Plan to split California into 6 states advances

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

How would these "states" have voted in 2008 and 2012 (vote totals)? Any data genesis want to take a crack at this?

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2014/02/21/california-six-states-plan-tim-draper/5673283/

This link lists each state by current CA counties.

"Silicon Valley" and "West California" are obviously hardcore Democratic. "North California" is safely Democratic, but not by blowout numbers My guess is that Obama won both "Central California" and "South California", but that they would be competitive for Republicans. "Jefferson" is hardcore Republican.  Maybe 7-5 Senator split, with Democrats locking down the 3 Democratic states while taking a competitive seat in "Central" or "South" California.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

More reasonable would be using the "straight line" county boundaries north of Bakersfield to divide the state in two.  But all that does politically is create 2 more Democratic senators.

Yes, some of these 6 are pretty absurd. North California especially has an odd shape. And San Francisco and Concord part of "Silicon Valley"? LOL.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Looks like it'll probably be on the 2016 ballot.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

We know this isn't going to pass anyway. That said, I would be interested to see how things like Medical and the UC system would be dealt with in a state split.

There'd be

University of Silicon Valley:
Berkeley
San Francisco
Santa Cruz

University of North California (Davis)

University of Central California (Merced)

University of West California:
Santa Barbara
Los Angeles

University of South California:
Irvine
Riverside
San Diego

and nothing for Jefferson


LOLs for the fact that none of the 3 University of Silicon Valley campuses would be in silicon valley.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

So if it gets on the ballot, would it need a simple majority to pass or would all six "states" need to have a majority in favour?

Statewide propositions in California only need a simple majority of those who vote on that specific proposition.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Why are we revisiting this?

Because it will probably be on the ballot in 2016, sadly.

Will "Yes" break 10% of the vote is what I want to know.

Almost certainly, but of course it will fail.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

6 seems ridiculous - why not just spit into Northern and Southern (not that would fly either).

Anyone how Northern and Southern differed in presidential voting?

Southern California is much more Republican than Northern California. A state just composed of the ten southern counties would have come close to voting for Bush in 2004; Kerry won 51.50% of the vote in those counties, while Bush won 47.22%.

Obama did almost as well in Southern California as the state as a whole. I think he got around 59% last time. Splitting the state in two along the 35° 47′ 28″ N line would clearly result in 2 more Democratic Senators and a couple more electoral votes for the Democrats.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

San Diego does have a major military base, which helps make the region a bit more Republican than it likely otherwise would be.

OK, but one military base does not determine how an area of 23 million people votes. The cities of Oakland and SF had military bases a couple of decades ago, and you can see how they vote.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Are these awful names set it stone? Surely they can do better than just a directional California name...

Not that I'd vote for this anyway, but the names would be enough for me to vote No if I otherwise liked it.

I tend to agree, but I suspect there are electoral considerations at work. Picking a name other than a bland direction is more likely to lose votes than to gain them.

Silicon Valley isn't a direction, and I think Monterey, San Francisco, and Antioch will agree that they're not silicon valley.

None of the 3 UCs in "Silicon Valley" (Berkeley, San Francisco, and Santa Cruz) are actually in silicon valley. Silicon Valley generally means Santa Clara county, Fremont, Palo Alto, and Redwood City.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

And it fails to qualify.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.sacbee.com/2014/09/12/6702457/six-californias-initiative-fails.html