It was because there are more liberals than conservatives statewide so the GOP couldn’t gerrymander the progressive rights away. This was not a bipartisan effort at all. It was to destroy the strength of California currently so the Republicans could win more elections.
It didn’t say but my assumption is that the idea was CA’s size and the way it is densely populated in urban centers has made it so rural area’s (Like most of proposed Jefferson) needs are largely ignored by state government.
What I don’t understand is how removing the tax revenue generated by the urban areas was supposed to make things better for the rural areas? These proposals always felt like memes that somehow got shoved into state legislation.
They want to go the way of the US south. Careening towards the bottom of every life quality metric, but feeling super free as the air whistles past your face. And politicians knowing that they won’t be alive when the splat occurs.
Maybe they feel the issue is more about allocation of funds either in the form of funds being disappropriately given to places like LA or just a disagreement around which departments and programs get how much.
I could see CA letting go of maybe the Jefferson folk. But I agree that the idea of dividing into 3/6 states isn’t likely, and is probably a publicity thing.
Was there any justification behind it being ‘ungovernable’?
It was because there are more liberals than conservatives statewide so the GOP couldn’t gerrymander the progressive rights away. This was not a bipartisan effort at all. It was to destroy the strength of California currently so the Republicans could win more elections.
Ding ding ding! This right here is what it all boils down to. It’s a flagrant power grab, and an attempt to disenfranchise people they don’t like.
It didn’t say but my assumption is that the idea was CA’s size and the way it is densely populated in urban centers has made it so rural area’s (Like most of proposed Jefferson) needs are largely ignored by state government.
What I don’t understand is how removing the tax revenue generated by the urban areas was supposed to make things better for the rural areas? These proposals always felt like memes that somehow got shoved into state legislation.
They want to go the way of the US south. Careening towards the bottom of every life quality metric, but feeling super free as the air whistles past your face. And politicians knowing that they won’t be alive when the splat occurs.
Maybe they feel the issue is more about allocation of funds either in the form of funds being disappropriately given to places like LA or just a disagreement around which departments and programs get how much.
I could see CA letting go of maybe the Jefferson folk. But I agree that the idea of dividing into 3/6 states isn’t likely, and is probably a publicity thing.