Plan to split California into Six States

[Brandon]

Where the hell is FritzOwl?

Plan to split California has 1.3 million signatures

The billionaire backer of a long-shot effort to break California into six separate states submitted signatures to state officials Tuesday aimed at putting his proposal before voters in 2016.

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 working for months on a ballot initiative to chop the most populous U.S. state into smaller entities.

"Today, we turn in 1.3 million signatures that say we are ready to make a change," Draper said. "We are ready to create six more responsive, representative governments."

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.

[corco]

Holy crap, we had a billionaire in our midst and we dismissed his ideas as being crazy.

[roadman65]

Two states maybe, but six.  Holy cow as Scooter would once say.  I have met many from California do not recognize Southern California as their own and hope that someday they will become another state or go back to Mexico, but never felt the tone for further breakup up north.

[corco]

Two states maybe, but six.  Holy cow as Scooter would once say.  I have met many from California do not recognize Southern California as their own and hope that someday they will become another state or go back to Mexico, but never felt the tone for further breakup up north.

The State of Jefferson is one of the oldest and strongest state-split proposals out there.

[oscar]

Two states maybe, but six.  Holy cow as Scooter would once say.  I have met many from California do not recognize Southern California as their own and hope that someday they will become another state or go back to Mexico, but never felt the tone for further breakup up north.

There has been some sentiment in rural northern California that they'd rather break away than be in a northern California state hopelessly dominated by its coastal populations.

A six-way split might be hard to sell to voters, among other reasons that there are so many more boundaries for people to quibble about.  It would also complicate getting Congress' approval.  Congressional Republicans will have problems with a split that could net out to more blue states.  Congressional Democrats, as well as a blue-tilting California population, will have problems with a split that might on balance mean more red states.  (Not necessarily the level of nastiness before our Civil War, about balancing new free states and new slave states, but still could get ugly if it gets to Congress at all.)  That kind of tightrope-walking invites trouble for an already complicated plan.

[english si]

Holy crap, we had a billionaire in our midst and we dismissed his ideas as being crazy.

No, he just took the idea at the start of the petition and ran off a cliff with it...

[Zeffy]

How the hell is everyone so region-centric over there in California? I don't get what warrants splitting the state into six other ones. I mean, over here in New Jersey, the north and south portions are vastly different from eachother (and then you have the central New Jerseyans like me who are just kind of in the middle), but I don't think we need to divide the state because of that.

[hotdogPi]

I think it's to keep the population of each state more balanced.

[corco]

How the hell is everyone so region-centric over there in California? I don't get what warrants splitting the state into six other ones. I mean, over here in New Jersey, the north and south portions are vastly different from eachother (and then you have the central New Jerseyans like me who are just kind of in the middle), but I don't think we need to divide the state because of that.

You realize that New Jersey is a teensy bit smaller than California, right?

[jeffandnicole]

And some fat guy named Peter will want to break away and create state #7 called Petoria.

[DTComposer]

God, this proposal annoys me to no end. Not the concept in and of itself, but the utter lack of thought that went into it. I've ranted about this in earlier threads, but here's some more things that have been brought up, or have come up in my mind:

-Perhaps 60% of Cailfornia's college students would suddenly be "out-of-state." Would they have to pay higher tuitions, would they be grandfathered, what about students who have applied/been accepted but not enrolled at the time of the split? What about the dismantling/division of the UC/CSU systems themselves? Jefferson wouldn't have a single UC campus; other campuses would not be evenly distributed based on states' population. Would campuses be moved/shut down?

-My conservative estimate is that over a million phone numbers would have to change, because area codes can't cross state lines, and the exchanges in adjacent codes in the new states are already being used. So not just new area codes, but entirely new numbers.

-Economy: the split would create the highest per-capita income state in the country (Silicon Valley) as well as the lowest (Central California).

-Infrastructure: Most of California's prisons would be in states with lower populations, meaning the more populous states would have to build new prisons.
Similarly, the major metropolitan areas would suddenly find themselves importing water from two or three states away.
Also, the costs of building or retrofitting buildings to house five new state capitals?

-Bureaucracy: not just five new state governments, but splitting up quasi-governmental agencies that would suddenly span states (the regional districts for transportation, air quality, long-range planning, etc. in both L.A. and the Bay Area would have to divide).

My guess is many of these issues would be solved, at least in the short term, by operating agreements between the states that would try to maintain the status quo (for colleges, prisons, water, etc.). Except that those agreements would have to be ratified by multiple state governments. And those state governments would likely be dominated by the same politicians we have now. Except there will be more of them. So all we've done is create more government, more bureaucracy, more confusion, and most likely not removed the partisanship and corruptness that is the actual problem with the current state government. WHHEEEEEEE!

And the names. Silicon Valley? It's like re-naming North Carolina the "State of Research Triangle." Centuries of romantic, historical and interesting names and four of your six states are named with directionals? You can't even muster up enough marketing élan to do better than "Central California"?

[/rant]

[Grzrd]

And some fat guy named Peter will want to break away and create state #7 called Petoria.

God, this proposal annoys me to no end ....
And the names ... marketing élan ...

This article reports that Eureka would possibly be the capital of the only one of the six named after a person ....

[oscar]

-My conservative estimate is that over a million phone numbers would have to change, because area codes can't cross state lines, and the exchanges in adjacent codes in the new states are already being used. So not just new area codes, but entirely new numbers.

Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island provinces share 902.  Yukon, Northwest Territories, and Nunavut territories share 867 (itself formed by a merger of part of Alberta's 403 and part of Quebec's 819), which also serves border areas of British Columbia and Alberta provinces.  British Columbia's area code 250 also serves the border town of Hyder, Alaska.  All of these area codes are in the same numbering plan as the United States. 

There are other major issues with the proposal, including the all-important water issue (a source of regional tensions, which I don't know how a state split will help with, notwithstanding what its author says).  But area codes are small beer. 

[DTComposer]

-My conservative estimate is that over a million phone numbers would have to change, because area codes can't cross state lines, and the exchanges in adjacent codes in the new states are already being used. So not just new area codes, but entirely new numbers.

Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island provinces share 902.  Yukon, Northwest Territories, and Nunavut territories share 867.  British Columbia's area code 250 also serves Hyder, Alaska.  All of these area codes are in the same numbering plan as the United States. 

There are other major issues with the proposal, including the all-important water issue (a source of regional tensions, which I don't know how a state split will help with, notwithstanding what its author says).  But area codes are small beer. 

Point taken (as yes, it's way down on the list of concerns), but those examples are multiple states/provinces sharing one single code, not multiple codes straddling portions of multiple states, and Hyder is a tiny settlement geographically isolated from the rest of the state. Area code 909, for example, serves about 500,000 people in Los Angeles County. Area code 661 serves over 600,000 people in Los Angeles County.

[Brandon]

-My conservative estimate is that over a million phone numbers would have to change, because area codes can't cross state lines, and the exchanges in adjacent codes in the new states are already being used. So not just new area codes, but entirely new numbers.

Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island provinces share 902.  Yukon, Northwest Territories, and Nunavut territories share 867.  British Columbia's area code 250 also serves Hyder, Alaska.  All of these area codes are in the same numbering plan as the United States. 

There are other major issues with the proposal, including the all-important water issue (a source of regional tensions, which I don't know how a state split will help with, notwithstanding what its author says).  But area codes are small beer. 

Point taken (as yes, it's way down on the list of concerns), but those examples are multiple states/provinces sharing one single code, not multiple codes straddling portions of multiple states, and Hyder is a tiny settlement geographically isolated from the rest of the state. Area code 909, for example, serves about 500,000 people in Los Angeles County. Area code 661 serves over 600,000 people in Los Angeles County.

It really doesn't matter anymore about area codes crossing state lines anyway.  With the advent of cell phones, people just take their number from their original area code with them anywhere they go.  What does geography have to do with that?

[formulanone]

Holy crap, we had a billionaire in our midst and we dismissed his ideas as being crazy.

Pfft...that's two four-level stacks and a couple of stub ramps, at most.

[PColumbus73]

I highly doubt Californians would want to split into 2 or 6 states. (Although I think between the two scenarios, 2 Californias would be more plausible).

However, if they are trying to sell the idea of giving California 5 siblings, they ought to come up with some better names.

Jefferson = Shasta

North California = Augustina (named after John Augustus Sutter, Jr., one of the founders of Sacramento.)

Silicon Valley = Bahias (Spanish for Bays)

Central California = Sequoia (Sequoia National Park)

West California = Angeles

South California = Mojave

Just a thought.

[DTComposer]

-My conservative estimate is that over a million phone numbers would have to change, because area codes can't cross state lines, and the exchanges in adjacent codes in the new states are already being used. So not just new area codes, but entirely new numbers.

Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island provinces share 902.  Yukon, Northwest Territories, and Nunavut territories share 867.  British Columbia's area code 250 also serves Hyder, Alaska.  All of these area codes are in the same numbering plan as the United States. 

There are other major issues with the proposal, including the all-important water issue (a source of regional tensions, which I don't know how a state split will help with, notwithstanding what its author says).  But area codes are small beer. 

Point taken (as yes, it's way down on the list of concerns), but those examples are multiple states/provinces sharing one single code, not multiple codes straddling portions of multiple states, and Hyder is a tiny settlement geographically isolated from the rest of the state. Area code 909, for example, serves about 500,000 people in Los Angeles County. Area code 661 serves over 600,000 people in Los Angeles County.

It really doesn't matter anymore about area codes crossing state lines anyway.  With the advent of cell phones, people just take their number from their original area code with them anywhere they go.  What does geography have to do with that?

True for many individuals, but most businesses have at least one and likely several land lines (voice, internet, data, fax, alarm, etc.), and many homes still have land lines for internet, alarms, etc.

[rschen7754]

I wouldn't be opposed to a splitting proposal, but 6? That's overkill...

[roadman]

If you still need proof that initiative petition is NOT the way to legislate complex issues into law, then look no further than this proposal.

[jeffandnicole]

-My conservative estimate is that over a million phone numbers would have to change, because area codes can't cross state lines, and the exchanges in adjacent codes in the new states are already being used. So not just new area codes, but entirely new numbers.

Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island provinces share 902.  Yukon, Northwest Territories, and Nunavut territories share 867.  British Columbia's area code 250 also serves Hyder, Alaska.  All of these area codes are in the same numbering plan as the United States. 

There are other major issues with the proposal, including the all-important water issue (a source of regional tensions, which I don't know how a state split will help with, notwithstanding what its author says).  But area codes are small beer. 

Point taken (as yes, it's way down on the list of concerns), but those examples are multiple states/provinces sharing one single code, not multiple codes straddling portions of multiple states, and Hyder is a tiny settlement geographically isolated from the rest of the state. Area code 909, for example, serves about 500,000 people in Los Angeles County. Area code 661 serves over 600,000 people in Los Angeles County.

It really doesn't matter anymore about area codes crossing state lines anyway.  With the advent of cell phones, people just take their number from their original area code with them anywhere they go.  What does geography have to do with that?

But what about the US Flag?  It will go from 50 stars to 55 stars.  That affects everyone!!

[freebrickproductions]

It sounds like a very dumb idea. It'd make it even harder to do anything in Congress if this actually happens.

[SteveG1988]

I highly doubt Californians would want to split into 2 or 6 states. (Although I think between the two scenarios, 2 Californias would be more plausible).

However, if they are trying to sell the idea of giving California 5 siblings, they ought to come up with some better names.

Jefferson = Shasta

North California = Augustina (named after John Augustus Sutter, Jr., one of the founders of Sacramento.)

Silicon Valley = Bahias (Spanish for Bays)

Central California = Sequoia (Sequoia National Park)

West California = Angeles

South California = Mojave

Just a thought.

Shasta...The Cheap Soda State

[Billy F 1988]

If you're splitting California, I can see about 3 sections forming a "New California", but 6 is too much. That'd be like splitting Montana into 6 states. What the heck would that end up being? A major cluster bucket of fuck for that matter.

[freebrickproductions]

While we're at it, why don't we divide it up so that there's enough states for each state to only have one area code?