General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forums'Three Californias' plan would give Dems more seats
A proposal to split the nations most populous state into three smaller states would give Democrats a huge boost in the perpetual battle for control of the United States Senate likely dooming the plan even before voters have a chance to weigh in.
California voters will vote this November on the ballot measure, backed by tech billionaire and venture capitalist Tim Draper. If the measure passes, Congress would have a year to allow the state to split up into three separate states one centered around Los Angeles, another in Northern California that includes the Bay Area and Sacramento, and a third in Southern California that would include the Central Valley and San Diego.
Democrats have easily won Californias electoral votes in recent years. George H.W. Bush was the last Republican to win the state at the presidential level, and Republicans havent won a Senate seat in California since Pete Wilson won reelection in 1988.
But if Democrats are leery of splitting Californias 55 electoral votes, recent election results show the three new states all would have voted for Democratic presidential nominees Hillary Clinton in 2016 and Barack Obama in 2008 and 2012.
Data compiled by Ballotpedia, the political analysis firm, found Clinton would have won more than 60 percent of the vote in both California the Los Angeles-based state and Northern California. She would have won almost 52 percent of the vote in Southern California, while President Trump would have taken 42 percent.
Obama would have won all three states in 2012 and 2008, though he would have won the San Diego-based Southern California state by just 27,000 votes over Mitt Romney in 2012, a margin of just six-tenths of a percentage point.
That means Democrats would have earned 59 electoral votes four more than they did in 2016, because every state gets two more electoral votes than the number of representatives it sends to Congress though a third of those votes would have been far more competitive than they are at present.
http://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/392488-three-californias-plan-would-give-dems-more-seats
dem4decades
(11,322 posts)thucythucy
(8,139 posts)Still, I don't see why Democrats aren't seriously pushing the idea of statement for both.
DC has more people in it than Wyoming. Why should it get only one non-voting Rep, in the House, and no representation at all in the Senate? Same with Puerto Rico.
Just another instance of how the system is rigged against us.
MrsCoffee
(5,803 posts)It's not at all in the Democrats best interest. Many people have pointed out that the boundries are designed to try to give the Republicans a 4-2 Senate advantage.
Don't buy into this.
thucythucy
(8,139 posts)of which I know next to nothing.
I'll take your word on it that it's a screwy idea and would hurt Dems.
But DC and Puerto Rican statehood are long overdue. Would Congress and the parties have ignored Puerto Rico this past year if it was a state with two senators, several reps, and a bunch of electoral votes? I tend to think not.
KCDebbie
(664 posts)Senators to fight for them to get funding to bring PR back into the 21st Century after being devastated by that hurricane last fall...
thucythucy
(8,139 posts)And at least three Electoral College votes, probably more.
KCDebbie
(664 posts)So Puerto Rico would get three Congressional Districts? That is, some other states, depending on their population, would give give up a seat so that Puerto Rico would get three Congressional districts?
Puerto Rico has 2.3 million citizens given that each congressman/woman represents about 750,000 Americans?
thucythucy
(8,139 posts)no matter how small their population. Two Senators plus one representative.
The more representatives, the more Electoral College votes, but no state ever gets less than three.
I wish they'd also just add representatives as needed, instead of keeping the Congress set at this arbitrary figure,
KCDebbie
(664 posts)thucythucy
(8,139 posts)Best wishes.
politicaljunkie41910
(3,335 posts)North Dakota and South Dakota both have 2 Senators and 1 House Representative while each has a population of approximately 175,000 residents. Between the two Dakotas they have 4 Senators while California has 2. Yes I know that there are other small states besides the Dakotas, but the Dakotas illustrate perfectly why at most they should be ONE state with ONE Representative and 2 Senator's on a good day, not 4.
Sophia4
(3,515 posts)Downtown Hound
(12,618 posts)But y'all can stop worrying about this. An April poll found Californians opposed to this idea by a ratio of 4 to 1. And let's just put on the imagination cap and pretend that for some reason California changed it's mind (which they won't), it still has to be approved by the state legislature, which will not happen. It's controlled by Dems.
MurrayDelph
(5,307 posts)anything, it's to not stop worrying about this until after November 6.
Take nothing for granted. We're living in the bad "Counterpart" universe.
angrychair
(8,759 posts)That will make elections more expensive and complicated. Not to mention its not as simple as people in CA taking a vote on it. That is barely scratching the surface to that process that would likely take a decade or more, if at all.
A calexit or breaking CA up has been found to be a pet project of Russian trolls to create disharmony and friction between competing camps within the DNC and leveraging it to the advantage of the republicans.
BigmanPigman
(51,675 posts)I have been saying the same thing but no one wanted to hear it on DU the other day.
https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1040&pid=18829
angrychair
(8,759 posts)Breaking up CA is NOT in our Partys long-term best interest.
yallerdawg
(16,104 posts)has an article suggesting breaking up California would be good for Democrats?
That's all I need to know!
MrsCoffee
(5,803 posts)This is being promoted by a guy with Russian connections and investments.
Fuck him and this bullshit.
lagomorph777
(30,613 posts)Fuck him and the horse he rode shirtless on.
Wwcd
(6,288 posts)CA needs to remain one State.
This is such a hairbrained RW proposal being marketed like all the other chop & carve up bull we've seen from them
The coup is not yet complete
LastLiberal in PalmSprings
(12,604 posts)and at the same time replace him with a new candidate. Issa pulled the stunt so he could become governor, but he was thoroughly trounced by Arnold Schwarzenegger.
The final result was that the man who had won by millions of votes (Davis) was replaced by a man who won by hundreds of thousands, thereby negating the votes of millions of Californians.
I fervently hope Californians don't buy into this misguided effort to split up the state.
TeamPooka
(24,309 posts)It would not be a lock anymore in those two "states"
but more importantly there are parts of the state that need support from the others.
Our cities taxes support the rural areas. Cutting them out of the state would create a new Kansas right away.
we're pretty proud of the state we have here, just like Texas I'm sure, so we're not going to break it up.
DFW
(54,527 posts)Suddenly we'd keep two Democratic Senators and have four new Republican ones plus two new Republican governors.
I'd rather not see that.
Freethinker65
(10,119 posts)It would not be good even for red rural areas as they depend on the populous cities.
It might be better for the national GOP for the short term.
marlakay
(11,545 posts)To do, break up Californias power.
Freethinker65
(10,119 posts)There are enough wealthier California conservatives that know they are personally better off with a strong united California economy than they would be in a less powerful, though perhaps more conservatively represented, smaller state.
And most Democrats see it as an obvious GOP power grab at the National level.
Wounded Bear
(58,799 posts)That would lead to 3-4 additional Repub senators IMNSHO. No way the supporters would support something that benefitted Dems.
Looking at the map, the two interior sections proposed have a shitload of red counties in them.
hlthe2b
(102,580 posts)as a new progressive country...NO, I'm not espousing secession--just "spit-balling", but certainly the first five states have more in common politically than not. Likewise NY and much of the NE, if contiguous boundaries were not an issue.
haele
(12,704 posts)It doesn't matter that some Venture Capitalist/Libertarian elitist A-hole thinks his little slice of California can sustain itself under less regulation and more tax breaks while the rest of the state takes up the burden of providing infrastructure and the service economy that supports the technocracy that is Central Coastal California.
A split up California along his lines will end up politically the same as two Arkansas and a Long Island. Just because the voters in the whole state ended up voting for Hillary Clinton and that the whole state voting has resulted in a Democratic majority, splitting into three states will end up with one solid Red state (Northern/Central California), one mostly Blue state (Central Coastal California), and one toss-up that will lean Red (Southern/Central Valley California minus the liberal Ventura and north coastal/San Fernando Valley side of Los Angeles County, the way it's drawn).
Orange and Riverside Counties are pretty darn red, and the majority of the residents are really much more focused on sustaining large corporate interests and making status and money above the lip service they pay to environmental concerns or sustainable, affordable living...
California is the fifth largest economy in the world, with a surplus in the billions that can sustain it through a recession if necessary and still pay all the bills.
Splitting it up will put more of a burden on the working folk because the rich technocrats don't want to pay the taxes necessary to keep it the fifth largest economy in the world.
Just because some Virginia or DC based "think tank" believes that since we seem to be blue, a split would be a political gain for the Democrats, the people who actually live and pay taxes here have a much better idea on how that split would work. And that we residents have already experienced "governance" by the Republicans and Libertarian speculators who flock to this state because of the economic opportunities to make lots of money don't like to pay taxes - the entry fee, as it were - to be able to make money here.
Haele
lame54
(35,360 posts)It's only to enrich a few people
Iggo
(47,603 posts)Californians from Oregon to Mexico all voted in one election, the same election, with one set of candidates running.
You can't take that data and spread it out as if it would be exactly the same in three different elections, with three different sets of candidates running.
I guaran-fucking-tee you San Diego plus The Inland Empire would absolutely send two Republicans to the Senate.
peggysue2
(10,854 posts)to all three mini-Calif. states. This is merely a variation of the same ole theme and Pooty-backed idea of chaos that was the former Calexit movement and its current reiteration. It was fake then and it's fake now, meant only to spin up more divisiveness and confusion in the electorate.
Once we get out of this current debacle and a Calif majority is serious about any side of this--that's one thing. But right now? I can smell the stink rolling clear from the Pacific, over the Rockies to the Smoky Mountains. Smells like more of the same with a tempting twist--Dems could gain.
And Draper? He's a billionaire, Silicon Valley guy who has enthusiastically supported cryptocurrencies and Elizabeth Holmes' Theranos, a total fraud, who left investors holding a big bag of nothing.
Notice how these fraudsters hang together? Birds of a feather. Don't be fooled.
Iliyah
(25,111 posts)Iggo
(47,603 posts)You and I both know how that starts to even up as the day gets nearer, though, and stupid people start thinking they're smart by doing the opposite of the smart thing.
TDale313
(7,820 posts)And it sounds like polls are not favorable. Californias clout in National elections is already watered down. I seriously doubt this would help. On the state level, we are doing just fine. We have our issues, but again this would not help.
Freethinker65
(10,119 posts)nolabels
(13,133 posts)These type of people are all alike, they always want to divide up something they are unable to control. Mostly I think, they will again be told to just to go pound sand
Caliman73
(11,760 posts)A bullshit selling, venture capitalist, libertarian asshole billionaire.
nolabels
(13,133 posts)FIVE STUDIES: THE PSYCHOLOGY OF THE ULTRA-RICH, ACCORDING TO THE RESEARCH
Bernie Sanders says that billionaires have psychiatric issues. Hes not entirely incorrect.
LIVIA GERSHONJUL 31, 2015
https://psmag.com/social-justice/five-studies-bernie-sanders-says-the-rich-are-deranged
And You And I
Yes
A man conceived a moment's answers to the dream
Staying the flowers daily, sensing all the themes
As a foundation left to create the spiral aim
A movement regained and regarded both the same
All complete in the sight of seeds of life with you
Changed only for a sight of sound, the space agreed
Between the picture of time behind the face of need
Coming quickly to terms of all expression laid
Emotion revealed as the ocean maid
All complete in the sight of seeds of life with you
Oh
Turn round tailor
Coins and
Assaulting all the mornings of the
Crosses
Interest shown
Never know
Presenting one another to the cord
Their fruitless worth
All left dying, rediscovered
Cords are broken
Of the door that turned round
Locked inside
To close the cover
The mother earth
All the interest shown
They won't
To turn one another, to the sign
Hide, hold, they won't
At the time
Tell you, watching the world
To float your climb
Watching all of the world
Watching us go by
And you and I climb over the sea to the valley
And you and I reached out for reasons to call
Coming quickly to terms of all expression laid
Emotion revealed as the ocean maid
As a movement regained and regarded both the same
All complete in the side of seeds of life with you
Sad preacher nailed upon the coloured door of time
Insane teacher be there reminded of the rhyme
There'll be no mutant enemy we shall certify
Political ends, as sad remains, will die
Reach out as forward tastes begin to enter you
Ooh, ooh
I listened hard but could not see
Life tempo change out and inside me
The preacher trained in all to lose his name
The teacher travels, asking to be shown the same
In the end, we'll agree, we'll accept, we'll immortalize
That the truth of the man maturing in his eyes
All complete in the sight of seeds of life with you
Coming quickly to terms of all expression laid
As a moment regained and regarded both the same
Emotion revealed as the ocean maid
A clearer future, morning, evening, nights with you
And you and I climb, crossing the shapes of the morning
And you and I reach over the sun for the river
And you and I climb, clearer, towards the movement
And you and I called over valleys of endless seas
Songwriters: Chris Squire / Jon Anderson / Steve James Howe / Tony Kaye / William Scott Bruford
And You And I lyrics © Warner/Chappell Music, Inc
dlk
(11,606 posts)Of course, Republicans want to split it up.
JI7
(89,290 posts)Yavin4
(35,455 posts)Aint worth the risk.
Sophia4
(3,515 posts)San Diego are lumped together in one state. This could well increase, not the number of Democrats in the Senate, but the number of Republicans.
It is not a good way or fair way to divide the state. And we who live in Southern California, especially Los Angeles, need the ability to regulate an obtain the water from the Sierras -- which under that plan mentioned in the OP would be part of a different state.
No Thanks.
Get rid of the electoral college and let California be California.
Hekate
(91,055 posts)People don't get how conservative a big chunk of California is.
DFW
(54,527 posts)Gerrymander the map to get two red states and one big blue one. It is a net gain of two senators for the Republicans. Typical McTurtle strategizing. It should never happen.