A Riverside County Supervisor is proposing the Golden state be split in two.
This, says Jeff Stone, would allow officials in the new 'State of South California' to focus on securing borders, improving schools and creating a vibrant economy.
'Our taxes are too high, our schools don't educate our children well enough, unions and other special interests have more clout in the Legislature than the general public,' Stone told the Los Angeles Times in a statement.
'It has to change,' he added.
The proposal would see 13 Southern California counties branch off from into their own state.
These include: Riverside, Imperial, San Diego, San Bernardino, Kings, Kern, Tulare, Inyo, Madera, Mariposa and Mono.
Stone said the new state would consider having a part-time legislature, shifting more power to local government and having a reasonable sales tax.
He is now proposing to hold a public meeting to get feedback from officials and the public on the idea.
'Are there challenges?' he said. 'Absolutely. But the destruction of California has to stop and we don't know what we can accomplish unless we sit down and consider the possibilities.'
Not all are so pleased however.
Fellow Riverside County Supervisor Bob Buster called the split-state proposal a 'crazy distraction.'
'We should begin to get our own budget balanced, which we haven’t done yet, and put in place some of the reforms we need in this county before we try and go and restructure the government in the great state of California,' he told the Press-Enterprise.
'The temperature has gone up in Riverside County and it seems Supervisor Stone has gotten too much sun recently,' he added.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... z1QzIHreZ7
Calif Ornia.
Calif Ornia.
“If you trust in yourself, and believe in your dreams, and follow your star. . . you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things and weren't so lazy.”
Re: Calif Or
A north-south split of California would be fine with me and I suspect most of us up here in the north.
Especially if we started charging them for all the water we now give them.
But I wouldn't call it Southern California.
I'd call it Northern Mexico.
Especially if we started charging them for all the water we now give them.
But I wouldn't call it Southern California.
I'd call it Northern Mexico.
Re: Calif Or
Riverside county is a Republican shit hole. Please god let them leave the state. Ignorant and they like it that way.
yrs,
rubato
yrs,
rubato
Re: Calif Or
Splitting California is long overdue. But this guy's particular plan seems to me rather odd. (It does not help that the linked article says that South California would comprise thirteen counties and then proceeds to list eleven.)
I have been posting for years that we should split California along that amazingly convenient line you can see in the linked article: The ten southernmost counties become South California, and the others become North California.
Yes, that would mean that North California would have to part company with some very desirable places. But one can hardly expect South California to agree to a proposal that says "We get all the good stuff; you get only the shit."
I have been posting for years that we should split California along that amazingly convenient line you can see in the linked article: The ten southernmost counties become South California, and the others become North California.
Yes, that would mean that North California would have to part company with some very desirable places. But one can hardly expect South California to agree to a proposal that says "We get all the good stuff; you get only the shit."
Reason is valuable only when it performs against the wordless physical background of the universe.
Re: Calif Or
A house divided against itself shall not stand.
(A. Lincoln quoting Scripture)
This idea has been floating around since the 1960's here in Calirfornia.
Look for it to go nowhere fast.
(A. Lincoln quoting Scripture)
This idea has been floating around since the 1960's here in Calirfornia.
Look for it to go nowhere fast.
Your collective inability to acknowledge this obvious truth makes you all look like fools.
yrs,
rubato
Re: Calif Or
It's a silly idea that's never going to happen; every now and then ideologues on one side or the other trots it out, (usually to try and get themselves some publicity) but serious minded people don't pay any attention to this sort of nonsense.
Re: Calif Or
Serious people have been seriously considering this serious idea for a very long time. From a thoroughly sourced article in Wikipedia:
Etc., etc., etc.
The California Assembly has voted to split the State. The California Senate has voted to split the State. Both houses of the Legislature and the Governor have all agreed to split the State.
I guess all those elected representatives -- legislative and executive -- over the course of well more than a century were not "serious minded people".
Splitting California remains an excellent idea. Among the many, many reasons is California's being systematically shortchanged in legislative representation.
The idea that a "State" like Wyoming -- which should never have been admitted to the Union as a separate State in the first place -- with a population of 568,300 should have the same representation in the US Senate as California, with a population of 37,341,989 is patently ludicrous. There are fifteen counties in California which have populations greater than the entire "State" of Wyoming.
And in the US House, where the Constitution requires that the States be represented "according to their respective numbers," California gets flat-out robbed. California has 66 times the population of Wyoming. California should have 66 times as many Representatives as does Wyoming. But Wyoming has 1 Representative, and California has only 53.
Both of those inequities consistently favor the Republican party. Which explains the opposition to what serious-minded people agree is a good idea.
(Emphasis added; footnotes omitted.)There have been at least 27 attempts to split up the state of California, the most populous state in the United States and the third-largest in area, since it acquired statehood in 1850.
...
In 1854, the California State Assembly passed a plan to trisect the state.
...
In 1859, the legislature and governor approved the Pico Act splitting off the region south of the 36th parallel north as the Territory of Colorado. However, owing to the American Southeast secession crisis in 1860, the proposal never came to a Congressional vote and the Federal government never acted on it.
...
The California State Senate voted on June 4, 1965, to divide California into two states, with the Tehachapi Mountains as the boundary.
Etc., etc., etc.
The California Assembly has voted to split the State. The California Senate has voted to split the State. Both houses of the Legislature and the Governor have all agreed to split the State.
I guess all those elected representatives -- legislative and executive -- over the course of well more than a century were not "serious minded people".
Splitting California remains an excellent idea. Among the many, many reasons is California's being systematically shortchanged in legislative representation.
The idea that a "State" like Wyoming -- which should never have been admitted to the Union as a separate State in the first place -- with a population of 568,300 should have the same representation in the US Senate as California, with a population of 37,341,989 is patently ludicrous. There are fifteen counties in California which have populations greater than the entire "State" of Wyoming.
And in the US House, where the Constitution requires that the States be represented "according to their respective numbers," California gets flat-out robbed. California has 66 times the population of Wyoming. California should have 66 times as many Representatives as does Wyoming. But Wyoming has 1 Representative, and California has only 53.
Both of those inequities consistently favor the Republican party. Which explains the opposition to what serious-minded people agree is a good idea.
Reason is valuable only when it performs against the wordless physical background of the universe.
Re: Calif Or
(Emphasis added; footnotes omitted.) ...yet, no link provided. However after finding the article,
...meaning anyone can propose a split up; but seriously it's not likely to ever happen.The California State Senate voted on June 4, 1965, to divide California into two states, with the Tehachapi Mountains as the boundary. Sponsored by State Senator Richard J. Dolwig (D-San Mateo), the resolution proposed to separate the 7 southern counties, with a majority of the state's population, from the 51 other counties, and passed 27-12. To be effective, the amendment would have needed approval by the State Assembly, by California voters, and by the United States Congress. As expected by Dolwig, the proposal did not get out of committee in the Assembly.[11] A previous proposal to this effect, the Pico Act, was advanced in 1859-1860 but was tabled due to the American Civil War and never revived (see above).
Re: Calif Or
It has as much chance of happening as nude airport security express lines, and belongs in the same category of nonsense.
No serious minded people give it any serious consideration, which is why it will never happen; it's the stuff of political grandstanding and the province of bitter cranks and bloviating eccentrics.
No serious minded people give it any serious consideration, which is why it will never happen; it's the stuff of political grandstanding and the province of bitter cranks and bloviating eccentrics.
Re: Calif Or
At one point, the State Assembly passed a plan to split California into three States. I guess that a majority of State Senators were not serious minded people.
At another point, the State Assembly passed a plan to split California. The State Senate passed that plan. The Governor approved that plan. I guess that majorities in both houses of the Legislature were not serious minded people, and the Governor was not a serious minded person either.
Most recently, within the lifetimes of many of us here (including me), the State Senate passed a plan to split the State -- by more than a two-thirds majority. I guess that those 69% of State Senators were not serious minded people either.
What is now the State of Kentucky was once part of the State of Virginia.
What is now the State of Maine was once part of the State of Massachusetts.
What is now the State of Tennessee was once part of the State of North Carolina.
What is now the State of West Virginia was once part of the State of Virginia.
More than half of what is now the State of New Mexico was once part of the State of Texas.
About a third of what is now the State of Colorado was once part of the State of Texas.
A portion of what is now the State of Oklahoma was once part of the State of Texas.
A portion of what is now the State of Wyoming was once part of the State of Texas.
I am sure that when those things happened, there were people who considered the proposals not serious.
At another point, the State Assembly passed a plan to split California. The State Senate passed that plan. The Governor approved that plan. I guess that majorities in both houses of the Legislature were not serious minded people, and the Governor was not a serious minded person either.
Most recently, within the lifetimes of many of us here (including me), the State Senate passed a plan to split the State -- by more than a two-thirds majority. I guess that those 69% of State Senators were not serious minded people either.
What is now the State of Kentucky was once part of the State of Virginia.
What is now the State of Maine was once part of the State of Massachusetts.
What is now the State of Tennessee was once part of the State of North Carolina.
What is now the State of West Virginia was once part of the State of Virginia.
More than half of what is now the State of New Mexico was once part of the State of Texas.
About a third of what is now the State of Colorado was once part of the State of Texas.
A portion of what is now the State of Oklahoma was once part of the State of Texas.
A portion of what is now the State of Wyoming was once part of the State of Texas.
I am sure that when those things happened, there were people who considered the proposals not serious.
Reason is valuable only when it performs against the wordless physical background of the universe.
Re: Calif Or
The idea of a north/south split to California sounds good to me, but that's without really knowing the positive & negative consequences.
I've never read an analysis that lists any potential benefit to either the north or south.
I've never read an analysis that lists any potential benefit to either the north or south.
Re: Calif Or
One benefit for both the North and the South we be in the US Senate. People in North California would have Senators representing North California, and people in South California would have Senators representing South California.
The effect, at least in the near term, would be the addition of two Democratic Senators to the US Senate. Which is one the main reasons that Republicans would rather dismiss any such proposal than discuss it.
Another benefit for both North and South would be that the people of the smaller counties would have a greater voice in State government. In the South, for example, Imperial County -- have you been there? talk about a place that has got the fecal end of the stick -- would have a greater proportion of representation than it has now. In the North, one can say the same thing about, for example, Butte County.
Another benefit for both North and South would be the diminution of the power of agribusiness. It would still be powerful in both States, of course, but its influence would be diminished in each.
One benefit for North California would be about water. California's present water policies amount to, and have for decades amounted to, one giant drain by South California of North California's water.
That would be a detriment for South California. Too bad.
And detriments are relative. If Los Angeles and Riverside and other places that could not support large populations without draining other places dry -- look what happened to the Owens Valley -- have to pay more for their water, well, at least that beats what will happen to them when North California gets sick of it and shuts off the spigot.
At bottom, California is just absurdly large. And the ratios are ridiculous. We have fifty States. Almost one out of every 8 resident Americans lives in California. One out of every 544 resident Americans lives in Wyoming. It's preposterous.
California needs splitting. Serious minded people have been saying so for 150 years. But bloviators have been managing to carry the day. It is long past time for that to change.
The effect, at least in the near term, would be the addition of two Democratic Senators to the US Senate. Which is one the main reasons that Republicans would rather dismiss any such proposal than discuss it.
Another benefit for both North and South would be that the people of the smaller counties would have a greater voice in State government. In the South, for example, Imperial County -- have you been there? talk about a place that has got the fecal end of the stick -- would have a greater proportion of representation than it has now. In the North, one can say the same thing about, for example, Butte County.
Another benefit for both North and South would be the diminution of the power of agribusiness. It would still be powerful in both States, of course, but its influence would be diminished in each.
One benefit for North California would be about water. California's present water policies amount to, and have for decades amounted to, one giant drain by South California of North California's water.
That would be a detriment for South California. Too bad.
And detriments are relative. If Los Angeles and Riverside and other places that could not support large populations without draining other places dry -- look what happened to the Owens Valley -- have to pay more for their water, well, at least that beats what will happen to them when North California gets sick of it and shuts off the spigot.
At bottom, California is just absurdly large. And the ratios are ridiculous. We have fifty States. Almost one out of every 8 resident Americans lives in California. One out of every 544 resident Americans lives in Wyoming. It's preposterous.
California needs splitting. Serious minded people have been saying so for 150 years. But bloviators have been managing to carry the day. It is long past time for that to change.
Last edited by Andrew D on Wed Jul 06, 2011 1:51 am, edited 1 time in total.
Reason is valuable only when it performs against the wordless physical background of the universe.
Re: Calif Or
San Bernadino and Riverside counties could fit several New England states comfortably within their county lines, so space isn't an issue. I have to agree that it would take some remote occurrences to arrive at a scenario where there would be any actual political possibility that the state could be split into two or more states.
Re: Calif Or
It is an idea worth pursuing, particularly in a state that has that most-Democratic of traditions, the ballot Proposition.
Clearly, the the state has the population and resources to justify at least two subdivisions, possibly more. The biggest downside - and I think it is a fatal one - is that South California would become a northwestern province of Mexico, in fact, if not legally. Anglo's would quickly leave in droves. Certain kinds of lawlessness would become even more endemic.
It is also difficult to envision how it could be done in such a lousy economy, and with the state's budget in such a disastrous condition.
As a regular visitor to California it is always striking to me how different the different regions feel.
I think a separate country might be a better idea; then it could be split up into more logical regional provinces. The legislature could then print more money (to waste).
Clearly, the the state has the population and resources to justify at least two subdivisions, possibly more. The biggest downside - and I think it is a fatal one - is that South California would become a northwestern province of Mexico, in fact, if not legally. Anglo's would quickly leave in droves. Certain kinds of lawlessness would become even more endemic.
It is also difficult to envision how it could be done in such a lousy economy, and with the state's budget in such a disastrous condition.
As a regular visitor to California it is always striking to me how different the different regions feel.
I think a separate country might be a better idea; then it could be split up into more logical regional provinces. The legislature could then print more money (to waste).
Re: Calif Or
I'll say....I have to agree that it would take some remote occurrences to arrive at a scenario where there would be any actual political possibility that the state could be split into two or more states.
"Occurrences" of a remoteness similar to getting hit in the head by a meteorite on a golf course right after scoring a hole-in-one with a winning Mega Lottery ticket in your pocket....
Re: Calif Or
Kentucky, Maine, Tennessee, and West Virginia all seemed, at various times, remote possibilities. But now they are realities.
There are serious proposals being seriously discussed by serious minded people. But it is always easier for someone who does not like an idea to dismiss it than to discuss it.
There are serious proposals being seriously discussed by serious minded people. But it is always easier for someone who does not like an idea to dismiss it than to discuss it.
Reason is valuable only when it performs against the wordless physical background of the universe.
Re: Calif Or
What's to discuss?
It ain't gonna happen.
It ain't gonna happen.
Your collective inability to acknowledge this obvious truth makes you all look like fools.
yrs,
rubato
Re: Calif Or
That happened to me just the other day...Lord Jim wrote: "Occurrences" of a remoteness similar to getting hit in the head by a meteorite on a golf course right after scoring a hole-in-one with a winning Mega Lottery ticket in your pocket....
“If you trust in yourself, and believe in your dreams, and follow your star. . . you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things and weren't so lazy.”
Re: Calif Or
Twice.
Why is it that when Miley Cyrus gets naked and licks a hammer it's 'art' and 'edgy' but when I do it I'm 'drunk' and 'banned from the hardware store'?
Re: Calif Or
It's all I've ever heard since I was a kid.
Local/Nocal...
Local/Nocal...
Sometimes it seems as though one has to cross the line just to figger out where it is