Image 01 Image 03

“New California” moves to split off from Golden State

“New California” moves to split off from Golden State

High taxes, poor services, and misplaced priorities inspire the attempt to unite the rural areas into new state.

Shortly after the New Year opened, I noted that President Donald Trump had begun mounting a #CounterResistance to California’s political war against his administration.

I recommended 5 strategies for continuing the battle, including assistance in helping the “State of Jefferson” break free to dilute the Golden State’s electoral power.

It appears that someone may have followed-up with this suggestion, as a group of unhappy state residents has launched a quite public declaration to create “New California“.

With the reading of their own version of a Declaration of Independence, founders of the state of New California took the first steps to what they hope will eventually lead to statehood. CBS Sacramento reports they don’t want to leave the United States, just California.

“Well, it’s been ungovernable for a long time. High taxes, education, you name it, and we’re rated around 48th or 50th from a business climate and standpoint in California,” said founder Robert Paul Preston.

The state of New California would incorporate most of the state’s rural counties, leaving the urban coastal counties to the current state of California.

This movement is different than the “State of Jefferson” because all of the non-coastal-elite portions of California would become part of the new state (not just the northern section). That works out well for me, as San Diego County would be included with the break-away sections.

The plan to separate the rural areas from the coastal regions also makes abundant sense. The fiscal and cultural priority differences are vast, as the one part of the state has held on to its freedom-embracing Western heritage while the other portion is trying to channel New York City.

“There’s something wrong when you have a rural county such as this one, and you go down to Orange County which is mostly urban, and it has the same set of problems, and it happens because of how the state is being governed and taxed,” Preston told CBS Sacramento.

The “founders” have evoked Article IV Section 3 of the United States Constitution as justification for establishing a new economy with a new state constitution.

It states that a consensus must be reached by the state legislatures of California as well as congress. The process, according to New California representatives, could take 10 to 18 months.

I sure hope that the organizers have a pathway that does not go through Sacramento. Our state’s politicians will cling to power like a starving vampire grips a hapless victim.

And while most of the progressive publications dismiss this move as a long-shot, the organizers seem steadfast and have a long-term game-plan.

The group is moving forward, however, putting together a list of organized county committees who would then spread the word and raise support locally.

Preston termed it “a growth phase” for the organization.

It’s too bad that “New California” won’t occur this week. I am in Florida for a few days, and it would have been nice to return home to a state with more responsible governance in place.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.



    Tiki in reply to gibbie. | January 17, 2018 at 5:02 pm

    CalExit. Post secession? California as a coherent entity ceases to exist. Groups of likeminded individuals would be free to join geographical regions to form a new state.

These guys are on to something. This is how I’d carve up the state.

It won’t happen. San Francisco is too wedded to Hetch Hetchy water, and SoCal to the Owens Valley and Colorado River.

Nice to think about, though.

Roy in Nipomo | January 17, 2018 at 1:29 pm

My only difficulty is that though my county (San Luis Obispo) is geographically about halfway between S.F. & L.A. and on the coast, in demographics & economics, we, along with northern Santa Barbara County, we share “New California” attitudes & problems more than with “California”. Short of either making the rump “California” discontinuous or breaking into three states (Bay Area, L.A. and “New California”), I don’t view any of these being a help for my area. Bottom line: I’m screwed, regardless.

Any dilution of Prog power will be contested. The Left wants (if need be force) all America to be as enlightened, diverse and tolerant as they are. All of those “rural” areas need saving from their shortcomings and sins. Anyway, the coastal areas are too densely populated for any future reeducation camps… Camp Brown, Camp Boxer, Camp Feinstein and Camp Milk.

Or, if the process takes too long, old california will simply cleave off along the San Andreas fault which the proposed new border conveniently follows…

    The fault still takes out some Red areas…. there are plenty of faults (and how) in California that can create a crisp and well defined (deserved?) “parting of the ways”. A problems with Leftist Lemmings is that they stopped short of the ocean.

Even if statehood fails, it could mobilize voters.

In addition to the directions in the text in the Constitution, there’s some precedent on process. Maine was carved from Mass. (1820) as was W.Va from VA (1863). Both came about because of the slavery issue.

Doubtful anything useful will be learned if the approval of Sacramento is required. It simply will not be given.

New California, hey that’s good. I would have gone with Sane California. Good luck.

This is exactly as futile as the “impeach Trump” and “25th amendment” initiatives. Just as you can’t remove a president by impeachment without the vote of a majority in the House and 2/3 of the senate, and you can’t remove him by the 25A without all of that plus another sixth of the House, the vice president, and a majority of the cabinet, you can’t split a state without its legislature’s consent. And there is no way on earth that the CA legislature will consent to this.

The national D Party might well consent, if offered Puerto Rico statehood in return, but there is nothing you could offer the CA Ds that would make this a good deal for them, so they will just say no.

Not going to happen without a revolution.

State of Jefferson, similar thing but further along.
They have 23 counties already onboard.

    DaveGinOly in reply to JDmyrm. | January 18, 2018 at 12:42 am

    In a strategic move, CA may allow the creation of Jefferson, because that would weaken the efforts of the New California movement, having taken much of the wind out of its sails.

A GREAT IDEA! What a perfect way to give the liberal progressives a safe space! Several additions should be strongly considered to make Western California a “Safe Space”

1] First, a 30 foot wall around the entire 50th state. We want to keep the liberals safe.

2] Control ingress and egress, strictly allowing only licensed professionals, food or medical supplies to cross into the 50th state. No illegal immigrants or felons.

3] Control the water flowing into the 50th state. This is a vital resource for the 51st state and agriculture, not for watering lawns or washing cars. If the 50th state wants fresh water, then they have an entire ocean to siphon from. Perhaps a water treatment plant would find support where a fast train had problems.

Given the electoral and congressional impact there will be high interest and $ for and against.

I could see some other left coast states following suit as Oregon and Washington suffer from similar representation issues. Who knows about others???? Obama (the smahtest POTUS evah..) could have been prescient on his 57 state count after all!

Sorry, but California already has 2 Senate seats and more than 10% of the seats in the House. I wouldn’t want California to have even one more seat anywhere. They already have too much say in DC.

The only way to split California is to place a secession proposition on a election ballot via the initiative system. If Californians approve the ballot? California as we know it ceases to exist as a coherent entity; people would be free to determine the future of specific geographical regions.

    Subotai Bahadur in reply to Tiki. | January 17, 2018 at 7:16 pm

    Any vote of the people that the Democrats disagree with will be ruled unconstitutional by the courts. It is right there next to the “connected Person clause” of the state constitution.

    Milhouse in reply to Tiki. | January 17, 2018 at 7:41 pm

    Have you ever bothered reading the US constitution? Obviously not. I don’t care how many referendums you hold, without the state legislature’s consent you cannot split the state. And the legislature will never consent.

      The proposition would compel legislators to ‘aye’ under threat of removal.

      Next time read the Ca. constitution and the initiative process before popping off Mr Poppinjay.

        Milhouse in reply to Tiki. | January 18, 2018 at 12:09 am

        No proposition can dictate to legislators how to vote, or remove them for voting the wrong way. The power to decide how to vote is inherent in the legislative function, and a proposition such as you suggest would effectively abolish the legislature, which CA voters have no power to do.

As a California refugee, I understand the why, just don’t understand the how. I figured it wasn’t going to happen in my lifetime so moved to a more sane state. Trouble is, it’s now being inundated with Californians, not all of whom are freedom loving, just wanted to trade up in housing!

Not gonna happen. It requires a CONSENSUS of both the California State Senate and Assembly as well as the Senate and House of Representatives of the US Congress to agree to form the new state. California is never going to allow that to happen. The US Congress is also not likely to upset the status quo. Just another California pot dream.

    ronk in reply to Mac45. | January 17, 2018 at 6:33 pm

    actually there is a precedent for that, it’s called West Virginia

      Subotai Bahadur in reply to ronk. | January 17, 2018 at 7:17 pm

      In the middle of an actual shooting civil war. Which may yet obtain, but at that point what this group is doing will be moot.

        Milhouse is correct. West Virginia split off of Virginia after it had seceded and was allowed to join the United states [just one more example of the fact that the USA actually recognized the Confederacy as a sovereign nation]. Maine might be a closer approximation. However it was only recognized by the government of the United States as part of the Missouri Compromise. Its establishment as a state was meant to offset the entry of Missouri as a slave state.

        Such conditions do not apply today.

      Milhouse in reply to ronk. | January 17, 2018 at 7:42 pm

      WV happened while VA was no longer a state. It couldn’t have happened otherwise.

Darn! I’ve never seen such a brilliant chess move before. So, yesterday, California was talking smack about how they were not going to obey Federal laws, and if the Feds didn’t like it, they just might secede from the union.

Today, a good part of California said, “Yeah, well go ahead, but if you do, will be staying with the US.” Oh, and we will be keeping the water and agriculture with us. And also, you know those farm workers that do the jobs American’s won’t do? We will let them in legally, with green cards and we won’t need all of those poor people that you traffic and keep in a shadow servant class.

I’m guessing many people who are stuck inside the fault lines will not be happy about being left in the People’s Republic of Mexifornia.

Talk about turning the tide!!

    daniel_ream in reply to elle. | January 17, 2018 at 11:32 pm

    This is exactly what happened during the last Quebec independence referendum here in Canada. All of the parts of the province where the resource wealth is said they’d secede and rejoin Canada if Quebec voted to secede.

    “Si Canada est partible, donc Quebec est partible (if Canada is severable, then Quebec is too)”

notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital | January 17, 2018 at 6:16 pm

Drive the lefties really over the edge – tell them the new state will be named Reagan-Land.

It’ll probably fail. My suggestion is to get shovels and start digging along the lines drawn up. If anyone asks, tell them you’re working on the high speed rail.

legalizehazing | January 18, 2018 at 3:35 am

Screw that… join AZ!

If not.. split to Jefferson and give San Diego to AZ! We want a beaches and a port baby!!