California: How Many is Too Many?
California has seen over 220 proposals for partition or secession throughout its history.
California is the most populous and 3rd largest state in the United States. It also possesses the largest sub-national economy in the world. The state’s capital, Sacramento lies 240 miles from its northern boundary and almost 500 miles from its southern border with Mexico. Many California residents feel this literal separation from both their government as well as other fellow residents on the opposite end of the state. Throughout the state’s history, many have sought to remedy these feelings by partitioning the state in a variety of ways. Today, we’re gonna look at some of these proposals that split California into two, three, four, or even six separate states.
Two Californias: One for Each Party
Most of the “Two Californias” plans fall into one of two buckets: (1) separating the liberal coastal cities from the more conservative inland counties or (2) seceding the forested counties of the far-north into a new Pacific Northwest state. While the maps these plans produce are vastly different, the political motivations are remarkably similar. Most supporters of “Two Californias” aim to create a new “red state” by unifying counties that traditionally support Republican candidates. In 2009, former California Assemblyman Bill Maze proposed Coastal California as he believed the current state has “too many taxes, too much control, too much bureaucracy…Conservatives don't have a voice. The two larger cities [Los Angeles and San Francisco] control the state. The agriculture and conservatives don't have a vote.” In 2011, state Sen. Jeff Stone proposed partitioning counties in the southern end of the state because he believed that Sacramento was “killing business with over-regulation and taxation.” While many of these supporters are angry with the current economic structure of California, it’s not entirely certain if a new state would be economically viable on its own.
Concerns of financial viability abound with proposals for creating the State of Jefferson. The movement to form a “Northstate” out of the counties lying along the California-Oregon border is a long-contemplated proposal for partitioning California originally dating back to the 1940s. The problem for advocates is that most of these counties are among California’s least populous; Jefferson’s largest city would be Redding, home to less than 100,000 people. Advocates have assured politicians that if the state seceded today, the current tax structure would cover the new state’s expenditures. The irony is that one of the primary reasons why advocates want to establish a new state is to lower taxes and they’re unable to prove that a more lenient tax regime would keep Jefferson economically healthy.
Is Six Too Many?
In December 2013, a venture capitalist named Tim Draper launched a movement that blended a mix of these “Two California” proposals into a ballot measure that would split California into a whopping six separate states. Draper believed that today’s California is too large and ungovernable and that splitting it into smaller pieces would produce more efficient state governments.
Let’s take a quick tour of the United States’ new West Coast under Draper’s plan. Starting from the north, Oregon’s new neighbor would be the State of Jefferson. Jefferson would have just under 1 million residents, the smallest of the batch, and was also found to have the smallest personal income tax base. Moving south out of Jefferson would land you in North California, home to famed wine producing areas like the Napa Valley as well as the natural beauty of Lake Tahoe. North California would hold just under 4 million residents (roughly the size of Connecticut or Utah.) South of North California lies both Central California and Silicon Valley: two states that would have polar opposite economic outlooks. Silicon Valley would have the highest per capita personal income of all US states, Central California would have the lowest (even ranking behind Mississippi, the current loss leader.) Meanwhile West California and South California would become the 7th and 8th most populous states in the US, respectively, and together would hold slightly over half of the original California’s personal income tax base.
Concerns surrounding inequality were raised immediately by most who reviewed this plan but more complicated discussions on splitting up infrastructure helped elucidate how truly complicated it would be to implement this six state plan. First and foremost, both Silicon Valley and West California would need to import water from the neighboring Californias in order to keep the taps running for all of their residents. Education funding would be shaken up dramatically. Currently, California spends over $100 billion annually on education and despite their varying tax bases, all six proposed Californias currently receive almost equal funding per pupil. Splitting these regions up would likely lead to significant drops in funding per pupil in Jefferson, Central California, and West California as they all rely on state funding to makeup for what they do not raise through their own local tax bases. Prisons are also unequally distributed throughout the current state compared to where prisoners originate. More than half of California’s prisoners serve time in prisons located in North or Central California but over 60% of prisoners originate from West and South California. Splitting California would require many of these new states to build their own prison systems as most are not currently equipped to handle all of the prisoners from their own regions. (Ain’t it funny how trying to make things “simpler” by splitting the state requires more governance and bureaucracy?)
Draper spent millions of his own money in an attempt to place the measure on the ballot so that all of California’s voters could vote on the idea. Ultimately, the attempt failed as Draper did not receive enough verified signatures to qualify the measure for a vote.
Okay… How About Three Californias?
But Draper wasn’t done. Three years after the failure of the “Six Californias” plan, Tim Draper took another shot at partitioning the state and proposed the “Cal 3” plan. This time around he explicitly attempted to address the issues of inequality that tanked his first proposal. The “Three Californias” would be extremely close in population size with all three holding roughly 12 or 13 million residents (roughly the size of Illinois or Pennsylvania.) The three new states would also have more equal personal incomes per capita with the lowest being South California ranking only 30th among all US states. While many of the issues surrounding splitting infrastructure persist, coordinating across half as many governments is also much more manageable.
This time, Draper was able to collect enough signatures but the California Supreme Court stepped in to block the measure from qualifying for the ballot. The issue with the “Cal 3” plan was the way it attempted to sidestep the official process for admitting new states. Instead of being subject to a vote by the California Legislature, the ballot initiative was written to have the required legislative consent for new statehood be given directly to the voters, an approach many claimed was fundamentally unconstitutional.
Tomorrow’s California
The prospects of partitioning California into several, separate states is slim. The grassroots drumbeat for the partition movement remains steady as it has throughout the state’s history. Yet no one has managed to sway public opinion enough to convince politicians to take any proposal seriously. The most recent “Cal 3” plan was polled among 2018 voters and a whopping 75% opposed the plan. That being said, the regional differences inherent in the state’s vast geography are not mediated by lumping them together into a single state. The issue at hand is that it seems as though everyone has their own opinion about how to split things up. Most proposals favor painting a picture of the end goal without supplying a roadmap for how to get there. Maybe it’ll take a smaller state to split and model a path forward but the relentless nature of California’s partition movement is a reminder that if you throw enough things against the wall, something’s bound to stick eventually.
Leftover Links
Hear from the supporters of the most recent California partition proposal, advocating for “New California.”
Dive into the legislative analysis of the Six California plan, undertaken by the California Legislature.
Check out the “Calexit” plan to secede the entirety of California from the United States to form an independent country.