Goodbye, California? Tim Draper Proposes a 6-Way Split 489
Daniel_Stuckey writes that venture capitalist Tim Draper has mooted a plan "to split California into six separate states, he told Tech Crunch, with Silicon Valley emerging as the richest and most powerful of all. The mockery is already pouring in. Of course a rich tech guru wants Silicon Valley to get its own government, so it can be freed from the dusty laws and regulations of California 1.0. Of course a deep undercurrent of self-aggrandizing narcissism runs through the proposal — only one other state-to-be gets an actual name, (inexplicably, 'Jefferson') and the rest are lazily affixed with topographical descriptors: West, South, Central, and North California...Yes, in shaping his doctrine, Draper has conjured the perfect blend of Seasteading's offshore tech nirvana lawlessness, boilerplate Tea Party antiestablishmentarianism, and good ol' secessionist chutzpah."
Re:Do it (Score:1, Informative)
Its very convenient how his outline for splitting up states, when compared with the voting demographics, would likely give the Republicans 8 US senators and the democrats only 4.
Jefferson gets a name (Score:5, Informative)
Because it's a preexisting movement: http://www.jeffersonstate.com/
Re:And each part takes a proportional share of deb (Score:4, Informative)
There is a really small but similar sentiment in Illinois too. The people who live in rural Illinois feel like the people who live in Chicago and the suburban areas surrounding Chicago disproportionately affect Illinois politics. They feel that the state would be better without Chicago.
I can actually understand that sentiment. But the California equivalent would be Central Valley or far northern secessionists. Silicon Valley can't really make the same kind of argument, because it is already very influential in California politics. Of course, it shares that influence with Los Angeles rather than having it entirely to itself, but the Bay Area is one of the state's main political power bases.
The State of 'Jefferson' (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Huh? (Score:2, Informative)
Congress is composed of two arms, the Senate and the House of Representatives. The Senate is designed to give the states equal voting power. The House of Representatives is designed to give the people roughly equal representation.
Why is this so hard to understand? Did you skip that day of 8th grade US Government?
Re:Jefferson (Score:4, Informative)
The proposal dates back to 1941: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jefferson_(proposed_Pacific_state) [wikipedia.org]
Re:Allow me to burn som Karma by saying (Score:3, Informative)
That will be cool.
We would impose an import tariff on all goods leaving California and we will give tax incentives to companies to move to the other 49 states. You will no longer enjoy all that pork from US military bases or contracts. Oh and you will have to pay 100% of your welfare, medicaid, and medicare expenses. Any of that technology that originates from federal grants will move out, and ITAR will prevent any new tech being easily exported to California.
Let's know how it works out.
Re:Allow me to burn som Karma by saying (Score:4, Informative)
It's sad that an artifact of the nation's early history results in a Senate where a few square post-independence states with tiny populations are effectively able to veto ideas supported by very large majorities of Americans.
It's a political check on the urban areas.
Try again (Score:5, Informative)
Last year, California sent $292.6 billion in federal taxes to the US government. California received $258.9 billion in federal spending. In other words, the federal government received nearly $34 billion dollars more from the state of California than was spent in the state.
Let's see how it works out indeed.
Re:Fail. (Score:4, Informative)
Um.. Detroit has been run by liberals for the last 50 years or so. What are you talking about?
Re:Allow me to burn som Karma by saying (Score:5, Informative)
CA is broke.
California has a $2.4 billion surplus, [sfgate.com] about same as Texas. [texastribune.org]
Re:Allow me to burn som Karma by saying (Score:4, Informative)
We were talking about "culturally homogenous" European countries, not linguistically. Languages are one indicator of cultural identity, but not the only one. The situation in France is actually particularly acrimonious, even more so than in Spain, and the French regions do not have any of the protections they have in Spain. Spain seems more troublesome than France precisely because the problem is officially recognised. In France, there is a flat-out denial of regional identities, with administrative boundaries redrawn contrary to local will (the city of Nantes, the capital of old Brittany, is no longer part of Brittany, and this is frequently protested about) and the French government refusing to ratify the European Charter of Minority Languages because "French is the language of the republic". Breton activists regularly protest by spraypainting or taking down French roadsigns (and I believe they've actually succeeded in getting some of their railway stations bilingually signed) and the Corsicans have a long history of shooting holes in the French half of bilingual roadsigns. While I was living in Corsica, the North Corsican assembly was putting through a bill to make Corsican co-official with French in the area, even though technically they had no powers to do so. It was an illegal act as an act of protest to France's treatment of regional languages.
The Saami are not analogous to the Pennsylvania Dutch. They're a minority population-wise, but they have a huge territory which leads to conflicts between the needs of the reindeer herders and the state's desire to open up mineral explorations in the area.