CALI, FOR, AND NIA?

The first I knew of this was five minutes ago.  But not only is it important, it is potentially game-changing.

Did you know that – unless the panicked Democrats in Sacramento find a way to stop it – there might be a ballot initiative in November that would split California into three states?

From Ben Riley-Smith’s article in London’s Daily Telegraph:

The chance of California splitting into three has moved a step closer after a billionaire secured enough signatures to trigger a referendum on the issue. 

Tim Draper, who made his money through Hotmail and Skype, has gathered 600,000 signatures supporting the change – way above the 364,000 needed.

Those who want to break up California believe it would boost educational standards and reduce the political power of Sacramento, the state’s capital. 

Providing the state authorities agree the signatures are genuine a referendum on the issue will be held this November alongside other mid-term elections. 

My first impulse in reading this article was to check and make sure it still wasn’t April 1st.

But then I read this article from the August 30, 2017 New York Times, and this one from an October 27, 2017 article for NBC – Bay Area, and realized it is no joke.  It is real.

Here is the proposed split:

So what would the result of a California three-way split be?

In considering your answer, please note that the middle state – in pale orange – appears to include the two super-leftward political twins, Los Angeles and San Francisco.

Obviously, the LA/SF state – which would have the most electoral votes and congressional districts of the three – remains a total Democrat stronghold.  But the other two states would be in play.

If they all went Democrat, this would be  a break-even for national elections (same number of electoral votes, just in three pieces) and the house (same number of house seats and – subject to gerrymandering, of course – about the same Democrat and Republican strongholds).

But the senate?  A very different story.

-If  all three states went Democrat, it would give Democrats four more senators (6 instead of the current 2).

-If, in each of the non-LA/SF states, two of the four senators were Republican, it would be status quo (4 Democrats, 2 Republicans – same as the current 2 Democrats, 0 Republicans).

-But if three, or all four of the Senators from the two non LA/SF states were Republican, it would either neutralize California’s current effect in the senate, (3-3 – on net gain of two for Republicans) or give Republicans a two-senator edge (4-2 Republican – on net gain of 4 for republicans).

Remember: northern and southern California are far less leftward/far more receptive to Republicans.  No guarantees, of course.  But it could happen.

That’s a lot to think about.  And a lot for Californians to think about if this referendum finds its way onto November’s ballot.

Stay tuned.