The State of North California, the State of Hamilton, or the State of Jefferson (Los Angeles: house, school)

[CA4Now]

It's doubtful that it'll ever happen.

CA splitting into three is getting even more ridiculous:
https://www.city-data.com/forum/cali...ting-even.html

Initiative to split California into three states qualifies for ballot: (and then is removed)
https://www.city-data.com/forum/cali...ee-states.html

[Elliott_CA]

Originally Posted by Chimérique

Sacramento County would be the southern most county in this new state.

... Sacramento would remain the capital of North California while California would choose a new capital city.

Why would the Jefferson people, who despise Sacramento, want to have Sacramento as their capital?
Being ruled by Sacramento is exactly what they want to escape from. And, by including Sacramento county, that would doom the movement to failure because Sacramentans would overwhelmingly reject it at the ballot box.

[Chimérique]

Originally Posted by Elliott_CA

Why would the Jefferson people, who despise Sacramento, want to have Sacramento as their capital?
Being ruled by Sacramento is exactly what they want to escape from. And, by including Sacramento county, that would doom the movement to failure because Sacramentans would overwhelmingly reject it at the ballot box.

This is more than just about "Jefferson" people. Creating a new state involves others; hence the name North California.

I don't know who exactly it is "they" "despise", but more than likely "they" despise the actions of the numerous legislatures elected by Southern Californians and Bay Areas and Coastal folks. Sacramentans have a little say in how the California legislature acts. Every governor in the last 125-150 years has been from SoCal or the Bay Area, not from Sacramento.

[apple92680]

Originally Posted by Chimérique

1. You obviously didn't read my posts which addresses the issue of sustaining an economy.

2. There are hundreds of thousands more people in SoCal addicted to meth than the north state.

There may be more people here in So Cal on meth, but they are vastly outnumbered by people who aren't. That is less the case when you go north of Sacramento. It seems like every third person up there is on something.

Originally Posted by Chimérique

3. Long before Trump-Republicans/libertarians, the idea of splitting California up, especially creating a new north state, have been in existence. The last seriously talked about attempt was from a powerful and ultra wealthy Democrat.

4. This is such a hot button issue that the powers that be quickly discredit, ignore and attack for the obvious political ramifications which I've addressed in my posts.

5. But for the people in the Northern California it is more about representation and freedom. Why would someone way down in Palmdale care if the north state created their own state. Less of your taxes would need to be spent in the North State.

I guess that's true?

I just can't see how you expect comparatively small Sacramento and its small metro area to shoulder the burden of a large, meth-addicted welfare class in the rest of this hypothetical state of "North California"? Sacramento doesn't have the industry and capital that the Bay and LA/OC/SD have. Sacramento probably wouldn't willingly split off and go with "North California" because they know better. So, your biggest city would like be Redding.

I get what you're saying about representation. Our last two governors have been from the Bay Area Anglo elite. They feel more like transplants from the Northeast than "Californians".

It would be nice to have a moderate Democrat Latino, with a working class background from Southern California, as governor, for a change.

[eureka1]

California should/will never break up.

[CCbaxter]

It’s a complete fantasy. All voters in the state have to approve it, that’s the first step. Then congress has to approve it.

[Fontucky]

People have been batting this around since the 19th century. Only two things change: the people batting it around and the name of the proposed seceded land.

[Vic Romano]

Originally Posted by apple92680

This "State of Jefferson" thingy is all just a right-wing pipe dream / fantasy dreamed up by a bunch of Trumpist Republicans.

It won't happen for a number of reasons:

1. -- and this is a BIG one! -- there is way too much meth going on once you get north of Sacramento.

2. Aside from the natural beauty of the Sierras, the redwoods and the Cascades, there isn't much to sustain the economy.

3. Those northern counties with huge meth problems and high welfare-use rely on remittances paid into State coffers by the Bay Area, Los Angeles, Orange County, San Diego, Fresno, etc. Without the money that the liberal counties pay in taxes to support them, those counties would have absolutely nothing. It would be nothing more than a West Coast version of West Virginia without the coal industry.

Don't make ignorant political statements. This has been going on before you were even a thought.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffer...Pacific_state)

[NYSD1995]

Would be the poorest state in the country by far!

[apple92680]

Originally Posted by Vic Romano

Don't make ignorant political statements. This has been going on before you were even a thought.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffer...Pacific_state)

It's not an "ignorant political statement" man. It's true. All of those counties up there, save for two or three on the coast, voted heavily for Trump. They are all very right-wing, they don't like non-white people and they hate the liberal parts of California. They are also all inundated with meth.

It is what it is.

At one time, the idea of a mythical "State of Jefferson" may have seemed like a good idea, but it's not feasible. I also have to question the wisdom of people who wanted to name a northern state after a slave-holding president? Seems odd. It would be like splitting Minnesota in half and calling the northern part "the State of Jackson" -- weird.