© 2004-2005 newCaliforniarepublic.org | Website of the New California Republic | New Ideas New Frontiers
Comments from readers
||I'd like to know the legal ramifications and process
involved with secession.
--Jeremy (Davis, CA)
||I have been a long time advocate of such an action. The nation is far too large and political power far too centralized. California
has tried to pass very positive environmental legislation, like
requirements for small engines (lawn mowers, blowers, etc.) to have catalytic
converters if they were to be sold here (air pollution savings would
have been equivalent to removing 3 million cars), but the feds prevent us
from doing so, citing the commerce clause. This has happend with
vehicle emissions too. When we want to clean up our air we are prevented from
doing so because we are altering the fuel economy that the federal
oiligarchy insists on dominating. WE NEED INDEPENDANCE to protect our
forests, air, water, farms, international reputation, and political
--Mike (Davis, CA)
Erection ring for men!
||There was this little war back in the mid-1800's, I think it
was called the Civil War, and If I can recall what I learned about it
in maybe, grade school I think, one of the reasons that it was fought was
to keep the union together maybe? I don't know, maybe this is relevant
to this topic? I don't know.
--Mike (Los Angeles, CA)
||Under the secession plan of moveonCalifornia, an independent
California would eventually "move on" to become a province of Mexico!
--Stephen (San Francisco, 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)
||Will California be allowed to take by violence that which it
could not win in an election? This talk of secession is infantile.
Part of being part of a federal republic is to accept that some elections
will not go your way.
What will you do with counties that are "red?" Will you let them
secede from California the way West Virginia left Virginia during the Civil
All this said, I think it would be great. Hey, I'll even volunteer to
lead the new "March to the Sea," this time with San Francisco playing
the role of Atlanta.
--Russ (Charlotte, NC)
||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)
||Only if Arnold is declared Supreme Dictator for life.
--Jeff (Davis, CA)
||The premise and arguments that are contained in this site
are bogus. How can it be that on one hand people are performing economic
suicide on the state and at the same time we are an economic
powerhouse? In fact since the energy debacle (magnified by the mismanagement of
the Davis administration) California's economy grown at a healthy pace.
There is no huge divide between California and the rest of the country.
We were split nearly in half during this past election, hardly a cry
for separation. A split into two states, firmly connected to the Union
might be a better use of time and resources. Thanks for reading my
message from the state of Northern California.
--Bob (Davis, CA)
||I am California-Born—now living in a Red State. My
Husband & I have been discussing moving to a beautiful Blue State !!! This
would be the natural choice. Please keep us informed.
--Karen (Longmont, CO)
||I'd like to get more information. I think this is the best
solution for all concerned. I'd like to get active on this, if we're
coming from the same place. And I think we might be.
--Erin (Oakland, CA)
||I would be delighted to see Kaliphornia secceed. Please take the Northeast and most of the Great Lakes states with you. My people
have always recognized the right of a free state to govern itself. The
States formed the Nation, not the Nation formed the States. You all have
my wholehearted support. Please leave. We WILL NOT force you to stay.
We will be glad to sign a peace treaty with you.
--Henry (Texas City, TX)
||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)
||May leave for the holiday but am looking forward to
dialoguing with others on this! 55 electorals and marginalized again!!
--Paula (Ventura, CA)
||I think everyone should read this article:
--Heather (Bakersfield, 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)
||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)
||You guys deserve to be your own country. It's not fair to
shackle you with the rest of the country's old, staid, stupid ideas and
beliefs. For one, you are all smarter than us, probably due to the large number
of Hollywood celebrities who live in California. Two, you are all better looking. We know this from watching TV, which is full of beautiful people, which is filmed in California, using
California residents. Three, we are doing nothing but holding you guys back. We will miss you, but we should set you free to find your own way. Oh, and don't let the doornob hit you in the a** on the way out.
--R.R. (Gulfport, MS)
(Note: We have had a number of responses like this and have chosen to publish a random few.)
||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)
||Your thought on secession is at best, short-sighted and has little political or economic merit.
Having said that, let me attempt to direct your energies to dividing California into three (yes three) states. Look at your map of the red and blue counties. Thirty seven of the counties are red. With rare exception, all of the blue counties are in the large population centers. Generally, these voters are more dependent on the government for services where the red counties are a bit more self-sufficient.
IF California was to be divided into three states, a powerful and dynamic voting block would be created. Think back to the early '40's. You recall the movement of Northern California and Southern Oregon to create a new state based on the fact that Salem and Sacramento no longer had these areas best interests at heart. This was the State of Jefferson. The movement was in full swing when Pearl Harbor happened. The movement was set aside, IN THE INTEREST OF NATIONAL UNITY, and was never brought up again.
I remind you of your history for this reason: If California was separated into three equal areas, your political aims would be met and, as I said, a powerful block of SIX Senators would be created. The 55 Electoral Votes would be spread over the three states. Much more power than we now command. Rather than throw the baby out with the bath water, use your influence in a constructive manner and solve all of these divergent states problems. Or are you just agitating out of spite? I fear that you are.
It is a real shame that your efforts will fall into the "kook" catagory rather that a constructive and reasonable solution.
--Ken (Orland, 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)
||While California has an economy greater than some
countries, please do not forget that California is in debt up the eyeballs, and
now that more taxes are on the way because the people voted for it, it
will be dire if there was another attack located in California or if
there was a natural disaster (earthquake) that will be as devestating as
the hurricanes in Florida. Also, please do not forget that other
countries such as France not only has an economy smaller than California,
they are also too poor to support a military to defend itself, all as a
result for the "progressive agenda." There must be an undestanding
that there will never be a "place" where everyone will be happy all at
once. Californians that are not happy with the election must come to
terms that the majority have voted by democratic means and to sabotage it
will bring nothing but grief. Why couldn't the people of the blue
counties try to understand the thinking of the red counties and try to understand that perhaps the "progressive agenda" can be going the
wrong way? Thanks for spreading the idea that FREE SPEECH applies to all,
whether blue or red.
--Teresa (Sacramento, CA)
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | Next
return to Main Page