California

'6 Californias' Plan Would Create Some Wealthier, Some Poorer States, Says Unshocking Study

It's, like, basic economics.

|

A long-shot proposal to break California into six separate states would also divide rich and poor, according to a legislative analysis released on Wednesday.

The plan, which supporters hope to put before voters as a ballot initiative this November, is backed by Silicon Valley billionaire Tim Draper, who submitted 1.3 million signatures in favor of his proposal to Secretary of State Debra Bowen last month.

NEXT: Is GOP Foreign Policy Getting More Libertarian, or Is it Just Anti-Democrat Opportunism?

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.

  1. The people in some of the poorer counties may appreciate being able to set their own policies and perhaps drive their economies without having to ask permission of what some plainly view as a disconnected, uncaring legislature hundreds of miles away.

  2. If nothing else stops the idea, water rights will. California is a “hydraulic empire” which tends naturally to centralized rule.

  3. And possibly put at risk a monopoly of 55 electoral votes? You may as well ask the Fed to allow other countries to print the dollar.

  4. As I understand it, it would require US Congress approval, so it will never pass. A slightly more realistic plan would be to decentralize the California government into regional governments. Be one state as far as the federal government is concerned, but no more Sacramento running things.

  5. “‘6 Californias’ Plan Would Create Some Wealthier, Some Poorer States, Says Unshocking Study”

    Reich to write strongly-worded article about income inequality!

  6. When you take a look at the burgeoning economies of relatively poor, relatively small-government states like Texas and Tennessee, which have seen very real growth the past 20 years while wealthy California stagnates, you might see why the “poor” regions of California might want to be free of the policies that have led to the stagnation of the state as a whole.

    If I were living in Central California, you can rest assured I’d want off of a sinking economic ship regardless of whether I was receiving more revenue from the urban centers than I was putting in.

    1. Yep. The article lists the proposed state of Jefferson as being the one of the ‘poorest’ without mentioning that that region has wanted out of California for a long while now. It also conveniently neglects to factor in the costs of living for the respective areas. Somehow I doubt rents are as high in rural northern CA as they are in San Francisco.

  7. You mean different parts of a state can have different income levels? Do the tacky tourist shops sell shocked faces?

  8. It has been done before; twice. California was broken up into Alta California (US) and Baja California, M?xico. Baja California was further broken into two states: Baja California Norte (North) and Sur (South).

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.