The L.A Times is reporting that Tim Draper’s “Six Californias” plan has failed to make the ballot for the 2016 elections because the petition to put it on the ballot did not achieve enough signatures in time for Friday’s deadline. Had it achieve enough support and went on to pass on election night 2016 there was still much doubt that the state could be split up into six pieces because Congress would have to agree to let California break up, which is highly unlikely, especially if the U.S Senate is still under control by Democrats who won’t ever allow such a plan to happen.
Draper argued for his proposal by saying California is too large to have a properly functioning government. He called the initiative an “opportunity to reboot and refresh our state government.” But I am calling BS on his argument. The argument is flawed because a state being smaller doesn’t mean it will automatically have a functioning government. Take a look at smaller states like Hawaii, it has 4 electoral votes to California’s 55, the state has just experienced a political civil war which saw the current incumbent governor lose his primary. Look at Wisconsin, back in 2010 the governor of the badger state was arresting state senators who did not vote. States legislatures all over America has been in stand-still battles, ironically California’s state legislative is one of the most effective and productive in the nation this year. So having a small state doesn’t mean it will make politicians get along but can being smaller lead to more economic prosperity, another claim Draper makes? Kansas right now has the worst economy and the slowest job growth, no one is going to argue Kansas is a small state. Texas economy is booming and it being big isn’t effecting their growth. So why does Mr. Draper want to split up California? This is the real reason why Mr. Draper wants to split California into six different states.
But Mr. Draper is quick to tell the media and voters that he is not a Republican and neither party defines him but if you search up his voting and political donation record one can easily see that Mr. Draper is lying. Tim Draper is a registered Republican and has been a registered Republican in California for a long time. Here is a list of some of his political donations (take note how many donations he made to Democrats).
6/27/2011 – $100,000 to Californians Against Special Interests, Yes on 32
10/27/2010 – $1,000 to Anna Bryson’s campaign for Capistrano Unified School District Board of Trustees
9/20/2010 – $100,000 to the California Republican Party
9/20/2010 – $1,000 to San Jose arbitration & pension reform measures V and W
9/20/2010 – $1,000 to Republican Tony Strickland’s campaign for state controller
9/10/2010 – $10,000 to San Diego Pension Reform Charter Amendment B
6/2/2009 – $25,900 to Republican Meg Whitman’s gubernatorial exploratory committee
4/30/2007 – $22,300 to Californians for Arnold Schwarzenegger 2006
6/14/2007 – $3,600 to (then-)Republican Nathan Fletcher’s Assembly campaign
11/6/2006 – $22,300 to Californians for Schwarzenegger 2006
5/12/2006 – $50,000 to Stop the Reiner Initiative, No on 82
5/11/2006 – $46,000 to Stop the Reiner Initiative, No on 82
4/13/2006 – $150 to the California Society of Certified Public Accountants PAC
3/13/2006 – $22,300 to Californians for Schwarzenegger 2006
1/25/2006 – $510 to the Lincoln Club of Northern California PAC
11/4/2005 – $25,000 to Gov. Schwarzenegger’s California Recovery Team
11/4/2005 – $5,000 to Teachers, Firefighters and Law Enforcement for Paycheck Protection, Yes on 75
8/30/2005 – $25,000 to Gov. Schwarzenegger’s California Recovery Team
7/27/2005 – $1,000 to Republican Richard Riordan’s gubernatorial campaign committee
5/23/2005 – $250 to Greg Munks’ campaign for San Mateo County Sheriff
9/23/2004 – $12,500 to Californians for an Open Primary, Yes on 62
9/17/2004 – $510 to the Lincoln Club of Northern California PAC
9/8/2004 – $500 to Bill Evers’ campaign for Santa Clara County Board of Education
2/26/2004 – $25,000 to Californians for an Open Primary, Yes on 62
2/10/2004 – $150,000 to Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s California Recovery Team
8/20/2003 – $21,200 to Californians for Schwarzenegger
9/18/2003 – $20,000 to Arnold Schwarzenegger’s Total Recall Committee
9/15/2003 – $10,000 to Women for Arnold, sponsored by the Republican Pro-Choice Coalition
9/12/2003 – $10,000 to Arnold Schwarzenegger’s Total Recall Committee
6/25/2003 – $2,000 to Citizens for After School Programs, Yes on 49
4/9/2003 – $1,000 to Republican Curt Pringle’s 2006 Anaheim mayoral campaign
It is clear that Tim Draper is bias in his “Six Californias” plan, he doesn’t care about creating equal government for the people of California, he doesn’t care if the government works, the Draper agenda is to gerrymander California so the Republicans can make political gains since they can’t connect with California voters as a whole. This is a sick idea that shouldn’t happen no matter which party it benefits, our states shouldn’t be gerrymandered by the rich and a political party that doesn’t represent a majority in a state as large as California. If Draper wants California to turn red then he should go look up “Democracy” in a dictionary and start talking to Californians instead of trying to split them up.
The idea is flawed and so are the six states. In red is the state of Jefferson, yellow is North California, green is known as Silicon Valley, aqua is Central California, blue is West California and purple is South California. Never mind how dividing these states up is going to spark a new water crisis in the state (once again remember, who cares about the voters, Draper just wants more Republicans coming out of California, Californians be damned) there is a serious flaw with how the plan deals with population.
States Projected Population
North California 3,820,438
Silicon Valley 6,828,617
Central California 4,232,419
West California 11,563,717
South California 10,809,997
The population isn’t portioned at all between the states. Each state will get 2 U.S Senators and the 53 U.S House seats will be divided up between the six states. So 435 in the U.S House will remain but 12 U.S Senators (110 total Senate seats now) will represent the area now. Two states are easily GOP strongholds, two states are easily Democratic strongholds and the other states would likely be purple states and could switch back and forth depending on current political environment in country and in the two states.
A non-bias way to fairly divide California into six different states would be to equally divide the population. 38.04 million would be divided by six which would roughly give the population of each state 6,333,400 people per state. In order to achieve this you would most likely have to divide the six biggest cities in California around the states and each of the biggest cities would likely be the state capitol. So West California would be just the city of Los Angeles, the city population is 3,904,657 so L.A would have to extend into another state and it would make West California the smallest state by landmass. South California capitol would be San Diego and would extend from the beaches of San Diego to the welcome sign greeting those leaving Nevada and L.A suburbs. San Jose would be the capitol of Silicon Valley and San Francisco would be the capitol of North California. Oakland would have to be placed in Jefferson and Sacramento would be placed in Central California. But this is a headache not worth trying. California economy is on the rise and the state works better than a lot of smaller states.
In the end there is no good reason to split up California. California just needs to not vote anymore movie stars as Governor and they will be fine. If California is divided up for political gains then there is no good reason why Texas, New York, Illinois, etc. also shouldn’t be gerrymandered. It is a deeply flawed policy idea that isn’t even worth voting on.