Six California's
Moderators: UAdevil, JMarkJohns
- CalStateTempe
- Posts: 16273
- Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2014 2:46 pm
- Reputation: 491
- Location: The Right to Self-Determination: FREEDOM!!!!
Six California's
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-m ... story.html
Break California up into 6 states?
Sounds like a very California thing to do.
Break California up into 6 states?
Sounds like a very California thing to do.
- Merkin
- Posts: 42680
- Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2014 10:31 am
- Reputation: 1493
- Location: UA basketball smells like....victory
Re: Six California's
I'm cool being with Ventura, Santa Barbara, SLO and Monterey counties, although the population really isn't here, thankfully. Still more people than Alaska.
Re: Six California's
I do think it makes sense for many reasons. All of these big states might end up doing things this way
Waiting at the Rose Bowl patiently for the cats to arrive
"I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more wildcat sports"
2019 BDW Survivor Pool Champion
"I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more wildcat sports"
2019 BDW Survivor Pool Champion
- CalStateTempe
- Posts: 16273
- Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2014 2:46 pm
- Reputation: 491
- Location: The Right to Self-Determination: FREEDOM!!!!
Re: Six California's
I see it as a cash grab for the money'd elites on the coasts, leaving the Central Valley and the far north to fend for themselves and ultimately become some of the poorest states in the new union.azcat49 wrote:I do think it makes sense for many reasons. All of these big states might end up doing things this way
Smacks of the "I've got mine, screw the rest of you" mentality.
- Merkin
- Posts: 42680
- Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2014 10:31 am
- Reputation: 1493
- Location: UA basketball smells like....victory
Re: Six California's
Far north has the water and the central valley has the biggest fruit and vegetable producing region in the nation. They will do OK.
Having 12 senators has to help California, which is one of the biggest states that receives less federal tax dollars than they pay in, subsidizing the South and other areas.
Having 12 senators has to help California, which is one of the biggest states that receives less federal tax dollars than they pay in, subsidizing the South and other areas.
- CalStateTempe
- Posts: 16273
- Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2014 2:46 pm
- Reputation: 491
- Location: The Right to Self-Determination: FREEDOM!!!!
Re: Six California's
Fair enough.
Re: Six California's
i don't know if i ever see us really wanting to have more than 100 senators. we worked so hard for 172 years to get exactly 100...Merkin wrote:Far north has the water and the central valley has the biggest fruit and vegetable producing region in the nation. They will do OK.
Having 12 senators has to help California, which is one of the biggest states that receives less federal tax dollars than they pay in, subsidizing the South and other areas.
i was going to put the ua/asu records here...but i forgot what they were.
i'll just go with fuck asu.
i'll just go with fuck asu.
Re: Six California's
Isn't Puerto Rico about to become a state or did that die?ASUHATER! wrote:i don't know if i ever see us really wanting to have more than 100 senators. we worked so hard for 172 years to get exactly 100...Merkin wrote:Far north has the water and the central valley has the biggest fruit and vegetable producing region in the nation. They will do OK.
Having 12 senators has to help California, which is one of the biggest states that receives less federal tax dollars than they pay in, subsidizing the South and other areas.
- Merkin
- Posts: 42680
- Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2014 10:31 am
- Reputation: 1493
- Location: UA basketball smells like....victory
Re: Six California's
ASUHATER! wrote:i don't know if i ever see us really wanting to have more than 100 senators. we worked so hard for 172 years to get exactly 100...Merkin wrote:Far north has the water and the central valley has the biggest fruit and vegetable producing region in the nation. They will do OK.
Having 12 senators has to help California, which is one of the biggest states that receives less federal tax dollars than they pay in, subsidizing the South and other areas.
Delaware, North and South Dakota, Montana, Alaska, Vermont and Wyoming all have less than 1 million people, which is the population in metro Tucson. They should get one senator each.
- Longhorned
- Posts: 14758
- Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2014 1:04 pm
- Reputation: 975
- Location: In a guayabera at The Sands Club, Arizona Stadium
Re: Six California's
Phoenix should be its own country, and Machina its president.
-
- Posts: 568
- Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2014 10:57 pm
- Reputation: 1
Re: Six California's
Not to be a turd, but a friend of mine who I went to college with, while not owning a vote, still held a voice in the House as LT Gov. of Saipan.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diego_Benavente
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diego_Benavente
formerly, UA Direct, mtzwami, SnowCat, MontanaCat. should cover every forum I've been on in the last 19 years.
-
- Posts: 520
- Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2014 6:34 pm
- Reputation: 1
Re: Six California's
When this whole system was set up, a voting member of the House represented about 10,000 voters. Today the number has ballooned to 520,000. While Senators weren't directly elected the ones from the most populous state, New York (roughly half the population of Metro Tucson), only represented about 60,000 voters.
Obviously, maintaining those ratios would require a congress more bloated and ineffectual than what we have today. I am just pointing out what little voice each voter has in our republic today. I'm in favor of breaking up large discontinuous populations. How can one state government effectively manage 38M+ people and their associated businesses and residences?
But the rural regions of CA aren't exactly living off subsidies from Palo Alto. They are low to medium population density areas creating wealth from the land. I've heard those new states will become the deep south of the west. That is ridiculous. The negative aspects of our collective view on the south have more to do with culture than economy. If they become a west coast Nebraska, is that really so bad (or so different)? And don't forget they'll gain more political freedom from LA/SF as well.
Obviously, maintaining those ratios would require a congress more bloated and ineffectual than what we have today. I am just pointing out what little voice each voter has in our republic today. I'm in favor of breaking up large discontinuous populations. How can one state government effectively manage 38M+ people and their associated businesses and residences?
It is a valid concern. What concerns me most is the Silicon Valley backers of this have, as you may have guessed, carved out their own state.CalStateTempe wrote:I see it as a cash grab for the money'd elites on the coasts, leaving the Central Valley and the far north to fend for themselves and ultimately become some of the poorest states in the new union.azcat49 wrote:I do think it makes sense for many reasons. All of these big states might end up doing things this way
Smacks of the "I've got mine, screw the rest of you" mentality.
But the rural regions of CA aren't exactly living off subsidies from Palo Alto. They are low to medium population density areas creating wealth from the land. I've heard those new states will become the deep south of the west. That is ridiculous. The negative aspects of our collective view on the south have more to do with culture than economy. If they become a west coast Nebraska, is that really so bad (or so different)? And don't forget they'll gain more political freedom from LA/SF as well.
Politics. PR puts two more Democrats in the Senate. You'd need a Democratic controlled congress, and either an Democrat in the White house, or a expansionist minded Republican. AND all of that would have to coincide with a PR vote to become a state. The two scenarios haven't aligned in the past. Maybe someday they will.Salty wrote:Isn't Puerto Rico about to become a state or did that die?
Re: Six California's
Much of rural California's population descended from farmers from Oklahoma and Arkansas who moved here during the Dust Bowl. There is a very strong cultural link to the American south.Sage&Silver wrote:When this whole system was set up, a voting member of the House represented about 10,000 voters. Today the number has ballooned to 520,000. While Senators weren't directly elected the ones from the most populous state, New York (roughly half the population of Metro Tucson), only represented about 60,000 voters.
Obviously, maintaining those ratios would require a congress more bloated and ineffectual than what we have today. I am just pointing out what little voice each voter has in our republic today. I'm in favor of breaking up large discontinuous populations. How can one state government effectively manage 38M+ people and their associated businesses and residences?
It is a valid concern. What concerns me most is the Silicon Valley backers of this have, as you may have guessed, carved out their own state.CalStateTempe wrote:I see it as a cash grab for the money'd elites on the coasts, leaving the Central Valley and the far north to fend for themselves and ultimately become some of the poorest states in the new union.azcat49 wrote:I do think it makes sense for many reasons. All of these big states might end up doing things this way
Smacks of the "I've got mine, screw the rest of you" mentality.
But the rural regions of CA aren't exactly living off subsidies from Palo Alto. They are low to medium population density areas creating wealth from the land. I've heard those new states will become the deep south of the west. That is ridiculous. The negative aspects of our collective view on the south have more to do with culture than economy. If they become a west coast Nebraska, is that really so bad (or so different)? And don't forget they'll gain more political freedom from LA/SF as well.
Politics. PR puts two more Democrats in the Senate. You'd need a Democratic controlled congress, and either an Democrat in the White house, or a expansionist minded Republican. AND all of that would have to coincide with a PR vote to become a state. The two scenarios haven't aligned in the past. Maybe someday they will.Salty wrote:Isn't Puerto Rico about to become a state or did that die?
History says, Don't hope
On this side of the grave,
But then, once in a lifetime
The longed-for tidal wave
Of justice can rise up
And hope and history rhyme.
Every lie we tell incurs a debt to the truth.
On this side of the grave,
But then, once in a lifetime
The longed-for tidal wave
Of justice can rise up
And hope and history rhyme.
Every lie we tell incurs a debt to the truth.
- Merkin
- Posts: 42680
- Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2014 10:31 am
- Reputation: 1493
- Location: UA basketball smells like....victory
Re: Six California's
Some Cal State LA professor in the early 1970s suggested reforming the 50 statues into 38.
http://www.tjc.com/38states/
No idea why LV would be with LA and SD when SLC is all by itself.
http://www.tjc.com/38states/
No idea why LV would be with LA and SD when SLC is all by itself.
- Longhorned
- Posts: 14758
- Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2014 1:04 pm
- Reputation: 975
- Location: In a guayabera at The Sands Club, Arizona Stadium
Re: Six California's
Amazing how they still speak with a southern accent.Bruins01 wrote:
Much of rural California's population descended from farmers from Oklahoma and Arkansas who moved here during the Dust Bowl. There is a very strong cultural link to the American south.
- Merkin
- Posts: 42680
- Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2014 10:31 am
- Reputation: 1493
- Location: UA basketball smells like....victory
Re: Six California's
I used to work with a contractor from Fresno who still had an accent. He said his grandparents were the O word.Longhorned wrote:Amazing how they still speak with a southern accent.Bruins01 wrote:
Much of rural California's population descended from farmers from Oklahoma and Arkansas who moved here during the Dust Bowl. There is a very strong cultural link to the American south.
Re: Six California's
How would this affect the 55 electoral college votes?
Re: Six California's
well electoral vote representation swings wildly between like 200,000 to 700,000 or so per vote on average. i'd assume states like silicon valley, west california and south california would probably still get a good 10-15 votes each but one like jefferson might only have a couple. that entire area of california only has a few hundred thousand people.
i was going to put the ua/asu records here...but i forgot what they were.
i'll just go with fuck asu.
i'll just go with fuck asu.
Re: Six California's
This bit of blind squirrel finding a nut is actually the biggest reason why this won't happen.Jefe wrote:How would this affect the 55 electoral college votes?
This is also why the electoral college and the Senate need to cease existing.
History says, Don't hope
On this side of the grave,
But then, once in a lifetime
The longed-for tidal wave
Of justice can rise up
And hope and history rhyme.
Every lie we tell incurs a debt to the truth.
On this side of the grave,
But then, once in a lifetime
The longed-for tidal wave
Of justice can rise up
And hope and history rhyme.
Every lie we tell incurs a debt to the truth.
-
- Posts: 14664
- Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2014 7:28 am
- Reputation: 1150
Re: Six California's
[youtube]EhHRt2PpHsQ[/youtube]Merkin wrote:Some Cal State LA professor in the early 1970s suggested reforming the 50 statues into 38.
http://www.tjc.com/38states/
No idea why LV would be with LA and SD when SLC is all by itself.
Because it was the 70's.
Re: Six California's
what would you replace the senate with?
i was going to put the ua/asu records here...but i forgot what they were.
i'll just go with fuck asu.
i'll just go with fuck asu.
-
- Posts: 14664
- Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2014 7:28 am
- Reputation: 1150
Re: Six California's
[youtube]1PQiq8zajCE[/youtube]ASUHATER! wrote:what would you replace the senate with?
Re: Six California's
Virtually every single advanced democracy has only a unicameral legislature. The Senate does not need to be replaced with anything. Abolishing the Senate and doubling the membership of the House (so that each Congressperson represents fewer people) doesn't have any downsides to me.ASUHATER! wrote:what would you replace the senate with?
History says, Don't hope
On this side of the grave,
But then, once in a lifetime
The longed-for tidal wave
Of justice can rise up
And hope and history rhyme.
Every lie we tell incurs a debt to the truth.
On this side of the grave,
But then, once in a lifetime
The longed-for tidal wave
Of justice can rise up
And hope and history rhyme.
Every lie we tell incurs a debt to the truth.
-
- Posts: 74
- Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2014 8:16 am
- Reputation: 13
Re: Six California's
No negative other than an 800+ person House? Yeah that seems likely to get anything passed. Guess if the house and pres are the same party things might fly through but that was an unmitigated disaster in the W administration. Sometimes gridlock is better than free passage of horrible policies. That said I'm in favor of tiny States only getting 1 senator as some don't really even deserve 1.