I want to live in the United States. I vote and lose sometimes. When I can’t handle losing anymore, I’ll leave.
These people are already at that point, so why not just go to Wyoming?
Do people have self determination or not?
To answer a few questions, the reasons the initiative was blocked were, among other things, because the court said boundaries can be changed only by the legislature and Congress. Not to mention the uproar caused by the creation of three new states, which would also entail elections of new U.S. Senators and Congressmen. All in all, this was a stupid bill. The story below gives some details on the reasons it was blocked.
1 Like
I’ll just skip 4-5 posts so we can get to the point where I ask you to define exactly what self determination is so we can see why these Californians deserve 2 brand new senators.
California can ask to be split (and that part is a state question) but it’s up to congress to say yea or nay (federal question)
Actually, it would be four new Senators all together over the three new states.
If you read the excellent article posted by madasheck above, one of the questions the California Supreme Court is faced with is abolishing the constitution of the state by ballot initiative. This excerpt sums up the major problems with this initiative…
Those questions include whether California voters’ broad authority to enact laws by initiative, established in 1911, includes the power to break up the state, and in the process abolish its Constitution and existing laws, to be replaced by lawmaking bodies in three future states.
The narrower legal issue is whether Prop. 9, drafted as a change in the laws that define California’s boundaries, would actually amount to a “revision” of the state Constitution. That cannot be done by initiative, but instead requires approval by two-thirds of both houses of the Legislature to be placed on the ballot.
“We believe it is clear that a ballot initiative may not revise the Constitution by making changes in the basic framework of government,” said Carlyle Hall, a lawyer for opponents who sued to take Prop. 9 off the ballot. “And there can be no greater change in our framework of government than the total abolition of our existing Constitution.”
They wouldn’t be Californians anymore in this situations.
They want to vote. They like living in California.
Uh oh. Now this is interesting.
But the courts can?
Is the California constitution living?
What changes to California framework of government did the courts make?
Man, the non-Californians here are salivating trying to divide someone else’s state up. All to win a few elections.
Texas next?
Are they not The Final Arbiters?
Stupid post. It has nothing to do with winning elections.
No idea why the court didn’t just go ahead and allow it on the ballot. IF it passed, not bloody likely, the court simply would have ruled it unconstitutional anyway, like they do with every voter prop that passes and they don’t agree with.
Humbling.
10
They didn’t change a thing. The government of California will function exactly as it has.
Also do you realize how bad that map would screw over the conservative farmers in the central valley? Besides ground water 100% of their water resources would belong to other states.
What is the law concerning putting a proposition on the ballot?
The California Constitution cannot be revised by initiative.
