Democracy for California

Talk About California Secession

This is a *hot* topic being widely discussed.

Via California Insider. This group thinks California should secede from the union to save itself from the reign of Bush.

Whether you're in California or not, I think this idea is worth tossing around. It is a way for us to question how we can do things better.

Do you think California should secede from the United States?

This is certain to be a politically and emotionally charged issue, but it is time to give it some consideration.

It may not be the only answer or even the best answer, but citizens on the West Coast are finding themselves increasingly distinct and disenfranchised from the conservative cultural domination of the large middle and southern sections of the country.

The West Coast has also been the target of economic sabotage by energy brokers aligned with the so-called “Bush Dynasty.”

Secession may not be possible and certainly not easy. Even a majority of Californians may not initially be inclined toward the idea. But it is a prospect for which a dialogue can begin.

By itself California would be one of the leading economic superpowers in the world capable of self-determination in the development of global trade. California would also be free to establish laws and rights that embrace liberty, freedom and opportunity for all citizens regardless or ethnicity, religion or sexual orientation.

It is entirely possible that similar movements might begin in the states of Oregon, Washington or elsewhere in establishing a new Pacific nation.

Even if the prospect of a new nation is never realized this movement will succeed in sending a message to the rest of America that we must stand up to the narrow cultural and religious agenda that has reared its head. California will not be a place where cultural, economic and religious bigotry will dominate the people who want to freely speak, freely live and freely love.

This comment sums up the essential points nicely:

The breakdown of local units of goverments from the big center is on its way, and it encompasses the whole political strata. I'm sure you would find Bush II voters in the red counties who agree that the federal government is too powerful, too arrogant.

The more we can encourage these discussions and potential policy actions, the more we can decentralize from Washington to preserve our ultimate unity in the true beliefs that founded the original American republic.

To me this is true patriotism. The right of the people of local self-government is as American as apple pie.

My own understanding is that the concept isn't so much about literal secession (nobody wants another Civil War) as it is about the need to decentralize and scale down government to manageable size. It was Thomas Jefferson who had the brilliant forsight to see that small is better than big for the Republic when he said: "Democracy is impratical outside of a town." Tellingly, you never hear a Washington politician quote that seminal statement.

UPDATE:

Article in the Washington Times, Blue states buzz over secession

*Click* below for a selection of comments pro and con secession.

The magnitude and diversity of consequences to secession cannot be covered in a short comment, but my opinion is that the removal of the California economic engine, combined with the alienation engendered by the Bush administration's foreign policy, could result in an end to the superpower status of the USA.
--Aaron (Davis, CA)

I personally prefer secession on a county level within California, but hey, I'll support the whole state if it means a progressive democracy on the west coast.
--Patrick (Santa Cruz, CA)

What about joining with Oregon and Washington to form a bioregion instead?
--Jennifer (San Francisco, CA)

Here are a few possible consequences to think about: 187 like propositions could no longer be shot down in the federal courts. It would give the Republican party a significant additional electoral advantage in the House of Representatives and for the President. California would have to decide what to do about its own border with Mexico. California would have to balance its own electricity and refinery needs, or be subject to unfriendly markets.
--Gene (Pasadena, CA)

We need to achieve something like the "Velvet Divorce" of the Czech and Slovak republics. For that we will need a leader of impeccible moral stature. Who will be our Vaclav Havel? Let's explore this. No harm in trying, we may surprise ourselves.
--Phil (Anaheim, CA)

Optimally, support would follow topographic or ecological lines but I like county-based secession too. I would also propose the use of Geographic Information Systems to map patterns of support for the movement, just in case boundaries ever need to be redrawn. Instead of looking north for alliance, perhaps our strongest support will come from outside the US border...Latin America (labor/immigration issues), Europe (trade, politics)...What will our flag look like? This might be an opportunity to edit out that ironic icon, the Grizzly Bear, in favor of something more contemporary. Grapes? or cows? Furthermore, water politics may, after all its history, turn out to provide an important model for statewide cooperation and collaborative policymaking. Evidence shows we can work together through such challenging issues. I can't wait to see what else is possible.
--Michael (Sacramento, CA)

This is beyond a doubt the stupidest idea I have ever read on the web. And that covers a lot of territory. Clearly you do not know the first thing about either histroy or democracy. In case you have not heard the issue of seccession was settled by an event that has come to be known as THE CIVIL WAR.
--D.J. (Washington, DC)

Californians have a better future in mind, so let's talk about how to get there. We are different from the rest of the nation: more opne-minded, more innovative, more committed to equality, more compassionate, and more concerned about protecting the environment.
--Christopher (location not given)

This is such a silly idea. You are making an assumption that all the counties voted "blue," but if you look at the voting map you'll notice that most of California was "red." I'm in one of those "red" areas and I would no more want to be a part of the San Francisco Bay or Los Angeles area than a toothache. Now if you consider secession of the sliver area of blue, then let's talk!
--Tina (Citrus Heights, CA)

Idea is impractical since current administration would apply pressure against the state. Not necessarily Sherman's march to the sea; withhold all social security payments, military pensions, NIH/NSF grants, etc. while encouraging companies to withhold power from the electric grid, oil shipments, other imports. We'd be treated like Cuba. Better to stay in union and fight conservative policies with better ideas; when we find a cure for cancer through stem cell research and license it to a French company with jobs staying in California, the rest of the country will take notice.
--Marc (Richmond, CA)

What a dumb idea. Would only the coastal counties seceed, or would we force the solidly Bush-supporting inland areas with you? I can see it now: border patrol and customs stations with four-hour backups at the grapevine on I-5, in Pomona on I-10 and I-60, and on I-80 between Sacramento and Tahoe. Port traffic now going to LA / LB / SF and Oakland shifts to Seattle. And San Diego is left to fend for itself in debates with Mexico over sewage coming in from Tiajuana. And when is the last time CA built either a freeway or a mass transit line with less than 80 % of the funding coming from DC? Let's get off the dopey ideas and work towards a better tomorrow in this country.
--Jack (Pasadena, CA)

I think California secession is worth considering, at least as a thought piece or as an act of political theater. It's a way for us to clarify what our values really are. I am on a progressive email list whose members are from all over the United States. Their reaction to this was, "don't leave us behind! Can we come with you?" So many of us are tired of domination by the "United States of Texas" - the religiousity, the domination by corporate interests, the lack of concern for community, for the environment, the intolerance of it all. So let's toss the idea around. How would we define ourselves? What would our country be like? How could we do things better?
--Lisa (Los Angeles, CA)

California has the 5th largest economy in the world! Why shouldn't they form their own country, afterall, it should have been Mexicans, but we drove them out and stole the land for our own greedy purposes! Maybe the other blue states could join up and we'd have one kick ass country, that is of course after we get rid of Ahnold!
--Annie (Lombard, IL)

I've wondered for years when someone would organize a secession effort. I'm a California native (senior citizen). California has never in my lifetime received back our investment in the USA. I support populist issues but politically I'm a consequencialist! My biggest concern is the environment. If you decide to go forward, please let me know.
--Mitchell (Sacramento, CA)

The idea of secession certainly deserves learned discussion and consideration. To do so would almost positively reverse the pattern of benign neglect and whimsical forebearance shoveled down our throats the past forty years or so by national administrations and multi-media organizations. Instead, they would probably find themselves scrambling furiously to attain our favor. Having said that, however, one should be cautious in assuming that secesion would automatically favor one political view over another. Things have a way of changing, sometimes faster than well-made plans can be realised! Whichever your personal view, however, secesion has a much more likelyhood of future success if a certain degree of civility could somehow creep into the dialogue of the body politic and impede the current practice of 'dissing those who hold contrary beliefs. There is an equal place in society for the intelligencia as well as the shopkeeper. For either to scoff at the other because neither shares nor understands the other's world view, is downright short sighted. Rodney King's ancient but plaintive query may not be completely possible, but we should at least learn to treat each other as neighbors, not enemies. As neighbors we might unite for a common cause. As enemies, we just yearn to damage each other. Which way would be progress? First order of business: Defining "California Values."
--49erDweet (Salinas, CA)

Secession of California, or any other State or States should be done if it is the interest of the people! In the spirit of the Declaration of Independence "long standing governments should not be changed for transient reasons." I, like you, think Washington D.C. has become drunk with power. I would encourage the dissolution of the Union because I believe it would be in the best interest of the several states. Therefore, as a Citizen of Connecticut, I would not stand by and watch Washington D.C. do to California what it did to the other States that did secede in 1861-1865. Remember we all entered into the Union voluntarily, we should be allowed to leave. The imperial nature of the Federal government has gone too far. That was the reason the South originally seceded. I recommend a book titled, the "Constitutional History of Secession." I encourage anyone that wants to secede to read it and understand that this nation was built on the rock of secesion. If not, we would all still be Royal Subjects of the British Crown. Regardless of political beliefs Left or Right, the basic instinct of all people is to be truly free. So, go for it, get it on the ballot and call on your legislature to call a special session for the discussion of secession. You will lead the way for other States that might want to do the same thing, even if the reasons are different. Perhaps it is time for a divorce! Godspeed to you!
--Robert (Hartford, CT)

My view on the freedom of California...is that all California be free, both U.S. and both Mexican...and form a United California.
--Octavio (Los Angeles, CA)

I'm a sixth generation Californian but I will, until my dying breath, defend the Union.
--Andrew (Pleasant Hill, CA)

Great Idea. After all, we send so much to the Feds that does not come back to us. We only get 77% of what we give. Meanwhile, those so called small government states that voted for the Bush seem for some reason to get considerably more from the Feds than what they pay in. Besides, it's obvious much of the USA does not share our values and don't like us.
--Charles (Pasadena, CA)

Who's that idiot who said, "It sounds like you're advocating the overthrow of the government. Isn't that against the law?" Hasn't he read the Declaration of Independence: "right to alter or abolish" the government? Or are we to suppose that the Declaration of Independence is "against the law." Besides, secession is not "the overthrow" of any government. The government of the U.S. would go on without interruption... the only change would be that our Congressmen wouldn't show up in D.C. So what? Big deal. D.C. can go on governing the other 49 States as if nothing happened; how is that "overthrowing" the government.
--CB (Modesto, CA)

To say that California has the 5th largest economy is not really true. It has such because of it's "free Trade" staus with the other 49. Most large companies, those able to afford it, would move out, especially defense contractors. Trade barriers with the USA would most certainly be established by the US. The US government would pull out all military. That means every military installation. How much of that and the related industry is CA's economy? Since most of LA's water and power comes from out of state, there would be shortages unless you would be willing to pay a lot higher rates. Technology would be under export control. As Non-US Citizens, your tech sector would be crippled. The larger USA could absorb some loss, but most tech companies would probably move if they could. Currency and Banking. What would you use? Defense? Would Mexico gobble you up? Me thinks your planned welfare state would collapse upon itself in a matter of months. It makes me wonder. Ya'll question the intelligence of those of us who voted for President Bush, but you folks come up with some really DUMB ideas and this is one of them. You lost an election. GET OVER IT. Lick your wounds and try again. History shows that eventually things will change back. You are acting like 5 year olds. "I lost the ball game so I'm gonna take my ball and go home." Grow up!
--Mike (Tacoma, WA)

Secession movements have been developing on the west coast for some time now, but beyond reasons of bigotry and neo-conservatism. This country for several years now has continually favored the elite, and many people on the West Coast, including myself, believe we can create a smarter, healthier, freer, and more sustainable nation. I am not one to make this a left v. right issue; secession should be for all walks of life. I created a yahoo group called SavePac http://groups.yahoo.com/group/savepac/, which is aimed at either uniting the West Coast States and Provinces, or creating a secession movement for the entire coast (Alaska, Yukon, B.C., Washington, Oregon, Jefferson, California). I aggree that such talks will send a message to Washington D.C. that democracy, freedom, and sustainability is much more important than imperialism, war, surveillance, and invasion of privacy.
--Collin (Portland, OR)

I think that secession and personal sovereignty are linked. We are the ones who determine the course of our lives. (R)evolution is inevitable. What Americans think of as their government can be unthought; it only exists to the extent that we recognize it or fear it. Ignore it and it will go away.
--Cary (Omaha, NE)

While I understand that you are unhappy with the outcome of the election and the seeming dominance of the red states, if you were to attempt to secede you can guarantee that it would be met with military force by the Feds. Any secessionist could be tried and executed for treason. I would recommend that you look at more realistic options such as repairing the Democratic Party rather than a military solution, which is what secession is. I was under the impression that liberals abhorred violence. But with secession that is exactly what you would create.
--Keith (Orange County, CA)

I think it's clear that California Secession is not really practical, at least without years and years of preparation. It’s also obvious that many living here would feel literally kidnapped by a new government, much like much of San Francisco feels now. I also shutter to think what would happen to the rest of the US without the moderating influence of a strong progressive opposition. Then there's the purely practical fact that we're in debt up to our eyeballs right now. That being said; the idea IS amazingly attractive, and not because of the unfortunate result of one or two elections. I like the idea of splitting up the world's only super power—effectively reducing the US's ability to selfishly strongarm the rest of the world. I believe California's progressive politics would breed fresh ideas and interesting experiments, such as our stem cell initiative—something we’re limited in doing under the yoke of a strong federal government. I would be proud to say, "I'm a Californian" when I travel abroad and I think we could do a lot of good on the world stage. California is a large, diverse and beautiful state, we would make a truly amazing country. This sort of change takes a huge toll though, and while dialogue is always useful, things would need to get a lot worse to make it worth the cost.
--Kevin (San Francisco, CA)

We have laws against monopoly in business enterprises because competition brings inventiveness, fresh viewpoints, greater service, lower prices, and many other benefits. For the same reasons, we must not let one kind of government or ideology have a monopoly. Friendly competition among states or countries is the only way each individual is going to find a place to live that "feels right." We are never going to all be happy living under the same system. I heartily support all sucessionist movements.
--Brian (Salt Lake City, UT)

I indeed favor a limited form of secession—specifically, the Nine Counties of the Bay Area, with the contiguous North Coast and Central Coast counties. The reason for this limited approach is twofold:
{1) In the multiple maps showing the county-by-county vote totals, it can be shown that the only three counties south of the Monterey-SLO county line to vote for Kerry were Santa Barbara (54%), Los Angeles (63%) and Imperial (54%). The entirety of the theoretical support for such a measure as secession would logically (and logistically) come from the North and Central Coasts and the Bay Area.
(2) I find it ironic that you propose to drag 38 counties of this state into a new nation because of the fact that the people of 20 other (admittedly more populous) counties might disagree with the outcome of one election—all on the premise of protecting them from the predations of the policies that the people of the 38 red counties had clearly voted for—and for which their electoral voice was muted by the 20 blue counties. To paraphrase Geddy Lee of Rush, "Those who know what's best for us, must rise and save us from ourselves."
Is this truly what you propose?
--J.W. (Roseville, CA)

Why go so far as secession? Why not bring back the idea of FEDERALISM where each state is semi-autonomous and the federal government's role is limited?
--Stephen (N. Kingston, RI)

It would be preferable for us as a nation/state to be able to focus on our own state's needs. Our constitution is as good as (in some respects better than) the federal one and we could concentrate on real equality and diversity and not be playing a reaction or a "catch-up" game with the newest federal (also read republican) incursion against civil liberties.
--Valerie (Mill Valley, CA)

Support a thorough analysis. Would perhaps prefer a west coast secession: Washington, Oregon, and California.
--Camille (Guerneville, CA)

I live in Louisiana and have lived in the South my whole life. I have always felt as if I were in an occupied country. I find it amusing that your ancestors insisted that we say in the Union to the point that they killed most of the men, burned our home, raped the women,stole any valuables, and distroyed the economy to the extent that it is only now returning. Now we have the power to return to Southern rule as it existed before 1860. I could think of nothing better for California and New England to leave, but I would feel duty bound to return the favor from 1865. Also, think of this, many of you are upset because Kerry did not win. He ran on a platform of soak the rich. Yet you are complaining that your states are being soaked. This lacks in logic.
--David (Shreveport, LA)

Thank you for taking a measured and rational approach to the question of California secession. I think there is already tremendous interest and unity on this issue throughout the state. On November 3, some of my coworkers and I, as partial purgative for the depression of the previous day's election results, initiated (we thought, uniquely) a discussion of secession. We thought to encourage Oregon, Washington, and Hawaii to join our nascent country. We'd also invite B.C. and Baja California to break from their respective motherlands and become part of "Pacifica"...a name which, remarkably, I have since seen others with thoughts of secession have independently identified as an appropriate appelation for our new nation. Clearly, even at this preliminary stage, there is growing consensus. Keep up the good work.
--Curtis (Davis, CA)

Most people are making the mistake of considering secessionalist as left winger or semi-democrats...I know many people who support secession, yet voted for Bush... You can't just look at those who voted for Bush as anti-secessionalist...
--James (Oakland, CA)

This issue has to be raised and talked about...it cannot be put under the rug anymore.
I am not a secessionist. I'm a decentralizer. As was pointed out, 37 of 52 California counties voted for Bush II. Secession, unless in a few parts of the country, is not going to be a neat or perfect process. Especially in my home state of Wisconsin which only went [by a margin of] 13,000 votes for Kerry.
Instead of that, California should assert itself and its de facto indpendence from Washington DC. The stem cell referedum and initiative process is one way to do this. How about preventing the state's national guard from serving in overseas conflicts unless there is a Declaration of War? Or setting your own CAFE standards for autmobile emissions? There are any number of ways California can declare defacto secession without going all the way.
Or break things down to the local level: San Francisco or LA declared as city states like Florence or Venice, or break away Nor-Cal to for a west coast Cascadia with Vancouver?
The breakdown of local units of goverments for the big center is on its way, and its encompasses the whole political strata. I'm sure you would find Bush II voters in the red counties who agree that the federal government is too powerful, too arrogant.
The more we can encourage these discussions and potential policy actions, the more we can decentralize from Washington to more we can preserve our ultimate unity in the true beliefs that founded the original American republic.
To me this is true patriotism. The right of the people of local self-government is as American as apple pie.
--Sean (Arkansaw, WI)

It is clear that the "values" of the slight majority of Americans differ from those in the Golden State. California has the mass, the finances, the political and infrastructural systems to secede -- but do we have the will? It would be a bombshell of a movement, but given the dark and possibly dictatorial days which may be ahead for the nation as a whole, it warrants consideration.
--Steven (Long Beach, CA)

I am tired of California being used by the much of the rest of the nation (and particularly of late Texas oil interests [Enron and such] as a siphon for money with little return from the nation at large back to California. In fact, I would like to see the creation even of an extended Western states and include Oregon and Washington, who seem to be getting some short ecnomic shift as well. I want a place where people's votes are all counted and a place where whatever your color or religion or political leanings—your views are valued and respected. My federal taxes are going toward choices that reflect nothing of what I believe on any level now. We could make our own deals with Japan and Mexico and and other countries related to business. Hey, maybe an affliation with Canada and check out if Alaska would like to have control over their oil. Instead of siphoning off to middle America they could take control of their environment. The U.S. as a whole seems willing to destroy Alaskan wilderness without a thought. Maybe Alaska would like to have something to really say about that. Anyway, as far as California is concerned... I would love to see all my tax money going directly to California!
--Rebecca (Davis, CA)

This is an important alternative to consider! How long can we allow our tax dollars to fuel the crusades of the right? The world needs a better example of how to achieve a sustainable future. The US is providing the leadership our planet needs, but maybe California can.
--Sean (Davis, CA)

Posted by Diana at November 17, 2004 08:36 AM