Blogging Bayport Alameda

July 16, 2014

On the 6 states

Filed under: Alameda-ish — Lauren Do @ 6:06 am

Not Alameda related at all but, holy crap, have you all been following the ridiculous “Six States” proposal that is slated for the ballot in 2016?   I mean, I don’t even know what the point of this is other than to create rampant poverty in the Central Valley, I mean “Central California.”

Here’s a good map to see how much per capita income tax revenue and welfare spending per capita is spent per the proposed regions.

Here’s a good synopsis of the history and challenges if this ballot measure actually receives any traction at all:

It’s not the first attempt to slice up the largest state in the country: periodic efforts have been made since California gained statehood in 1850, including an ongoing push by some residents in far northern California to create a state called Jefferson that would include a few counties in southern Oregon. Like previous secessionist efforts, Draper’s campaign is a long shot, to say the least, and it poses an array of feasibility problems, including a vast reorganization of water and energy delivery systems, Congressional approval and the inevitable onslaught of fierce litigation. But the proposed borders are, nevertheless, worth taking a look at, as they highlight some of California’s extreme economic disparities as well as its uneven population distribution.

The gaps are underscored in California’s non-partisan Legislative Analyst’s analysis of the proposal. According to the report, the new state of Silicon Valley, which would encompass most of the Bay Area, Santa Clara County and parts of the Central Coast, would have the highest per capita income in the nation, out-ranking Connecticut (funny coincidence that Draper happens to reside here). Meanwhile, the neighboring state of Central California, encompassing mostly poor agricultural counties in the Central Valley, would be at the very bottom in per capita income, behind Mississippi.

Speaking of resources, apparently some folks out there don’t realize that we’re in a drought and are continuing to operate as though we have water to spare.    This means that fines could be coming.  And you know what’s next after that…  That’s right: letting the yellow mellow.



  1. “What’s next” after fines is not flushing with every urination? If you haven’t been doing that already, Lauren, you’re part of the problem.

    Comment by Jack Mingo — July 16, 2014 @ 6:14 am

  2. Simply letting the lawn die has cut our water use by approx. 25-30%%

    Comment by dave — July 16, 2014 @ 6:16 am

  3. I have a five year old boy, trust me, the yellow is mellowing all of the time. Sometimes the brown mellows too.

    Comment by Lauren Do — July 16, 2014 @ 6:24 am

  4. It is a stupid idea and would increase state government spending. Can you imagine having 6 Sacramento’s in the state…6 capitals, 6 governors, 6 attorney generals, 6 different Departments of Transportations 6 of everything…including set of laws….things in California are complicated but this would make it 6 times more complicated. It is a waste of money just putting it on the ballot. Millions will be spent on both sides to divide instead on uniting California. You cross the Golden Gate Bridge and suddenly you are in a different state.

    Comment by Joseph — July 16, 2014 @ 7:43 am

  5. These two subjects are about the same, 6 states, or yellow toilets.

    Comment by John P. — July 16, 2014 @ 8:21 am

  6. from a satirist friend :”Welcome to Tech Lord Rickmaster’s Six Californias—
    Libertarian California, Republican California, Poverty California, Airhead California, Klan California and Beach Party California”

    Comment by MI — July 16, 2014 @ 8:30 am

  7. While I know neither will ever happen, we’d be much better served by a brand new state constitution, one devolves more authority down to localities, among many other needed reforms.

    Comment by dave — July 16, 2014 @ 8:35 am

  8. The biggest obstacle I can see to passing this are the profoundly boring names this bozo has come up with for the various regions. Good luck getting any San Franciscan to sign on to be part of “Silicon Valley.” I’m surprised they didn’t suggest that San Francisco be its own thing, like D.C.

    Seriously though, look at the trends. I watched “Frontline” last night where they reported about a group attempting to spilt the affluent, predominately white section of Baton Rouge off from the rest of the city for the same reasons. They want to call it “St. George” which, interestingly indicates that there’s also some English vs. French stuff going on there, too. Their rationale is that busing has destroyed the sense of community and that kids should be able to attend schools in their neighborhoods. That very well may be the principle reason some folks support it but the effects would be devastating on the rest of the community.

    It looks like the wealthy are no longer content to create gated communities or mountain top retreats to live in. Now they want the whole territory to be “their sort” of people. I suggest they buy up islands and create their utopias there. Wonder how much we can get for Alameda? To hear some people talk, we’re halfway there. Imagine if some billionaire offered you a million dollars to move if you are a Democrat, for instance. Would you leave, and where would you go?

    Comment by Denise Shelton — July 16, 2014 @ 9:50 am

  9. This bozo doesn’t seem to know the natural divisions existing in California, either. Leaving LA County out of Southern California makes no sense. There has always been a line across California [top line of San Bernardino-Kern-SLO Counties] which makes more sense: separating Fresno from Bakersfield = farms from oil fields [sort of]. this makes some sense; the Auto Club of Southern Calif is different than CSAA. Kaiser Northern California is still so completely separated from Kaiser Southern California that you cannot use your NorCal Kaiser medical record number in SoCal Kaiser. [This was true in the 1990s = someone in SoCal had the same medical record number I had in NorCal, so every time I made an appointment, that member would cancel it, not knowing I existed. I just called the Riverside Kaiser Member Service Center; the situation remains unchanged in 2014.]

    Large corporations are already treating California like 2 states, but I don’t see the logic in six.

    Comment by vigi — July 16, 2014 @ 11:13 am

  10. Another problem is all these stated could have different tax rates (income, sales, and property). One state may keep prop 13 whereas another get rid of it. You see this in Portland OR. and Vancouver WA. People live in WA, but shop in OR because they don’t have any sales tax. If you make a lot of money the income tax rates could determine which state you live in. It would create a lot more bureaucracy and most notably years and years to separate it all. The current state is so intertwined it would take billions and billions of $’s to separate it.

    Comment by Joseph — July 16, 2014 @ 12:52 pm

  11. Why not , let’s cut off the water from northern California to keep these Beverly Hills green and you will see a long line of moving van flowing back north , might be a way to fill the base and all these future projects . Utopia always have their detractors ,
    On the plus side , we will be able to charge everyone of them for trucks entering their State , commerce is free infrastructure is not .

    Comment by Sam — July 16, 2014 @ 4:39 pm

  12. I see a 7th State , Alameda , anyone remember the gates to welcome visitors off high park street bridge ….
    They have been replaced by a company jamming their truck in the lot , the name is : Shred it , How appropriate and funny ! even Joel might like the idea ……

    Comment by jack — July 16, 2014 @ 4:44 pm

  13. Some would say this island’s already a seventh state, that being quark-gluon plasma.

    Comment by Other Jack — July 16, 2014 @ 5:47 pm

  14. Six states and one republic – the Republic of Berkeley.

    Comment by Basel — July 16, 2014 @ 7:51 pm

  15. Opponents to the proposed Six Californias ballot measure filed a complaint with Secretary of State Debra Bowen, according to the San Francisco Chronicle.

    Comment by Joseph — July 18, 2014 @ 10:35 am

  16. That’s the ridiculous point to which the initiative process in CA has been brought: one Silicon Valley idiot with too much money pays signature gatherers to get enough other idiots to sign to get this on the ballot. It would be interesting to see what would happen: the techies may have lots of money they want to preserve, but where are they going to get the workers to clean their offices and make their sandwiches and do their laundry?

    Comment by Linda on Otis St. — July 21, 2014 @ 2:47 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Create a free website or blog at