:)

Chant: "Not one, not two, not three, not four, not five ... but six Californias"

-David

Yeah, I suppose you can make a case for Kentucky (and Tennessee, for that matter). But that was the aftermath of the original 13 and the Northwest Territory claims, so I didn't count it. You could also make a case for huge territories splitting in order to qualify as states, but I discounted them as well (look at the original size of the Louisiana Purchase, for instance).

But discounting all of that, it's only really happened twice, and both times slavery was at the heart of the deal. And it certainly hasn't happened in a long time, even though such movements pop up from time to time. Even in CA, a few counties voted on a measure to seceed from the state this year, for instance.

The referendum is legally meaningless, you're right -- it would require the governor (I think, doing this from memory) to place the issue before the legislature, and also to send a plan to Congress for approval. Nothing more than a "sense of the people" sort of thing.

LewDan -

I've heard (but was too lazy to look it up) that the state water board actually has veto power over the state ever splitting up (maybe I just remembered that from Chinatown, not 100% sure). It wouldn't surprise me in the least.

However, I have to compliment you on your first sentence: "The initiative is the ultimate in gerrymandering." That is truly brilliant, and I wish I had thought of it while writing this. You are correct: it would essentially be (if it happened) the first successful gerrymandering in the Senate. Just had to say that: well done!

It jest ain't gonna happen. I seriously doubt it'll get even close to a majority to vote for it, even.

-CW

The initiative is the ultimate in gerrymandering. Losing elections? Redraw the map to create your very own Senators and Representatives! Instead of addressing the inequalities of wealth distribution let the wealthy turn their enclaves into independent states, drawing even more on federal resources, while simultaneously reducing their contributions to local economies and populations, other than their own making the problem even worse.

And you're absolutely right about issues involving water rights! That's been a major bone of contention for decades that would be orders of magnitude more contentious with six Californias. And is already going to be an increasingly difficult and important issue due to climate change.

But the Senate alone is a deal breaker. With abuse of the filibuster and abuse of Senators nominating judicial candidates in vogue as a means of turning the Senate into a means of nullifying elections, repealing laws, and blackmailing the President, the Congress, and even the entire country at the whim of a handful of extremist Senators, instead of reforming the Senate increase its size ten percent?! Why would anyone outside, or even inside of California think that a good idea?

Your quite right, CW, six California's will never happen.

Indeed. One is that under Article IV section 3, it requires the consent of the state legislature (as well as of Congress), not a referendum.

But it seldom actually happens, and hasn't since the Civil War (when West Virginia split from Virginia). The only other time this has ever happened in American history was even further back, as part of the Missouri Compromise (when Maine split off from Massachusetts)

Not quite the only other time: Kentucky split from Virginia in 1792.