Should California be broken up as a State, and if so how? (X-Posted from CA forum)

[SidneyCarton]

The bigger this budget mess gets, the more I begin to wonder whether California is viable anymore as a single state. We are huge, 1 in 9 Americans lives in this state, we have huge infrastructural costs, and the government in Sacramento has proven itself to be inept at facing this challenge. Could the state as it is currently constituted be just too big and too expensive to run realistically?

Now it may be argued that CA is not the only big state, and others work all right. Alaska is several times the size of California, but it also has a very small population which recieves what is effectively welfare payments from oil & gas revenues for the state. Texas is also larger than CA, and has the second largest population of any state in the union, and is not facing a budget crisis this year. But Texas has not had proposition 13 to deal with, simple majorities can pass a budget in TX, and they can raise property taxes if necessary, hence Texas does not face the same structural limitations that California does.

So, should the state be divided, and if so along which lines?

[rrneck]

1. It's been tried before.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_Jefferson

The State of Jefferson is a proposed U.S. state that would span the contiguous and mostly rural area of Southern Oregon and Northern California, where several attempts to secede from Oregon and California, respectively, have taken place in order to gain own statehood.

This region on the Pacific Coast is the most famous of several that have sought to adopt the name of Thomas Jefferson, the third President of the United States; the name was proposed in the 19th century for Jefferson Territory, as well as in 1915 in a bill in the Texas legislature for a proposed state that would be created from the Texas Panhandle region.<1>

[liberalitch]

2. North California and South California....

Make the line just south of Scott's Valley.

[BlooInBloo]

3. No.

[TreasonousBastard]

4. You can't have a progressive state hobbled by...

the troglodytes who refuse to let you pay for it. Get rid of the anti-tax schemes and let the chips, or tax bills, fall where they may and watch half your problems disappear. 2500 years ago Plato warned us that democracy is doomed to failure because the people will demand more and refuse to pay for it, with politicians falling over themselves to give them what they want.

If Californians think it's a good idea to separate north and south because they're effectively two different places anyway, so be it, but forced separation, even if possible, would be an outrage.

BTW, we're not facing bankruptcy from our folly, yet, but here in NY we have our own little demonstration of another downside of democracy.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

10. CA political splits are such that a physical split along those lines is impossible

[KansDem]

5. My sister and BIL lived in southern California until 2007 when they moved to Idaho

All she ever did was bitch and moan about the "liberals" in the north (i.e., San Francisco) screwing up life in southern California, so I guess divide it somewhere between Los Angeles and San Francisco, keeping Fresno in the southern part if at all possible.

And make Orange County its own country! ;)

[Bicoastal]

6. I propose splitting up LA county into smaller counties.

With 10 million residents and 16 cities with a population of over 100,000, my home county is one of the most overworked bureaucracies in the US.

Any time you need to do anything through the county, it takes weeks or months to get an answer. No wonder our judicial system and infrastructure are so pathetic.

[KamaAina]

30. I actually had thought of that myself

in particular, rather than having the Valley split off from the City of Los Angeles, it could form San Fernando County; L.A. would spread across county lines, much as NYC does with its five boroughs.

edit: spelling

[Auggie]

7. California's problems are not that different from those of the USA...

It suffers from a stalemated legislature in the control of special and corporate interests. Dividing the state would solve nothing.

[bridgit]

31. That's right. California's problem doesn't run north to south, it's internal from left to right...

There've been many contributors; but people seldom if ever bring up the pernicious, corrosive effects of Howard Jarvis & Grover Norquist: the ultimate corporate boot licker. Californians are witnessing the end-game of what unchecked human greed and corporate theft have promised all along http://firedoglake.com/2007/10/25/12494

[stopbush]

8. No.

As long as the Federal government continues to treat CA as a donor state for 38 other states in the Union, returning only $.77 to the state for every $1 we send to DC in Fed taxes, we will be behind the 8 ball.

In a typical year, CA sends $48-Billion to the Fed that doesn't come back to CA. It goes to NM, and AK and all the other red states. NM gets $1.35 back from the Fed for every $1 they send to DC. Why?

When Reagan was president, CA got $1.01 back for every $ we sent to the Fed in taxes, but that has been dropping ever since, to the point where we now are in the position of helping other states meet their bottom line while going further into the hole ourselves.

I have a simple solution: the 90/110 solution. That means that no state gets back less than 90% of the money they send to the Fed, and no state gets back more than 110% of the money they send to the Fed. In the case of CA, we would need to learn to live within 90% of $ we send to the Fed. In the case of NM and the other non-donor states, they would have to learn how to live within 110% of the money they send to the Fed.

Under such a scenario, CA would run surpluses into infinity, and we would do so while still fully funding every public service we now have, including automatic increases that are built into our state budget to account for inflation.

Sounds fair to me. What do you think?

[Auggie]

12. I agree that California does not receive it's fair share.

As of 2006 the state was the eight largest economy in the world after the USA, Japan, Germany, China, U.K., France and Italy. We should be rolling in money.

Link: http://www.lao.ca.gov/2006/cal_facts/2006_calfacts_econ.htm

[stopbush]

13. Yep. And I'm getting a bit tired of those who say we in CA aren't taxed enough

and that the system of the way Fed taxes are distributed among the states can't be changed and is a dead end in CA seeking its fair share of Fed revenues. Obviously, it CAN change, because CA has been on the butt end of the change since the Reagan presidency years.

[Auggie]

16. I would expect to be screwed under the Bush Administration...

but things should be changing now. Hello Feinstein? Hello Boxer? Hello Musclebound Moron?

[Johonny]

20. don't see how it can change

as long as California is under represented in the federal government. I doubt there's much interest in changing either how the senate or house is established.

[stopbush]

25. It can change, but it will be difficult because only 12-13 states

in the Union act as donor states, ie: states who get less Fed money back than they send in. It certainly isn't in the best interest of the 37-38 "freeloader" states to upset the gravy train that is being funded for them by CA, NY, NJ, MA, IL and other BLUE states.

The real problem is in the Senate, where each state has equal representation, and where 76 Senators from the freeloader states can insure that the 24 Senators from the donor states can do little to change the inequity.

That means that the Ted Stevenses and Robert Byrds of the Senate will continue to have their bridges to nowhere and their repaved-for-the-hundredth-time highways funded by CA, while CA cuts school budgets and basic social services to the people who are the worst off in our state.

Meantime, the freeloading citizenry of the freeloader states will continue to rail on how undisciplined and under taxed we Californians are, all the while enjoying the benefits of Fed tax dollars that were earned not by them or by their state, but by CA.

[Johonny]

36. it's basically written in the constitution

which makes it really hard to change. In modern America there is no reason to split senators and representatives based on artificial state lines. It's an archaic concept based on an America circa 1780 when Americans saw themselves as members of nation states like Europe and not one country. I've post this before and not many DUers understand that this is a problem and under representation severely hurts many states to the benefit of just a few. I don't think this will change anytime soon. Californians will basically have to tax and create their own state programs to compensate for their lack of federal support. That they pass massively regressive tax laws is not in the best interest of those in the state. The oddest thing to me is the anti tax Californians have basically forced California into a tax base that doesn't tax maximum advantage of federal tax deductions.

[blue_onyx]

45. Where did this "underrepresented" BS start?

I've read that multiple times on DU recently. The Constitution says that the House is based on population and the Senate provides equal representation. The Senate would pointless and redundant if it also based on population. Being under-represented is not the reason for California's problems.

[WillyT]

9. If We Can Have Everything From Pismo Beach And Yosemite To The Oregon Border

I think I could live with that.

:hide::evilgrin::hide:

[Cleita]

68. Yeah and you get Arnold, but leave Pismo Beach out of it. I live close by. n/t

[Hepburn]

11. Two states:

I can do without NoCal. It is like another state ~~ not just another area of the same state. I would prefer SoCal as its own state. Besides ~~ since Sacramento is in NoCal, they would get to keep Ah-nold.

Maybe I am wrong, but when I have been in Texas ~~ which, of course, is a lot bigger than Calif ~~ Texas is pretty much alike or at least similar in most parts. NoCal and SoCal are totally different in just about everything I can think of.

JMHO

[Tikki]

14. California has incredible beauty to preserve....

The land boards and commissions throughout the State have
certain controls that have commonalities North and South..

These entities are political. Hopefully they
have ethical people sitting in power.

If you don't travel throughout this big State you may not
know what kind of economics rules one region, county or community.



I would be willing to fight to preserve the Central California Coast..
What you see there is breathtaking.


Tikki

[Hepburn]

18. I have lived in Calif for nearly 50 years. I have travelled...

...all over the state. I much prefer SoCal to NoCal. If NoCal split away, I would not miss it one bit. There are people in NoCal I absolutely love ~~ but there are also people on the east coast and in the mid-west who I adore and like to visit. I just see no need to have them living in the same state as me.

I just do not like NoCal and never have ~~ too cold and too damp, IMO, and too full of green stuff to which I am HORRIBLY allergic!

[Flaneur]

19. Do you mean mold or pot?

[Hepburn]

22. I am allergic to both!

Pot I can avoid ~~ but let me tell you, what a bummer to come of age in the 1960s and be allergic to pot!

Horribly allergic to mold and to things like pine trees. What makes it even worse? When people burn wood ~~ I nearly need a respirator at times. That is one reason my family moved from the mid-West to the West Coast ~~ my horrible allergies. NoCal is often a VERY miserable place for me. However ~~ SoCal beach or dessert: Much, much better for me.

Edit for typo

[Retrograde]

27. I'd say three states

North, South and Mountain/Desert. The South can keep the California name and the North can go back to its original name of Alta California.

I'd put the North/South border just south of San Luis Obispo. The east/west split can be right down 5. You guys down there can argue about who gets Riverside County.

(No, you're not wrong. They're very different mindsets. BTW, it's not NoCal: it's "God's Own Country" :) )

[SidneyCarton]

32. I'm a resident of Riverside County, we would have to end up with LA.

It's our port, all the commerce that comes through the County comes through the port of LA, the highways are set up for it, the I-10 and CA-60 corridors link us with the coast, it would be a disastrous place for an interstate boundary. The libertarians and fundies in the IE might not like it, but we're stuck with LA, and it's for the best.

[ContinentalOp]

41. LOL, it's YOUR port?

Hell, it's half of the nation's port. People always conveniently overlook that. They love to rag on California and particularly Los Angeles, and particularly our pollution. Then they conveniently ignore that we produce all of their entertainment, most of their food, and import almost all of the cheap chinese shit they buy at Wall Mart through our ports in Los Angeles and Long Beach. I'd love to see all of the "let California fail" types crying if we shut down the port for a month. I'd also love to see how much L.A.'s air quality would improve in that month.

[SidneyCarton]

54. good point.

What I mean is that the Inland Empire has a lot of work tied up in the Railroads, Warehousing and Trucking, all dependent on the Port of Los Angeles.

[mitchtv]

59. Don't worry it's going to be replaced by a giant

non union container facility south of Tijuana.

[marmar]

51. I'm pretty sure San Franciscans would love to be rid of "Hell-Lay"

:)

[Cleita]

71. I never understood that. My relatives are from San Francisco and north of there

but I'm a southie and I never heard the end of how awful we are. My only answer was, if you don't like us don't come down here. :shrug:

[MNDemNY]

15. Yes. With a massive earthquake.

[ContinentalOp]

42. Gee I hope your state is destroyed by natural disaster as well.

Lovely sentiment. :puke:

[MNDemNY]

46. Thicken up that skin.

a joke.

[scheming daemons]

47. His state will have to deal with Giuliani running for Governor... that's just as bad as an

earthquake

[bridgit]

17. Just don't be caught referring to The City as Frisco or there'll be hell to pay

I'm keeping Cambria for myself, however, as I have plans for converting the area to a principality, like Monaco, so I can wear gold braided Admiral hats to the bodega, build 220+ mph race tracks and swanky *green* casino's :thumbsup:

[ProgressiveProfessor]

34. I call it that sometimes just to annoy them...and it does

[CreekDog]

21. We could have a Bay Area state with adequately funded schools

universal health care and better mass transit.

if only.

[Initech]

23. Hi Cal -----> Lo Cal

[Hepburn]

24. LOL....n/t

[SidneyCarton]

26. or, in fairness to our northern neighbors...

No Cal ---> Lo Cal

[Initech]

66. Or you could also think of it as Hi Cal ---->*REALLY* High Cal

:smoke:

[bridgit]

69. whaa

:smoke:

[KamaAina]

28. Texas also does not have nearly the level of services California has (had)

and one of its standout institutions, the University of Texas at Austin, is endowed by leases from the oil that was found under its land grants (perhaps the worst-kept secret in academia).

[jclincali]

29. Yes, It should be broken into 4 states.

Jefferson/Green-Hippy land. (water, natural resources, pot)
Bay Area, wine country and surrounding areas (tech, business, agriculture, tourism)
The rest of the north and central (agriculture, industry)
SoCal (shopping malls, gas stations)

All could be viable. Jefferson maybe even the most with the Water and Pot.

[Oregone]

33. Turn Hollywood into a surrounded state, like the vatican, for Scientologists and MJ fans

Then turn I5 into a DMZ, and coral Calistinians on the East side of them, (after stealing their orange groves), and make them go through checkpoints to cross over to the West Cali Bank to work every day.

You could even break part of the state into self contained Ghettos maybe, which would be far cheaper to run. The people living in them could be provided with labor jobs at camps. If they work hard enough, they will be free to live elsewhere.

[tekisui]

35. No, 55 electoral votes.

[BolivarianHero]

37. Jesusland owes CA money...

Cali doesn't get much back for the tax dollars it contributes to the Feds.

[mitchtv]

38. I'd prefer larger

aa quick lightening strike and take Lake Meade and the entire east bank of the Colorado river. Incorporate LV as it is little more than a client state for CA anyway. Build settlements all over the AZ counties.

[SidneyCarton]

39. Kalifornia uber alles!

[LeftyMom]

40. Yes. A north-south divide somewhere in the central state. Fresno-ish.

NorCal will legalize pot and start charging SoCal for water, and we'll never have budget trouble again.

[ContinentalOp]

43. Hell no! Fuck off flyover staters. Mind your own damn business. -nt-

[blue_onyx]

49. Nice

I just love that "flyover state" mentality of some Californians. :eyes:

BTW, the thread was started by a Californian.

[SidneyCarton]

55. Come on, really?

These attitudes suck as much as the people who say let CA fail.

[ProgressiveFool]

44. No

I grew up in SoCal, went to school in NoCal, and I recognize California as one state. If anything, we should just secede.

[Ardent15]

48. The Bay Area and LA could be their own states...

I could do without the rest of the state.

[yurbud]

50. yes--break it up into progressive coast and conservative hinterlands

[Name removed]

52. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[SidneyCarton]

56. Yeah, considering the 16 million people in LA county include quite a bit of the tax base...

:eyes:

[FarCenter]

53. Extend the AZ/NM border west, the NM border south, and give the whole lot back to Mexico

With deepest apologies for that unpleasantness in the 1840s.

It would also get rid of most of the bad mortgage problems.

[cherokeeprogressive]

57. Which part of the state contributes more to the state's tax coffers?

I believe it's So. Cal., and I think the Nor. Cal. peeps would suffer without it.

[mitchtv]

58. believe me Nor cal wouldn't suffer

while So Cal might contribute more, they also drain more of the resources. Things still work in the North, while SoCal is approaching third world status.

[cherokeeprogressive]

61. LOL. What color is the sky in YOUR world?

The ports of San Diego, Long Beach, and Los Angeles are the busiest in the world. What does Northern California have that would match those things? An orange bridge normally so shrouded by fog that it can't be seen? A song by a band called Journey that no one under forty has ever heard? Three sports teams that are perennial losers?

Do you want the San Joaquin Valley or shall we keep it? If you keep it, how are you going to ship all that food to where it needs to go? Where will your illegal aliens go for health care? We'll take care of them, like we've been doing for the last twenty years.

Oh, and you can keep your water. When it becomes necessary, we're going to build desalination plants powered by their own VERY small nuclear reactors that will make so much fresh water it'll make your head spin. And we're going to sell the salt by-product to the rest of the world branded as California Sea Salt.

Northern California is destined to be known as a small artists enclave and not much more should it separate itself from the rest of California.

[mitchtv]

64. san Joaquin to South

Sacramento Valley to north. NoCal has silicon Valley Port of Oakland is large and very modern. the nukes would get me to leave riverside Co. I prefer clean and foggy to photoelectric haze

[tomm2thumbs]

60. Let's try 1000 Pieces and then slowly link them together as they fit

Eventually you'll have the state of California again. But it'll be quite interesting to watch in a time lapse video.

[Jennicut]

62. I live in Connecticut and we are so small it takes a bit over an hour to drive through it

I don't know how you crazy Californians do it. :) Here in CT we consider a 4 hour drive to be going through 3 states in New England.
Seriously, that does not seem realistic.

[OnionPatch]

63. Maybe it should be split east/west.

It seems like there are more liberal areas are near the coast. Inland is where you find the bulk of conservatives. I remember seeing a red/blue county map of a recent election that was split like that.

[ShadowLiberal]

65. The problem is extreme polarization of the state government & unrealistic budget/tax rules

The state being too big isn't the problem with California, I mean the Federal government is much bigger.

Also having lots of small states could actually make things worse, since then you have more overhead costs. For example instead of paying one governor you have like 10 to pay then in 10 different states. And lots of other jobs would need to be duplicated, you'd need more state workers then California currently has now. It's because of stuff like this that they're discussing merging some school districts here in PA, because they're the smallest in the nation.

The real problems are the unrealistic rules for how to pass budgets and tax increases in California, and radical polarization of both parties there.

With the GOP blaming 'losing their way' on taxes and spending for losing their majority at the federal level, the GOPers in the legislature are getting more and more strict and against any tax hikes, which are needed to balance the budget without pissing off way more voters then the tax hikes would.

Because of that California suffers as the GOP threatens primary challenges to anyone who dare votes for a tax hike in any way, and no budget gets passed till a few brave GOPers give in, or until over half the democratic caucus gives in. But the democrats aren't too eager to give in to the GOP's demands either, because they know people will have their heads if they vote for a budget with no tax hikes that would therefore be forced to include painful cuts in lots of areas people care deeply about.

And of course the voters don't have realistic expectations either, ask a voter and they'll say "sure I want stuff like free health care and other services/benefits from the government, but me pay more taxes to pay for it, no way!".

[Thothmes]

67. All you need to do is amendend the Constitution

of the United States, and you can divy it up into as many pieces as you like.

[Cleita]

70. Trouble is that north and south are dependent on each other. South needs

water from the north and north needs tax revenues from the south. Well that's when things are operating normally, not under our present governorship.

[bridgit]

72. Yes friend, you see it, this is a *truly* great state we have here god bless them...

but we are not talking about a state where-through you sneeze, so to speak, or cough and you find yourself in the next state...California is vast yes, we have a north (where I am :)) and a south; but it takes 15hrs 20mins to traverse it and that's not counting down the 395 we are a contiguous entity we are California


http://www.mapquest.com/maps?1c=El+Centro&1s=CA&1y=US&1l=32.791901&1g=-115.562202&1v=CITY&2c=Crescent+City&2s=CA&2y=US&2l=41.7561&2g=-124.2006&2v=CITY

[ColbertWatcher]

73. No. n/t

[saltpoint]

74. No.