Published in the Oct. 15-28, 2014 issue of Morgan Hill Life
By Marty Cheek
Tim Draper is a Silicon Valley venture capitalist billionaire who last year launched the kooky “Six Californias” proposed initiative. Thankfully, voters will not be deciding in the 2016 election on Draper’s bizarre plan to divide the Golden State into six new separate states. Draper failed to gain enough valid signatures to put it on the ballot.
The proposed new states would be named Jefferson (in the far north), North California, South California, Central California, West California (made up of Los Angeles) and Silicon Valley (made up of the San Francisco Bay Area). Morgan Hill would be part of the great state of Silicon Valley, which would be the wealthiest state in the union. Ironically, this proposed new state would border the proposed Central California, the poorest state in the union. That irony testifies to the extreme nature of California in terms of its diversity in economy and culture.
If Draper’s initiative of splitting California into six economically unequal parts had got on the ballot and had been passed by voters, it would not have immediately gone into effect. Based on the United States Constitution’s Article IV, Section 3, the California State Legislature and the U.S. Congress would both have to consent to admitting the new West Coast states into the union. That is a highly unlikely outcome because the Democrat majority in Sacramento would oppose the plan and it would upset the political balance of the Democrat-held U.S. Senate.
The Six Californias idea is just one of several proposed splittings of the state that have occurred over the years. Some people have proposed splitting the state into two with a Northern California and Southern California sharing a border somewhere around Santa Barbara. And for more than a century, more than a few residents in the far northern mostly rural section of California have suggested seceding from the state and joining a southern portion of Oregon to form a new state called Jefferson named in honor of the third U.S. President.
Draper’s reasoning for the Six Californias initiative is motivated by his belief that the state is ungovernable due to its geographical size and large population of about 38 million people, more than one-tenth the population of the entire United States. He also believes that the current government in Sacramento is out of touch with the people, and by splitting up the state into six parts, the new state governments would better serve the people who share a common regional culture.
Some critics have suggested that Draper’s initiative is a money and power grab for the wealthy of Silicon Valley. Others believe it’s a cynical Republican power play with the intent to diminish the number of California’s electoral votes that generally go to Democrats. I doubt that was Draper’s true intention. I also doubt Draper carefully thought his plan out on how the Six Californias initiative, if passed by voters and approved by lawmakers, might ultimately work out. Besides the need to add five new stars to the field of blue of the American flag, each state would have to face the cost and political burden of setting up six new state governments and five new capital cities. The initiative would also damage the economies of all six states because California businesses would be burdened by an increase in federal regulations regarding interstate commerce laws.
I have a hunch that the reason California faces its current share of problems is not because of its immense size and diverse population, as Draper suggests. Our problems stem from partisan politics. We lack real and cooperative leadership in Sacramento. The culture of extreme partisanship that pervades our national government has seeped into our own state legislature, making it often nearly impossible for members of the state senate and assembly to work together for the common good of the state. Dividing the state into six parts isn’t going to solve that problem. It might even make it worse.
