REPOST — May as well revisit the topic one last time on a tax day where Californians pay up to 10-percent of their personal income to corrupt politicians.
California needs to be split into three states. The state was only to be allowed to be as big as it was because it was sparsely populated. With an economy that would be 7th in the world if California was a stand alone country it’s ridiculous that its large mass and huge population is represented by only two US Senators, neither of whom represent the interests of the state as a whole.
The State is also ungovernable as a State of this size with such a large population. It’s more of a country than a State by any measure – and a poorly run one, at that.
Every so often the populace discusses cutting the State in half and making two States. I’ve thought about this and cannot see any logical place to split the state in two, but can see a good argument for splitting the State into three.
First of all there are numerous political sub-cultures in California that are so distinctive that they should be separated and given statehood. These areas seldom communicate and rarely see themselves as connected to the other part. They are as follows:
Northern California – This would be a state almost the size of Oregon with similar features and cities. The State begins north of Sacramento with a boundary from Pt. Arena on the west and Lake Tahoe on the east. The suggested Capital would be Eureka or Redding. There is little psychological connection between these folks and the rest of California and their needs are under-represented because of this. The area is massive, yet there is not one University of California campus. It would do better for itself as its own State.
California – The could also be called Central California and it consists of the middle of the State south of Pt. Arena down to just South of Big Sur. From there it cuts
across keeping Los Banos while relinquishing Fresno, which people from this area think of as in Southern California. The Capital would remain Sacramento. The University of California, per se is in this area.
Southern California – This includes the entire rest of the State and constitutes the largest land mass. It would still be one of the largest states in the union. There is already a University of Southern California, which is convenient. The placement of the Capital is problematic and the candidates would include: Los Angeles, Pasadena and San Diego — although an even more neutral location such as Riverside or Santa Ana might work too.
Now to find a way to make this happen.
What would I call Texas into five states? A start!!!
It may never work. It may be easier than actually fixing any problems, if they could fix them. Maybe the U.S. should just be 100 states. We could have East Carolina and West Carolina. I think we might just have a plan here. Just joking, of course. I hope it works out John. I wouldn’t plan around it. Maybe you can make fake maps and distribute them to the illegals and convince them they are still in Mexico with fake California maps and some of them will go to Oregon and think it is California. Maybe you can get them to go up to Washington and tell them Redmond is the Silicon Valley and they can get good technology jobs with Microsoft in California.
John Gummere is thinking of Ernest Callenbach’s two Ecotopia novels.
http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Ernest-Callenbach
http://sf.indymedia.org/news/2004/11/1706649.php
As to Texas splitting…that was revoked, as I understand, on re-admission to the Union after Reconstruction.
To some degree, unless you live south of the Tehachapi mountains, “Southern California” begins about 50 miles south of where you live.
I do find it interesting that most California split proposals generally try to split North and South. However, a split between Coastal and Inland may be just as appropriate. From the perspective of the people who live inland, the San Francisco Bay Area has much more in more in common with Los Angeles and Orange County than it does with the so-called “cow counties” of the inland north — Eureka, Redding, Chico, Placerville, etc.
A good description of this to take a look at political patterns — both per-county results from the last two presidential elections, as well as apportionment of the state legislature. The “blue counties” are all along the coastline, and the interior is all “red”. In the same way, although the California legislature has a majority of Democrats, even without the gerrymandered apportionment following the 2000 census, it’s nearly impossble for a Democrat to have any realistic chance of winning an Assembly or Senate seat (or for that matter, a congressional seat, either) in any of the inland counties.
I’ll tell you why I proposed the horizontal splits. This is so all the sectors have access to the ocean seaports for their inland goods and inland imports. To make the entire coast a state would eseentially turn the rest of the place into an extension of landlocked Nevada.
Nice map. But “Southern California” should be called “Northern Mexico” since our government has pretty much given it away. As a resident of “Northern Mexico” then i’d gladly move move out for this experiment. It would be nice to see how they would plan to establish a working government and succeed in giving away free education and health care without the support of the “civilized” portion of the state.
Or maybe we should just stop encouraging immigration, stop giving illegals better benefits than citizens and start encouraging english to be mandatory for those who choose to live in this state.
I suggest splitting it in more. A rich citizen’s state, a poor citizen’s state, and a poor illegal immigrant’s state. Then, have 3 rich white governors as usual.
I have no dog in this fight, but when they start calling you an old hippie I at least know it will be a lively thread. Somebody pass that reefer while I’m waiting for the next post.
I don’t want to live in a fractured state, it’s complex enough living here as it is! Wait, isn’t that self-contradiction? 😉
The real obstacle might be cloning Arnold twice
Break up California, this might be good for the textbooks inside The United States of America.
Wouldn’t hate it cause then the San Francisco would lose a lot of power and money that is generated here in LA County, but this will never happen for recidely that reason.
As Long As
1:all illegal immagrants are kicked out
2: John cobelt of the john&ken show of kfi in la is govener of S.california, im in
>> The State is also ungovernable as a State of this size with such a large population.
Surely your well known govenor is well equipped & experienced to manage such a state.
What about an entirely new revolutionary concept where California forms a part of a new superstate that would encompass a few other states with similar political ideals. This would become in a sense, it’s own country. The United States would be seperated into 4 or 5 of these superstates or ‘minicountries’ each with it’s own capital and Washington DC could simply be some federal unifying body, but that’s about it. It would be limited to military and intelligence matters, stuff like that. So instead of splitting California into different states as part of the US, why not join California as part of a smaller country to begin with? We don’t share the conservative political ideals of the South, and they don’t want to share ours either, so let’s all go our on ways, while keeping a loose tie to each other. We’d need to rewrite the Constitution, by the way, but that’s fine, the document is getting old anyway, and a good government always changes and modernizes.
-MiKe S.
I agree that Californian’s could be better represented in the Federal government. Some states better represent themselves with one mind: shared between two Senators.
But wasn’t this battle fought long ago when Pio Pico was governor of Alta California? It would be better to separate from the political pork barrels to the east then to split a culture and economy with global recognition.
Doug S.
I’m really tired of all our water going to Southern California and even more frustrated at the idea that most of the rest of this country (and the world) has an image of the entirety of California being surfers, movie stars and incessant sunny weather! I want at least to be a part of Alta California and NOT part of the predominantly Republican south.
Unfortunately, it will never happen as the result of anything less than a bloody civil war as OVER 50% OF CALIFORNIA’S VOTERS RESIDE SOUTH OF THE TEHACHAPIS!!
As for the whole inland vs. coastal thing, I prefer to see each section affording some degree of diversity — both in resources and population. Indeed, making either two or three divisions would make each more governable and, I believe, better suited to the populations in each new state.
Northern California, as it now stands, has no identity save for some limited notariety from the Wine Country and Silicon Valley. We are decidedly unique in comparison to LA/Hollyweird! Sonoma County and the entire Bay Area deserve better than to be associated with LA County and (gag!) Fresno!!
sigh…
Apricot Stuffed Chicken
——————————-
2 whole chicken breasts, boned, skin on
1/2 cup dry stuffing mix
1/4 cup chopped onion
2 tablespoons unsalted butter, melted
1/2 teaspoon ground ginger
4 fresh apricots (1/2 pound), halved
1/2 cup apricot jam
1 tablespoon cider vinegar
Place chicken skin side down and pound with a mallet to flatten slightly.
Combine stuffing mix, onion, butter, and 1/4 teaspoon ginger.
Spoon stuffing mixture in a strip along center of each breast.
Place apricot halved on top of stuffing.
Wrap chicken around filling; tie each chicken roll with a string every 2 inches.
Barbecue on rack about 5 1/2-inches above medium-hot coals 15 minutes, turning once or twice.
Mix apricot jam, vinegar and remaining 1/4 teaspoon ginger.
Brush jam mixture over chicken rolls; continue cooking until done, about 5 to 10 minutes
Makes 4 servings.
At first I thought this was a silly joke. Then I read the argument. It makes a lot of sense. I don’t live in California, but I support the idea of a split.
I seem to remember reading something about an initiative to split
California in the 1850’s. It was well on its way to happening, I think
up to a congressional level, but the Civil War came, and by the time
it was over the initiative was dead.
What an interesting cnocept to divide up California. Those of us in the East always demur the fact that ‘it’ always starts in California and then comes East….and this is not a compliment.
The orginal theme of Superman was to divide the state longitudinally and make the desert the new sea coast. Not a bad idea, and then we could start all over. Of course, the Terminator could be replaced by Superman as the Gov!!!!
Living in Ohio, we would like to donate Cleveland to you for your personal use.
Best to our friends in California….as you drift toward Hawaii!!!
Northern and Southern, that’s it. SF in N. LA in S. With the border at the Fresno line as shown. So what if there would be two cultures up in Northern California.
The distance from the Oregon state line to the international boundary at Mexico, along I-5, is 796 miles. That is roughly the same distance driving from Portland, Maine to Raleigh-Durham, North Carolina, a distance of 10-12 states (depending on the route chosen)!
California is every bit as diverse as the eastern seabord, and I believe splitting the state into several smaller states will allow those regional diversities to flourish and be showcased, as well as increase the clout that the region has in Washington, DC. I would propose 5 states: one for Bay Area/North Coast, one for the Very North, one for the Central Valley, and Two Southerns (one for LA and one for San Diego).
I disagree with Pier that increasing the size of the state house would fix California, as there are only two viable political parties, one of which is dominant and likes to spend our tax money even before it is collected. Besides, California is the 5th largest economy in the world! It deserves to be broken up into smaller, more manageable states that are more directly accountable to the populace.
I think most of you guys have the wrong idea thinking about this in terms of the different political mindsets of the various regions. That sounds like an extention of gerrymandering to me. I think that it should be split in two parts according to the economic potential of the resources of each potential portion. 3 states means at least four more politicians (i.e. senators) ughhh…
2 more is enough!
The fact that Chico, Redding, and Eureka are completely different from Sac, SF, LA, etc. isn’t that important. It’s like worrying about upstate NY being too different from NYC. The fact that we are diverse and celebrate it by not structuring a segregationist country is one of our greatest strengths. We have an inherant system that encourages the propagation of various political ideologies and helps citizens to sway one another from one ideology to another so that social progress can be made. That’s my humble opinion.
JD started this thread by pointing to perceived political emphasis in various regions of the state and making an important observation regarding the lack of communication between the regions and the perceived lack of connection between people in different areas of the current State of California.
Speaking strictly toward the issue of internal disconnection between the regions of the State of California, this could be ameliorated if a modern rail system was built to service the whole state. Statewide rail should have its own thread on this site.
I agree with you the state needs to be split. The right split for the republicans would take san diego, riverside, and orange county. All heavy republicans counties, we could start our own state and not have to deal with all the give aways the democrats like to do. The grassroots organization would be called (SPLIT THE STATE) , and the slogan would be take the blues out of southern california!!!!!!
I love the idea of three seprate states in CA. but as for your split there is no “f”ing way in hell Bakersfield wants to be a part of SoCal. Perhaps we should split into four states. Kern County will stand alone!
I’ve recently published a very sobering speculative-fiction novel describing the world of 2055 in which California has splintered into five States with dramatically different laws.
California will split into North and South within the next 25 years as a result of long-term cultural differences and the escalating demands for water from the South.
Within 5 years, the North will split again due to political polarizations. The coastal counties will be incorporated as the State of New Justice.
Within 5 years after that, the South will split for the same reasons. The new States will be Los Angeles (most of LA county, less San Fernando Valley and the Inland Empire), the Spanish-language State of Tenemos (Imperial County and part of SD County) and Mojave (everything else). This breakup is just the start; there are many unforseen consequences…
Since most people reading Dvorak’s blog probably are probably into science and technology, I’ll mention that the book also contains numerous scientific and technological elements — such as the detailed description of a variable speed-of-light technology known as “time-suppression” and abuse of nanotechnology by anarchists known as “nano-hackers.” You can learn more at http://www.3000years.org
I can’t believe I missed this. LOL. I think our problems might stem more from the fact that we have a pot smoking, nude posing, steriod taking governor versus our size.