures to place it on the ballot in two years.

Timothy Draper, a founder of a Silicon Valley-based venture capital firm that has invested in Twitter, Skype and Tesla, among other companies, has been agitating for months for a ballot initiative to chop the most populous U.S. state into smaller entities.

"It’s important because it will help us create a more responsive, more innovative and more local government, and that ultimately will end up being better for all of Californians," said Roger Salazar, a spokesman for the campaign. "The idea ... is to create six states with responsive local governments - states that are more representative and accountable to their constituents."

Salazar tells Reuters that his group has over 800,000 signatures for the initiative and will be filing them today so the plan comes up for a vote in 2016.

Some details:

One state, to be called Silicon Valley, would include the tech hub along with the San Francisco Bay Area. Jefferson, named after the third U.S. president, would encompass the northernmost region. The state capital of Sacramento would be in North California, while South California would be made up of San Diego and the eastern suburbs of Los Angeles.

L.A. itself would be part of a state called West California.

Read more.

Reason TV's Alex Manning recently reported on ongoing attempts to split part of the Golden State into the State of Jefferson. Watch here and click for full text, resources, and more.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • The Last American Hero||

    Long overdue. Now if we can just merge some of those states in the Northeast to make the State of New England, we won't even have to get new flags.

  • Brian D||

    God, no. We get enough Masshole influence in NH as it is.

  • sarcasmic||

    Fuck no. I imagine northern New Yorkers would be happy to split away from the city. Same with Maine. Northern Maine would happily split from the liberal southern part of the state.

  • Restoras||

    Hell. Yes.

  • Free Society||

    Same with Illinois. Chicago should be it's own little state too, if not we should just nuke it.

  • datcv||

    Or at the very least build a large wall of ice and snow around it.

  • Bobarian||

    With guys dressed in black on top of it to keep anyone from escaping (or running for president).

  • KalkiDas||

    No offense, but that's the worst idea I've heard all day. These small states run just fine and have the governments that work well for them, especially NH. I have no idea on earth why you'd think that's a good idea.

  • MegaloMonocle||

    Two words:

    Fewer Senators.

  • Christophe||

    Just split the states you like more. 8 Texases or something.

    Done.

  • ||

    Can't we just have New England fall into the Ocean instead?

  • Bobarian||

    Give it to Canada?

  • Brian D||

    I'm sure I don't understand CA regional demographics enough, but I'm not sure why Democrats are opposed, since they'd likely gain six solid Team Blue seats in the Senate while conceding 2 or maybe 3 Team Red seats.

  • thom||

    States can't just break up without federal approval. Didn't we fight a war over this?

    Also: Texas.

  • Anonymous Coward||

    States can break up without federal approval. They just can't leave the United States without approval of the other states. Or winning a war with the federal government because "perpetual union."

    See: Texas v. White.

  • thom||

    It's strange then that states haven't tried to strategically break up to control Congress.

  • briannnnn||

    I thought Congress had to approve

  • Free Society||

    They do and they probably won't if Democrats give a fig for their winner-take-all allotment of electoral votes that can be easily counted upon every presidential election.

  • Anonymous Coward||

    You might gain allies in the Senate, but you would shoot yourself in the foot by weakening your overall state's delegation to Congress. There is no guarantee how long the new state and its parent would remain politically aligned.

  • Agammamon||

    Because it would mean that one of the biggest single concentrations of political muscle in the country will get diluted.

    And once out from under the thumb of Sacramento, it will become obvious that huge chunks of CA don't actually like being exsanguinated to 'help the poor'.

  • Hugh Akston||

    Which state will Charming be in? or Sunnydale?

  • robc||

    Speaking of Sunnydale, when Buffy ran away from home and became Anne, do we know what city she was in? Didnt seem very LA like. Ive always figured it was SF.

  • Hugh Akston||

    She was in LA.

  • robc||

    You sure, was that stated?

    She didnt drive, how did you she get to work?

  • Hugh Akston||

    It's definitely LA. First episode of season three if you want to verify it on Netflix.

  • robc||

    wikipedia says you are correct.

  • gimmeasammich||

    +1 Hellmouth.

  • robc||

    It would never happen as no one wants to give them 10 extra senators...but then tLAH solves that problem.

    He truly is a hero.

  • UnCivilServant||

    I want more vertical splits between the coast and the heartland on that map.

  • Scarecrow Repair||

    The biggest flaw I see is that abomination stretching from the coast to Nevada. Marin county is asbolutely part of Silicon Valley. Sacramento is only fucked up because it's the state capitol; it would otherwise just be another central valley cow town. The Tahoe end is touristy but otherwise there aren't enough urbanite full time residents to screw it up.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    I will not be buying new flags, so you better consolidate other states.

  • robc||

    Fist burned by 3 minutes.

    Ouch, that will leave a mark.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    That was supposed to be a reply to Hero. Apparently I haven't worked out the kinks of threading off the first comment yet. It's so unnatural.

  • datcv||

    North & South Dakota

    Wyoming and Montana

    Delaware into Maryland, Sorry Delaware :(
    And while we are at it, DC back to Maryland (they deserve each other), doesn't change the flag count but let's do it anyway

    RI into CT

    West Virginia back into Virginia (dissolve all WV laws).

    Vermont should be let go as freed from the Union (just for funsies).

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Which state would inherit CA's laws and debt obligations?

  • UnCivilServant||

    The new states will be auctioned off to ay the creditors.

  • Almanian!||

    TBD

    Next question!

  • Anonymous Coward||

    Which state would inherit CA's laws and debt obligations?

    The states of Sacramento, Los Angeles, and San Francisco.

  • thom||

    The State of California. It could divest itself of the six states and become a shell state with no assets or territory and completely saddled with debt. It could then declare bankruptcy. Right?

  • silent v||

    South California would be made up of San Diego and the eastern suburbs of Los Angeles.

    I never realized that Orange County was an eastern suburb of LA.

  • Grand Moff Serious Man||

    I'd say most people behind the Orange Curtain would resent that.

    Although without looking at the map it might just refer to the IE.

  • Bobarian||

    The LA Angels of Anaheim has always seemed a huge fuck you to Orange county and the ghost of Gene Autry.

  • On The Road To Mandalay||

    More horse shit from people who have more money than brains.

  • ||

    Dum da dum da tiddly tum.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Hey, how's come Central California is landlocked? They're going to have to wait until the west coast finally slides into the Pacific to get their beachfront property.

    And Silicon Valley? What kind of name is that going to be in one hundred years when we're using polymeric organic circuitry in our bioneural Altavista implants? (That's right, it's going to make a comeback.)

  • UnCivilServant||

    What sort of name is Somerset? Or Provence? Outdated names stick around because they're associated with the place in some way.

  • Almanian!||

    Yeah - look at all the Indian Native 'Murcantown/lake/place names around here. We killed the motherfuckers off - but kept the names.

    Michigan - Gitcheegumee; Potawatamie; Chippewa/Ojibwe; Onandaga; Huron; Iriquois; Mohawk; etc. etc.

    So - kind of like that, right?

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    North Betamax. West HD DVD. New New Coke. You think those states wouldn't look silly today?

  • Almanian!||

    We have always been at war with North Betamax.

  • Hugh Akston||

    The great state of Crystal Pepsi.

  • thom||

    There are places with names like this all over the place. In 200 years people are going to be like "why the fuck is this road named Coca Cola Drive?"

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    Just call it Nerdonia

  • seguin||

    Muskovy

  • seguin||

    The PayPal States

  • NL_||

    Agree that the name will soon peter out. But so have places named for agriculture or resource extraction - Ironton, Coalville, Wheaton, etc. Plus anywhere named for fields or forests that have since been developed. Rhode Island is technically still named for Providence Plantation.

  • Almanian!||

    I used to think the people in the UP (upper peninsula, for you non-MI trolls) who wanted to create their own state ("Superior" and "Wolverine" are two names I've heard proposed).

    Back then I thought they were insane cause, "WHY WOULD ANYONE EVER WANT TO SPLIT FROM ANOTHER STATE MUCH LESS THE USA USA USA? TRADITION! AND HISTORY AND MY OWN IGNORANCE AND STUFF! ALSO - FEELZ!"

    Now, I STILL think they're insane, but for totally different reasons (no economic base - period). But if they wanna try - I'd still visit.

    CA - long overdue. Totally out of scale - unmanageable. Kind of like the whole US, which is why everything should NOT be federalized (federalization of EVERYTHING is the root of many current evils). But that's another, related, story for another time.

  • Free Society||

    "Federalization" implies non-centralized control. I know that the word 'federal' in 100 years will probably be taken to mean central authority, since our federal government is a central government now, but I digress...

  • Almanian!||

    Sorry, yes - I should probably use the term "central gummint" or "national".

    You are correct, sir.

  • Almanian!||

    Um, in the veryy first sentence, needs a "were insane" at the end. "I thought they were insane."

    This is why you should write simple sentences if you're a simple person like me.

    Let that be a lesson to us simpletons.

    That is all.

  • GILMORE||

    You know who else had a plan to redraw all the lines on the map.....?

    MR SHOW, WITH BOB AND DAVID!

  • Libertarian||

    Roosevelt?

  • Almanian!||

    Joe the Cartographer?

  • Francisco d'Anconia||

    The British?

  • UnCivilServant||

    Every kid with a crayon?

  • Bobarian||

    Every partisan committee to redistrict congresssional lines, EVER?

  • Libertarian||

    "It’s important because it will help us create a more responsive, more innovative and more local government, and that ultimately will end up being better for all of Californians," said Roger Salazar, a spokesman for the campaign.

    Of all the justifications, this sounds like the worse.

    Too bad the state isn't already divided up geographically somehow. We could call these divisions "counties" and make them really small so that government could be even more local and more innovative.

  • Tony||

    We're going to have a state in the union called "Silicon Valley"? That's the dumbest thing I've seen all morning.

    This rural Californian butthurt tantrum does illuminate one thing: the arbitrariness of state lines, and thus the limitations of "states' rights." Those of us who live in cities in red states also never get our way at the state level, though we tend to be a little more adult about it.

  • waffles||

    Bullshit Tony. The cities always get their way because they can use local government to establish whatever the city needs. It's the rural folk who get boned in both Red and Blue states.

  • Tony||

    I said we don't get our way at the state level. So 10 Commandments statues and the fist of government up women's skirts all over the place. Cities do manage to produce some amount of civilization and culture by themselves, yes, but the state is run by the hill people.

  • sarcasmic||

    I can see why you'd hate those 10 Commandments, especially that one about not stealing.

  • Restoras||

    And not murdering

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    It's "Thou shalt not covet" that gets him every time.

  • waffles||

    fist of government up women's skirts all over the place

    Do we live in the same country or is this hyperbole?

  • briannnnn||

    Didn't you know that every time you don't want to give your employees free birth control you're shoving the government first further and further up the American woman?

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    Says the man who believes that 50.000001% of the vote justifies just about anything.

  • Tony||

    Doesn't seem like a big hurdle to clear to get 0.000001% of the people to change his or her mind so you can get your way.

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    Great. On my list - all sexual services paid for by my employer. After all, nobody should come between me and my sex providers.

  • sarcasmic||

    My employer is denying me sex because they don't buy me hookers.

    Not taking is giving and not giving is taking, right Tony?

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    It's all part of the War On Sluts

  • Free Society||

    Fucking patriarchy!

  • Tony||

    You are welcome to propose it to your fellow citizens and try to get it on some legislature's agenda. Nobody said you couldn't.

  • Restoras||

    Says the man who believes that 50.000001% of the vote justifies just about anything.

    I wish I could say this wasn't more accurate with respect to Tony. If he could get his way, all those that disagree with him and his progressive ideology would be disenfranchised and sent to re-education facilities before deemed acceptable to participate in society.

  • Francisco d'Anconia||

  • sarcasmic||

  • ||

    I take great pleasure every time I think about getting him to so readily admit that.

  • Francisco d'Anconia||

    I will treasure it always and use it often.

    It shows where his ideology ALWAYS leads.

  • Bobarian||

    Besides these methods keep that .0001 from changing their minds back again when they witness the horror of Tony's 'Utopia'.

  • Restoras||

    I know, I just find it hilarious. Tony is the very person en masse that enabled all the genocides, purges, famines, and mass murders of the 20th Century and all in the name of Progressive ideology.

    I also find it hilarious that that he believes the people he wants to round up will do so willingly, as if they have no means to resist.

  • Tony||

    I wish I could get the quality commenters instead of you dregs. =(

  • Francisco d'Anconia||

    Says the immoral pig.

  • sarcasmic||

    I wish I could get the quality commenters

    If you posted anything with any quality then you might get quality responses. That's how it works. Moron.

  • Tony||

    So your job is to keep me busy with the inane sophistry and endlessly repeated cliches you present as thoughts? Well done!

  • sarcasmic||

    My job is to take your own arguments, deconstruct them, and then show the world how they are nothing but emotive logical fallacies. And yes, I do it well.

  • PapayaSF||

    I wish I could get the quality commenters

    Tony is the guy interrupting the game by running around the field naked and drunk who thinks the team needs better fans.

  • ||

    Tony|4.16.14 @ 11:41AM|#

    You probably don't want to know what my policy prescription is (it ain't filling unoccupied lands with solar panels).

    Tony|4.16.14 @ 3:27PM|#

    What do you think is the appropriate punishment for people actively working to destroy the human species as we know it?

    Psychopathic environmental dooms day fanatic with dreams of genocide laments the lack of quality commenters...

    Can't say I sympathize with you Tony.

  • Francisco d'Anconia||

    Says the man who believes that 50.000001% of the vote justifies just about anything.

    And if he can't get it, he believes he's justified in murdering the nonbleevers.

  • sarcasmic||

    That's the dumbest thing I've seen all morning.

    So you never looked in the mirror?

  • GILMORE||

    though we tend to be a little more adult about it.

    Really, Tony?

  • DaveSs||

    Care to provide an example of rural populations running roughshod over the big city within that state?

  • Tony||

    Well, my city's roads are shit because state legislators don't believe in spending public money on public infrastructure. They do like spending public money on giveaways to oil companies, though.

  • sarcasmic||

    They do like spending public money on giveaways to oil companies, though.

    The oil companies that pay billions of dollars in taxes? How can those companies simultaneously pay taxes and receive giveaways? It's one or the other, stupid.

  • Francisco d'Anconia||

    Not taking is giving.

  • Tony||

    Don't even start with me whore.

    A company only has a right to extract natural resources from the earth and sell it back to the people who inhabit the earth because it was given that privilege by government. Their entire existence is a handout. And that you still can't wrap your mind around the fact that a tax break given to one business and not another is tantamount to a subsidy for the former, then you need to go back to kindergarten and learn some basic kiddie math.

  • Francisco d'Anconia||

    Should they work for free?

    At the gas tank integrated oil companies make about 7 cents per gallon. Meanwhile, the government extracts more than 48 cents, on average, per gallon. That’s right: Uncle Sam takes nearly seven times more out of drivers’ wallets via taxation than “Big Oil.”

    You are an ignorant moron...as well as an immoral pig.

  • Tony||

    There should be no profit for private interests in extracting natural resources from the earth and selling it to earthlings while offloading all the waste into the atmosphere and ocean without paying for it or cleaning it up.

  • Restoras||

    If there was no profit, Tony, there would be no benefit to the earthlings that inhabit the planet.

  • Francisco d'Anconia||

    People will just line up to do it out of the goodness in there hearts, is that it?

    I'll risk billions for the reward of a paycheck.

    You may just be the dumbest motherfucker to ever walk the planet.

  • sarcasmic||

    You may just be the dumbest motherfucker to ever walk the planet.

    He has his arguments taken apart and shown to be logical fallacies, and then he comes back with the very same illogical tripe. Fucker just can't learn. Dumbest motherfucker I've ever seen. Well, not quite. A couple people who troll here are just as stupid.

  • perlhaqr||

    Asking seriously, not snarkily, why do you respond? I mean, "A company only has a right to extract natural resources from the earth and sell it back to the people who inhabit the earth because it was given that privilege by government. Their entire existence is a handout." is pretty much proof positive that he's just insane, so... why engage?

  • Francisco d'Anconia||

    Asking seriously, not snarkily, why do you respond?

    Because the purpose of an argument is NOT to convince the participants, but to convince the lurker who may not , as of yet, formed an opinion. Allowing such bullshit to go unanswered could be construed as agreement.

    And, I admit, I get some measure of satisfaction in humiliating the immoral.

  • Finrod||

    You should see some of the room temperature IQ (Celsius) trolls on Daily Caller.

  • Restoras||

    offloading all the waste into the atmosphere and ocean without paying for it or cleaning it up

    Speaking of offloading...

    Pascal Husting, Greenpeace International’s international programme director, said he began "commuting between Luxembourg and Amsterdam" when he took the job in 2012 and currently made the round trip about twice a month.
    The flights, at 250 euros for a round trip, are funded by Greenpeace, despite its campaign to curb "the growth in aviation", which it says "is ruining our chances of stopping dangerous climate change”


    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/ear.....-work.html

  • sarcasmic||

    A company only has a right to extract natural resources from the earth and sell it back to the people who inhabit the earth because it was given that privilege by government.

    Really? So no one ever in the history of human kind extracted natural resources and traded them with other humans until government came along and gave them the privilege? Did Cro-Magnons get permission from the Planning Board before quarrying stones for their tools? Fucking idiot.

    And that you still can't wrap your mind around the fact that a tax break given to one business and not another is tantamount to a subsidy for the former,

    You were saying your government doesn't have any money for roads since it is giving money away to oil companies. Get your story straight, liar.

  • Restoras||

    Tony doesn't believe in private property or property rights, except his own.

  • Tony||

    Prehistoric people had the bad habit of using up all the natural resources in a given area and dying out. That's what I'm suggesting we avoid this time around.

    But I'm talking to people who think oil is infinite and has no byproducts when combusted.

  • sarcasmic||

    Prehistoric people had the bad habit of using up all the natural resources in a given area and dying out.

    But you said it's impossible to extract resources without government permission. Are you now admitting to being a liar?

  • ||

    CO2 is that thing that trees and plants need to live. Why do you hate the trees?

  • sarcasmic||

    Why do you hate the trees?

    He doesn't hate all the trees. Just the oaks.

  • Restoras||

    Prehistoric people had the bad habit of using up all the natural resources in a given area and dying out.

    Which explains why there are seven billion earthlings on the earth?

  • Restoras||

    But I'm talking to people who think oil is infinite and has no byproducts when combusted.

    Citation needed.

    I know you can't provide one, but I just want you to see your own lies.

  • sarcasmic||

    you need to go back to kindergarten and learn some basic kiddie math.

    You mean infantile children pointing fingers and whining about fairness?

    Sorry, Tony, but I'll leave the kiddie math to you. I prefer adult math.

  • GILMORE||

    "" Their entire existence is a handout""

    Not taking is giving?

  • PapayaSF||

    Tony comes out against farming without government permission.

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    Their entire existence is a handout.

    Funny how you've extrapolated that thought onto the entirety of human history. No wonder you can't stop trying to punish society for your daddy issues.

  • DaveSs||

    What business are the CITY roads to the state first of all.

    Second, what does that have to do with rural folk.

    Third, what state are we talking about.

  • Restoras||

    Infrastructure spending doesn't lockup votes.

    Oil company giveaways assures their re-election coffers are full. You are correct.

    Tax revenues are used secure other voting blocks - like public unions, welfare/state assistance recipients, etc. Why don't you reference that as well?

  • Tony||

    Because I'm not a Drudgebot racist moron.

  • Restoras||

    I love it. You can only reply with ad hominem, thus admitting you have no logical argument.

  • Tony||

    Life is too short to waste on people who think the big problem with our society is that the poor have it too good.

  • Restoras||

    Where did I say that? All I suggested was that politicians in power use the resources at their disposal to secure votes from various concentrations of power, and thus remain in power. This is actually detrimental to poor people, not beneficial, as it encourage protracted periods of poverty instead of upward mobility, and the subsequent exit from the concentrated pool of voting power.

  • Tony||

    I'm aware of the bullshit. Take money away from poor people and that will motivate them to be upwardly mobile. (It works the opposite way with the rich.)

  • Restoras||

    I can't help it if it offends your sense of social justice but it does. And sure, you can take all the money from the rich and give it to poor people (after you get your cut, of course) and guess what happens - the poor remain poor and the rich either leave or just get rich again.

    The fact is, people like you want the poor to remain poor. You want them to be dependent on you and your state. It makes them easier to control, and easier for you to stay in power. You just don't have the balls to admit it.

  • Francisco d'Anconia||

    Take money away from poor


    HAHAHAAHA!

    No group has ever done more to hurt the poor than the progressives.

    Giving people stolen money doesn't help them, it enslaves them, making them forever dependent upon your immorality.

    You are a disgusting, lying, pig who wants to enslave an entire cast of people to his vile cause.

    It's a good thing you are mentally incapable of seeing that, as I would imagine the realization of just how disgusting you are would likely drive you to madness.

    Thank nature for sparing you that.

  • Restoras||

    It's a good thing you are mentally incapable of seeing that, as I would imagine the realization of just how disgusting you are would likely drive you to madness.

    Unfortunately, there are vast numbers of people out there incapable of seeing it. They are the bureaucrats that 'followed the orders' that gave us the Holocaust, the Holodomar, the Armenian genocide, etc., etc., etc.

  • Francisco d'Anconia||

    caste

  • ||

    What's it like, thinking you're better than everyone else and thinking that poor people can't make anything of themselves without your benevolent leadership?

    I sure hope none of those poor people you so earnestly want to "help" have thoughts and opinions different from yours. Otherwise they might find themselves on the wrong side of your firing squad.

  • sarcasmic||

    Take money away from poor people

    That's just stupid. You are aware that poor people have no money to take, right? That's what makes them poor.

    Du-oh! You mean not giving them handouts! I forgot! Not giving is taking!

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    Life is too short to waste on people who think the big problem with our society is that the poor have it too good.

    It's also too short to waste on people who think the rich have it too good.

  • ||

    Because Tony is a racist, paternalistic, asshole?

  • MJGreen||

    I like that, for the democratic Tony, "adult" means sitting back and accepting whatever the faraway government tells you to do, and not supporting a solution that would provide a more local and representative government.

    I guess that makes sense.

  • Tony||

    It means understanding that you don't always get your way when you have to share a jurisdiction with other people.

  • Francisco d'Anconia||

    And if you don't agree with the force I use to repress you, I will have you murdered.

    /T

  • Tony||

    What do you want? You don't like a law so you should get to ignore it?

  • Restoras||

    Wow. Doubling down. Save that one for future reference as well, Francisco.

  • Francisco d'Anconia||

    You don't like a law so you should get to ignore it?

    No, you immoral moron, I want there to BE NO REPRESSIVE LAW!

    Stupid fucking cunt.

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    Well, why not? Washington and Colorado decided they don't like federal pot laws, so they're ignoring them.

    Do you even bother to think through the intellectually inbred positions you take?

  • waffles||

    And why is North California farther West than West California?

    I want at least two Californias. Maybe three. But the state government of CA views their supremacy as absolute.

  • wef||

    Sorry if this has been brought up before, but isn't this double-x flag of Jefferson just a rip-off of the flag of Tolmania? Or did Chaplin use the Jefferson flag as a model for his own?

  • Grand Moff Serious Man||

    Heh, from the map it looks like the state line separating Weat California and South California would be the LA-Orange county line.

    Which means my parents would suddenly be living 400 yards from a state border and probably some kind of checkpoint.

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    Don't your parents already live 400 yards from a checkpoint? Or have they gotten rid of the one on I-5?

  • Grand Moff Serious Man||

    I don't recall one, so probably. They've been tearing up that section of the freeway on the county line for years now.

  • Plàya Manhattan.||

    I-5 checkpoint is on the OC-San Diego County border near San Onofre and Camp Pendleton.

  • Almanian!||

    Resisting. Urge. To respond. To it.

    Must. Control. Fist. Of Death.

  • Libertarian||

    ex uno plures!

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    First thought, West and South California are fucked. Central California will hold all the marbles since they will control the water supply.

  • Hugh Akston||

    Dude, they're right on the coast. Don't you know the poem? "Water water everywhere, so let's all have a drink."

  • robc||

    +1 Homer

  • Rich||

    The entire coast, say up to 30 miles from the ocean, should be a state called "Ooh Chile".

  • On The Road To Mandalay||

    Maybe what we really need is Provinces instead of states. Of course that won't happen. Had we not revolted against Great Britain back in the late 18th Century, we might have ended up like Canada. That would have been an improvement. Instead, we end up with a bunch of childish, yapping anti-government retards, attempting to justify the existence of 50 "sovereign" little nations. Grand bullshit, most of it.

  • waffles||

    Of course you mean brilliance. Grand brilliance.

  • sarcasmic||

    If you support states' rights then you're a racist who supports slavery. Everyone knows that.

  • GILMORE||

    That's a good point. Because there was no *good reason* for the revolt against Great Britain!

    What were they thinking! Sheesh.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Seriously, look how swell the UK is doing today. Why would anyone want to leave *that*?

  • robc||

    Lets ask Scotland. And Northern Ireland.

    AFAIK, Wales is happy.

  • MegaloMonocle||

    More centralization is obviously the cure for our problems. Isn't that what the childish, yapping pro-government retards are saying?

  • Christophe||

    Provinces in Canada have more pull than states in the US. They actually get the feds to stay out of entire industries a lot of the time.

    Completely accidental, but nowadays the Federal government is smaller in Canada than the US (as a percentage of GDP).

  • Dweebston||

    Are you upset that a man going by the sobriquet Derpologist nailed your semiliterate patter so well last night that even veteran commenters here couldn't distinguish the parody from your usual blather?

  • ||

    Which thread was that "Guess the Not" in?

  • Dweebston||

    Last night's Indies thread, I believe.

    I was rocking a pretty good benadryl buzz, so I might be misremembering.

  • ||

    I clocked out pretty early. I'll go check, thanks.

  • Eric T||

    I'm all for it as long as the San Francisco part (where I live) breaks off altogether, both physically and politically, as an altogether separate country, floating away towards the Farallons.

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    Only if you take Pelosi with you

  • Tony||

    San Francisco, practically hell on earth.

  • waffles||

    I like it there.

  • Citizen Nothing||

    This is true -- if you're poor. Not that Tony would give a fuck.

  • Tony||

    Unlike libertarians, known around the world as the foremost champions of the interests of the poor.

  • Francisco d'Anconia||

    HAHAHAHAHA!

    Progs champion the poor above libertarians.

    Good one.

    HAHAHAHAHAHA!

    Where do you get this stuff?

  • ||

    I wonder if those are the same progs that started PP or continue to fight the drug war as a means to control certain demographics?

  • Dweebston||

    According to the free birth control wing of the BREAD AND CIRCUSES party. Let them eat norgestrel!

  • Agammamon||

    . . . the tech hub along with the San Francisco Bay Area.

    Oh, this would be fun to watch. Ultra-rich '1%ers' selfishly trying to keep their money and innovate while the leftists in SF try to steal it and regulate them into the ground 'for the greater good'.

  • perlhaqr||

    I think it'd be hilarious. Since the border you have to move across in order to escape that rapacious taxation is a lot closer, I think you'd see a lot of people doing so.

  • briannnnn||

    Why is the majority of West California east of the rest of California?

  • Agammamon||

    Its not, its just waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay to the west.

  • UnCivilServant||

    +1 circumnavigated globe.

  • MegaloMonocle||

    Maybe we split CA and TX? Kind of a 21st century Great Compromise?

  • UnCivilServant||

    I want an upstate-downstate split for New York, with upstate keeping the name and downstate keeping the laws.

  • DaveSs||

    If New York gets to split, so does Illinois.

    Would be nice to kick Chicago proper out.

  • Restoras||

    Yeah, me too.

  • some guy||

    New York State and New York City State? That won't confuse anyone...

  • Restoras||

    New York City can re-rename itself New Amsterdam.

  • ||

    Dallas would quickly become a progtopia shithole so no thanks.

  • perlhaqr||

    I've suggested this for New Mexico before. Hell, we have counties that are bigger than some of them bitty little East Coast states.

    New Mexico, New New Mexico, Newer Mexico, Newest Mexico... :D

  • Invisible Finger||

    Splitting California into 3 or 4 states sounds like a good idea, I'm just not thrilled about these non-violent solutions.

  • ant1sthenes||

    Eh. Just eliminate the states, since federalism is dead. Allow the fifty largest coherent communities to organize as non-territorial, self-selecting government bodies, and use the feds mainly to force peace between the communities.

    Yes, organizing jurisdiction by territorial bounds is convenient, but it's also an ugly holdover from feudal times. You can't have government of the people when the government doesn't actually define its sphere of influence based on that people, but instead based on lines on a map.

  • Not a Libertarian||

    From a purely Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee perpective, this would be golden.

    South CA would possibly return one GOP and one Democratic senator
    West CA would always return two Democratic Senators
    Central CA would possibly return two D Senators (albeit pro-2nd Amendment Democrats)
    Silicon Valley would always return two Democratic Senators, one leftish and one "libertarianish"
    North CA would possibly return two Democratic Senators
    Jefferson would possibly return one GOP and one Democratic senator.

    10 extra Democratic senators seems a good trade.

  • Bobarian||

    South would likely be ruled by OC, 2 GOP
    Central went pro Romney; maybe split
    Jefferson would be two GOP.

    More like a 4 Senator swing.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Video Game Nation: How gaming is making America freer – and more fun.
  • Matt Welch: How the left turned against free speech.
  • Nothing Left to Cut? Congress can’t live within their means.
  • And much more.

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement