If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(ABC)   Somebody thinks it'd be a wonderful idea to split California into six pieces. What could possibly go wrong?   (abcnews.go.com) divider line 88
    More: Unlikely, Brendan Nyhan, secretary of states  
•       •       •

1213 clicks; posted to Politics » on 20 Feb 2014 at 8:43 AM (35 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



88 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-02-20 03:34:08 AM  
Not that this will come into fruition, but the additional states would acquire their own electoral college votes. Wouldn't this assure a Republican defeat in presidential elections?
 
2014-02-20 03:56:20 AM  

loveblondieo: Not that this will come into fruition, but the additional states would acquire their own electoral college votes. Wouldn't this assure a Republican defeat in presidential elections?


Not really.

I'm fairly certain at least 2, possibly 4, I'd have to check election maps, would be Republican or at least close enough to be competitive.

So it's currently 55-0, and it would end up as 50-15* or so.  Net gain for them.

* Vote counts pulled out of ass, but you get the point
 
2014-02-20 04:03:16 AM  

meyerkev: So it's currently 55-0, and it would end up as 50-15* or so.  Net gain for them.

* Vote counts pulled out of ass, but you get the point


Ah, 10-4. A person can dream though.
 
2014-02-20 06:53:04 AM  
It's too complicated. Let's just give Texas back to Mexico.
 
2014-02-20 08:15:46 AM  

loveblondieo: Wouldn't this assure a Republican defeat in presidential elections?


I think the GOP has the Republican defeat well in hand.
Every time they open their mouths.
 
2014-02-20 08:17:09 AM  
We've got enough stars on the flag already.  And the last thing we need are more senators.  If you split California in half I'm afraid you'll also have to merge Idaho and Montana together.  Not that anyone would notice.
 
2014-02-20 08:47:29 AM  
while Bakersfield, Fresno and Stockton would make up the larger "Central California. New Oklahoma"

FTFY
 
2014-02-20 08:48:08 AM  
It'd be fun to see them fight over water and who has to take San Bernadino.

/everything I know about San Bernadino is from Frank Zappa
//I'm sorry you got a head like a potato, I really am
 
2014-02-20 08:48:29 AM  
Would require an act of congress, which isn't acting on anything.
 
2014-02-20 08:54:54 AM  

meyerkev: loveblondieo: Not that this will come into fruition, but the additional states would acquire their own electoral college votes. Wouldn't this assure a Republican defeat in presidential elections?

Not really.

I'm fairly certain at least 2, possibly 4, I'd have to check election maps, would be Republican or at least close enough to be competitive.

So it's currently 55-0, and it would end up as 50-15* or so.  Net gain for them.

* Vote counts pulled out of ass, but you get the point


Can you imagine the ad campaigns that would run before the split, trying to convince people to move to such-and-such new state?
 
2014-02-20 08:55:31 AM  

Duke Phillips' Singing Bears: It'd be fun to see them fight over water and who has to take San Bernadino.

/everything I know about San Bernadino is from Frank Zappa
//I'm sorry you got a head like a potato, I really am


I once went to a Wal-Mart in San Berdoo.  It was the worst Wal-Mart I have ever been to by far.  Imagine how bad that is.

At least the ammo was really cheap once we trudged over enough boxes, dodged enough unattended children, and finally found a semi-literate meth addict/Wal-Mart associate to open the case.
 
2014-02-20 08:56:15 AM  

meyerkev: loveblondieo: Not that this will come into fruition, but the additional states would acquire their own electoral college votes. Wouldn't this assure a Republican defeat in presidential elections?

Not really.

I'm fairly certain at least 2, possibly 4, I'd have to check election maps, would be Republican or at least close enough to be competitive.

So it's currently 55-0, and it would end up as 50-15* or so.  Net gain for them.

* Vote counts pulled out of ass, but you get the point


And that's the only reason this is being proposed.
 
2014-02-20 09:00:00 AM  
Cute. Trying to split the EV. They'll try to do do that TX too once they seem that it may become blue.
 
2014-02-20 09:01:36 AM  

Marcus Aurelius: We've got enough stars on the flag already.


48 is plenty. I'll never recognize Alaska and Hawaii! :-)

California is not alone. There are a few states with constituents that are making noise about splitting. Colorado, for example. (I don't think that debate has dissipated. Perhaps its "mellowed" some...)

There's something interesting going on in New York where upper New York (becoming New Amsterdam?) wants to be separately governed from New York, New York, but still remain the same state (Heck, I may have even seen that story on Fark). /shrug. I don't know. It's all madness.

Personally, I haven't decided yet if this is a good idea or a bad idea. And in the end, it probably will be a little bit of both.
 
2014-02-20 09:05:13 AM  

meyerkev: loveblondieo: Not that this will come into fruition, but the additional states would acquire their own electoral college votes. Wouldn't this assure a Republican defeat in presidential elections?

Not really.

I'm fairly certain at least 2, possibly 4, I'd have to check election maps, would be Republican or at least close enough to be competitive.

So it's currently 55-0, and it would end up as 50-15* or so.  Net gain for them.

* Vote counts pulled out of ass, but you get the point


I've noticed a lot of talk lately about splitting states up. Things like Texas turning into 5 states, Colorado splitting in half, Oregon and California turning into 3 net states, this 5 state proposal now....

It's all Republicans realizing that they are becoming marginalized, and trying to retain some kind of power.
 
2014-02-20 09:09:11 AM  

kidgenius: 've noticed a lot of talk lately about splitting states up. Things like Texas turning into 5 states, Colorado splitting in half, Oregon and California turning into 3 net states, this 5 state proposal now....

It's all Republicans realizing that they are becoming marginalized, and trying to retain some kind of power.


One of the reasons the New York thing popped up is the animosity generated by Cuomo's "get out" rant.

Agree or disagree with Cuomo, that was sort of uncool.
 
2014-02-20 09:11:36 AM  
Isn't the San Andreas fault already working on that?
 
2014-02-20 09:17:57 AM  
First, New England north of Massachusets has to merge into one state with two Senators. I know this will produce some Kiev grade shiat storm when Vermont and New Hampshire are forced to acknowledge each other, but it's as essential to senate balancing as the California slice and dice.
 
2014-02-20 09:17:57 AM  
From the Constitution, Article 4, Section 3:
"New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new States shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress."

So sorry folks, it's nice to dream, but it's just not happening. None of these "form a new state" plans are happening--no state legislature, at this point, is going to let any territory/tax revenue/potential resources go and Congress is no longer functional enough to handle something like this.
I mean, have some fun thinking about it, and drawing new maps and making flags and such, but understand that it just won't actually ever happen.
 
2014-02-20 09:18:47 AM  

loveblondieo: Not that this will come into fruition, but the additional states would acquire their own electoral college votes. Wouldn't this assure a Republican defeat in presidential elections?


The House is limited to 435 members and as such representation would be apportioned to the population of each State.

There would be no additions to the number of Electoral Votes.
 
2014-02-20 09:21:08 AM  
"California as it is is ungovernable," Draper [A venture capitalist ] told ABC News today. "It is more and more difficult for Sacramento to keep up with the social issues from the various regions of California. With six Californias, people will be closer to their state governments, and states can get a refresh".

Translation: I want to break up California's electoral college vote so the GOP doesn't get shut out.

/DIAF
 
2014-02-20 09:22:35 AM  
Only if they merge all the Great Plains states into one state, and make Montana, Wyoming, and Idaho into one state,
 
2014-02-20 09:22:54 AM  

Marcus Aurelius: We've got enough stars on the flag already.  And the last thing we need are more senators.  If you split California in half I'm afraid you'll also have to merge Idaho and Montana together.  Not that anyone would notice.


I just hope it's called Montaho then
 
2014-02-20 09:27:55 AM  

loveblondieo: Not that this will come into fruition, but the additional states would acquire their own electoral college votes. Wouldn't this assure a Republican defeat in presidential elections?


I don't know that it would change the number of electoral votes since those are based on population much like the House, but it would add 10 more Senators to congress, with 6-8 of those Democratic. That could well ensure that the Republicans never gain control of the Senate again...

The thing that I am curious about would be if this does happen, how long until some of the other succession movements gain some real steam? Think Congress is confusing now? Just wait until there are 70 States...
 
2014-02-20 09:28:34 AM  

Gary-L: loveblondieo: Not that this will come into fruition, but the additional states would acquire their own electoral college votes. Wouldn't this assure a Republican defeat in presidential elections?

The House is limited to 435 members and as such representation would be apportioned to the population of each State.

There would be no additions to the number of Electoral Votes.


Not that it matters, the number of electoral votes now is 538. Would you like to imagine why?
 
2014-02-20 09:34:02 AM  
Slives: ...Think Congress is confusing now? Just wait until there are 70 States...

Hehe... And yet, it would be hilarious.

Where are you going to cram another 40 people in that room? Stack the desks together like bunk beds or something...
 
2014-02-20 09:40:04 AM  

Destructor: Slives: ...Think Congress is confusing now? Just wait until there are 70 States...

Hehe... And yet, it would be hilarious.

Where are you going to cram another 40 people in that room? Stack the desks together like bunk beds or something...


Elect kindergartners. That way, they'd be smaller and there would be an excuse for the loony ideas.
 
2014-02-20 09:40:40 AM  

Gary-L: loveblondieo: Not that this will come into fruition, but the additional states would acquire their own electoral college votes. Wouldn't this assure a Republican defeat in presidential elections?

The House is limited to 435 members and as such representation would be apportioned to the population of each State.

There would be no additions to the number of Electoral Votes.


Yes there would; each of the new states would also get Senate representation.  +2EV for each.
 
2014-02-20 09:41:49 AM  

theknuckler_33: "California as it is is ungovernable," Draper [A venture capitalist ] told ABC News today. "It is more and more difficult for Sacramento to keep up with the social issues from the various regions of California. With six Californias, people will be closer to their state governments, and states can get a refresh".

Translation: I want to break up California's electoral college vote so the GOP doesn't get shut out.

/DIAF


No, that's not exactly the main reason, although the GOP would likely consider that a nice plus.

What happened was California voters passed some hefty tax hikes on the wealthy and balanced the state budget. For example, folks with $250,000 to $300,000 a year in income now pay 10.3%, up from 9.3% before Prop 30 passed. The top California income tax rate-for folks with income of $1 million-plus-is now 13.3%, up from the previous top rate of 10.3%. You can understand why a venture capitalist or an investment banker would not enjoy a 4% increase in his tax rate every year for the next 6 years (and likely permanent). That's approx. a quarter of his annual ill-gotten gains "job creation" paid to California
 
2014-02-20 09:45:31 AM  
...while Bakersfield, Fresno and Stockton would make up the larger "Central shiatty California."
 
2014-02-20 09:49:26 AM  
I'm all for this. As a side requirement, all 11 states of the former Confederacy, plus Oklahoma and Kansas, also have to GTFO of the union immediately, EABOD and DIAF. Also, Sarah Palin is automatically their president.
 
2014-02-20 09:50:04 AM  

Destructor: Slives: ...Think Congress is confusing now? Just wait until there are 70 States...

Hehe... And yet, it would be hilarious.

Where are you going to cram another 40 people in that room? Stack the desks together like bunk beds or something...


Emmet haas the right idea; double decker couches for everyone!
 
2014-02-20 09:53:07 AM  

meyerkev: loveblondieo: Not that this will come into fruition, but the additional states would acquire their own electoral college votes. Wouldn't this assure a Republican defeat in presidential elections?

Not really.

I'm fairly certain at least 2, possibly 4, I'd have to check election maps, would be Republican or at least close enough to be competitive.

So it's currently 55-0, and it would end up as 50-15* or so.  Net gain for them.

* Vote counts pulled out of ass, but you get the point


Agreed. Once you get outbid the famous liberal conclaves California is at least as normal as the rest of us.

Also, Texas negotiated the right to split into five states (as opposed the right to secede as some believe) so there's that.
 
2014-02-20 09:57:13 AM  

Thank You Black Jesus!: Gary-L: loveblondieo: Not that this will come into fruition, but the additional states would acquire their own electoral college votes. Wouldn't this assure a Republican defeat in presidential elections?

The House is limited to 435 members and as such representation would be apportioned to the population of each State.

There would be no additions to the number of Electoral Votes.

Yes there would; each of the new states would also get Senate representation.  +2EV for each.


My mistake as I hit the submit too soon.

Everyone's calculations, thus far, are still off.

Currently, California has 55 electoral votes.  55 - 2 (Senators) leaves 53 Electoral Votes to be apportioned among the (theoretical) six States.

That leaves five States in need of two senators (5 x 2 = 10), meaning an addition of 10 electoral votes.

Therefore, the current total of 538 Electoral Votes would be increased to 548.

I did not see where people were arriving at an addition 15+ Electoral Votes.
 
2014-02-20 09:58:05 AM  

Delay: Gary-L: loveblondieo: Not that this will come into fruition, but the additional states would acquire their own electoral college votes. Wouldn't this assure a Republican defeat in presidential elections?

The House is limited to 435 members and as such representation would be apportioned to the population of each State.

There would be no additions to the number of Electoral Votes.

Not that it matters, the number of electoral votes now is 538. Would you like to imagine why?


Yep, number of reps + number of senators = electoral votes. DC gets the minimum of 3 as a token. Splitting CA into 6 and keeping the number of reps the same would still yield 10 more electoral votes due to the addition of 10 more senators.
 
2014-02-20 10:03:27 AM  

Destructor: Marcus Aurelius: We've got enough stars on the flag already.

48 is plenty. I'll never recognize Alaska and Hawaii! :-)

California is not alone. There are a few states with constituents that are making noise about splitting. Colorado, for example. (I don't think that debate has dissipated. Perhaps its "mellowed" some...)

There's something interesting going on in New York where upper New York (becoming New Amsterdam?) wants to be separately governed from New York, New York, but still remain the same state (Heck, I may have even seen that story on Fark). /shrug. I don't know. It's all madness.

Personally, I haven't decided yet if this is a good idea or a bad idea. And in the end, it probably will be a little bit of both.


There have been parts of various states agitating to split up for all of their history. So far only two have done so (not counting Kentucky since it was split off for other political reasons) and one only because of the civil war. I do not see it as likely.
 
2014-02-20 10:06:08 AM  
There shouldn't even be 50 states. They should be provinces so all this dumb, "states rights" crap can be put to bed finally.
 
2014-02-20 10:11:59 AM  
Republicans would never let that many new Democratic Senators in, however it would improve their electoral count for POTUS elections.

I wouldn't mind it as long as I ended up in a moderate partition.  The SF partition in purple would automatically become ultra liberal.  I think I'd be grouped into a partition with Monterey, Santa Cruz, and San Jose.  I don't think those areas are overly liberal, but probably about the same as what the state is on as a whole right now.

The partition with Bakersfield and Fresno would become the next ultra conservative redneckistan.  I'm talking Mississippi levels of derp.
 
2014-02-20 10:13:56 AM  
"Cheat to win" is pretty much all they have left at this point.
 
2014-02-20 10:19:01 AM  
They should combine the Dakotas/Kansas into 1 state, as well as Montana/Idaho/Wyoming while we're at it since those places have almost no people in them.  It would be nice if all of our states were more in the same ballpark as far as population.
 
2014-02-20 10:19:23 AM  

Gary-L: loveblondieo: Not that this will come into fruition, but the additional states would acquire their own electoral college votes. Wouldn't this assure a Republican defeat in presidential elections?

The House is limited to 435 members and as such representation would be apportioned to the population of each State.

There would be no additions to the number of Electoral Votes.


You forget the 10 new Senate seats that would result from the split, which would also receive electors.
 
2014-02-20 10:20:19 AM  

Gary-L: loveblondieo: Not that this will come into fruition, but the additional states would acquire their own electoral college votes. Wouldn't this assure a Republican defeat in presidential elections?

The House is limited to 435 members and as such representation would be apportioned to the population of each State.

There would be no additions to the number of Electoral Votes.


It would however allow Republicans to gerrymander that crap out of the more conservative partitions, just like they've done in any other state ... so I'm sure they'd milk a few more seats out that way.
 
2014-02-20 10:20:51 AM  

Strolpol: Emmet haas the right idea; double decker couches for everyone!


It would have the benefit of making C-Span more entertaining.
 
2014-02-20 10:20:54 AM  

yakmans_dad: Only if they merge all the Great Plains states into one state, and make Montana, Wyoming, and Idaho into one state,


Idaho is one of the states that has made noise about splitting in two - that was an old idea when I was growing up there, 45 years ago. Southern Idaho is practically part of Utah already, culturally and economically speaking, and northern Idaho is indistinguishable from eastern Washington.
 
2014-02-20 10:21:55 AM  
I can think of several states that can make the same complaint that they are not really being represented equally throughout the state. Nothing to see here.
 
2014-02-20 10:22:17 AM  

ckccfa: Delay: Gary-L: loveblondieo:

Yep, number of reps + number of senators = electoral votes. DC gets the minimum of 3 as a token. Splitting CA into 6 and keeping the number of reps the same would still yield 10 more electoral votes due to the addition of 10 more senators.

And as was pointed out in this thread

Fark thread
3 of the states as proposed by this rich guy mostly lack the really high population areas. Those areas, Central California, North California, and Jefferson are rather conservative. South California is conservative. Therefore, 8 of the votes will go to GOP and 4 will go to the democrats. Of the 55 old votes, all of them go to the democrats now and for the foreseeable future. Suppose the two parties sort of split the House, it is no longer winner take all 55.

The GOP would add 31 (25+6) electoral votes and the Democrats would lose 21 (55-34) electoral votes. Basically, it's Gerrymandering.
 
2014-02-20 10:23:11 AM  

BMulligan: yakmans_dad: Only if they merge all the Great Plains states into one state, and make Montana, Wyoming, and Idaho into one state,

Idaho is one of the states that has made noise about splitting in two - that was an old idea when I was growing up there, 45 years ago. Southern Idaho is practically part of Utah already, culturally and economically speaking, and northern Idaho is indistinguishable from eastern Washington.


Why not go with the more logical conclusion and get rid of Idaho and put the territory into Washington and Utah?  Idaho already has too tiny of a population to justify statehood as it is ... oh right - don't want to lose 2 GOP Senators.
 
2014-02-20 10:24:03 AM  
At this point, with the Death of the GOP Imminent, all this talk just smacks of trying to fiddle with the rules. Sure, we can make them states. Just do away with the Senate and permit direct election of the President.
 
2014-02-20 10:24:32 AM  

pkellmey: I can think of several states that can make the same complaint that they are not really being represented equally throughout the state. Nothing to see here.


There's another state with 38 million people that spans from Mexico up to the Pacific Northwest?
 
2014-02-20 10:31:12 AM  
Six pieces is a lot. I'd be happy if they just split NorCal and SoCal.

Never gonna happen, but it would be nice to be associated with the pot smokers up north instead of everyone assuming I'm some whacked-out OC resident.

//Incoming NorCal/SoCal fight
 
Displayed 50 of 88 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report