Richard Place: “No. It’s already broken.”
Nants Foley: “I think six states is too much. But looking at breaking it up is not a bad idea. Different sections have different needs. And hooray for the state of Jefferson!”
Jim West “Yes. It would be a jobs program for politicians, staff, lobbyists and lawyers. We would have more clout in both houses of Congress and finally have the kind of Senate representation that the people of Wyoming enjoy – they only qualify for one representative in the House, but they get two Senators just because there a separate state.”
Mary Zanger: “No. Everyone living here from the Sierras to the sea and from the redwoods to the ranches would consider our state to be a masterpiece. Dividing this masterpiece would be like dismembering the great Michelangelo statue of David. Now when a serious drought threatens to suck the lifeblood of the state and a serious extraction method called fracking threatens to stab the state to death is the time when, ‘United we stand’ means everything. Dividing California would make the Mona Lisa cry.”
Ruth Erickson “Perhaps two small states might work, Northern and Southern California, like North and South Carolina. Multiple states here would create numerous problems with each needing their own state governments, dividing such things as shared utilities and other shared interests and each state’s population would be too small for drawing jurisdictional lines for election purposes.”
Marty Richman: “Yes, but it’s not going to happen because there are too many political powerbrokers who would end up with diminished influence. Sad to say, but more people are interested in retaining their power, blind partisanship, and their share of the current spoils system than doing what’s right for the state or nation. Corruption of principles has its price and personal investment in the status quo is one of them.”
