Sen. David Perdue: Georgians should vote for me & Sen. Loeffler to stop Dems’ radical socialist agenda

[Cyberfx1024 7,980]

2 hours ago, laylalex said:

But the propositions get rejected again and again. The threshold to get on the ballot isn't that high -- about 3% of the total eligible voters. The reality is that the state's economy is interdependent on its regions. The Central Valley needs the money coming in from LA/SD/Bay Area; the urban areas need the crops from the Central Valley; Sacto, the Imperial Valley and the North need everyone's money. Yes, the state is huge and feels unmanageable sometimes. But putting it to a proposition to be voted on by voters, with the legislature to do some Underpants Gnomes magic to break it all up, is akin to Brexit, and look how SUPER that has turned out. (It hasn't.)

 

Until Padilla was appointed the other week by Newsom, California had not had a senator from Southern California in 29 years. 29! Nevermind that the bulk of the population of the state is down here. Nope, we had senators from the Bay Area who for all their good and bad points are just not plugged into what's happening here. Padilla is from a working class background and went to MIT. He's a great choice. When Feinstein finally does everyone a favor and retires (SOON PLEASE), I hope we get someone from the Central Valley, the North, or somewhere not the Bay Area. 

They actually passed the threshold to be placed on the ballot both times. The first time it was beating back because they couldn't verify all of the signatures after it came under intense scrutiny. The 2nd time had more than enough signatures for the ballot even after it came under scrutiny but this time it held up to it. When it passed the signature amount then it got sued in court by an environmental group because "it would be a revision of the state's constitution". The California Supreme Court struck it down saying:

 

 

"In a unanimous decision on July 18, the California Supreme Court removed the measure from the 2018 ballot, ordering further legal arguments on whether it can be restored on the 2020 ballot or struck down completely.^[2] In its ruling, the court stated that "significant questions have been raised regarding the proposition’s validity and because we conclude that the potential harm in permitting the measure to remain on the ballot outweighs the potential harm in delaying the proposition to a future election."^[28] Responding to the court's order, Draper labelled it as "corruption", "the insiders are in cahoots", and that the California Supreme Court justices "probably would have lost their jobs" if Cal 3 passed.^[2][28]

 

On 12 September 2018, in another unanimous decision, the Supreme Court of California permanently removed Cal 3 from all future ballots, stating:On August 9, 2018, petitioner (the party challenging the validity of the initiative measure) and real party in interest (the proponent of the initiative measure) filed separate documents in this court. Petitioner filed a request for an order granting the petition and directing the Secretary of State to refrain from placing the challenged initiative measure on the November 2018 ballot or on any future ballot. Real party in interest filed a document stating that he "do[es] not object to the Court making its [prior] order permanent without further briefing or hearing." Under the circumstances, we construe the real party in interest's filing as consenting to the entry of a stipulated judgment in favor of petitioner. The court has received no objection to proceeding in this fashion. Accordingly, the petition is granted and the Secretary of State is directed to refrain from placing the challenged initiative measure on the November 2018 ballot or any future ballot."
 

 

 

So basically it got sticken down because a California forced together has alot of political clout while 3 or 6 California's wouldn't have as much clout. The two things that everyone needs from the Central Valley region is the water and the crops. As you stated and we both know the state is ran by the wealthy elite out of the Bay Area. Which is unfortunate for the rest of the state, because even a Democrat Latino in the Central Valley is more Conservative than a Bay area or Westside weenie. 

[laylalex 7,285]

It doesn't change the fact that the voters have never approved it? It's actually been proposed more than twice, I think it's something like 7 or 8 times. If people really, really wanted to do this, there would be a groundswell of support. There would be outrage, people marching in the streets protesting that the proposition didn't get on last time by a technicality, i.e., it was unconstitutional. (Kind of a big technicality!) There would have been another prop on the 2020 ballot that fixed the problems with the 2018 initiative. I haven't seen polling on partition in a long time but last time I remember seeing it it was well below 50%. Democrats oppose it. Republicans oppose it. The Chamber of Commerce opposes it.

 

I really don't care if Draper thinks everyone's in cahoots -- he's got a vested interest in the last two props since he was the one who was behind them!  

 

The reality is that the red parts of the state don't like the blue parts even though the wealthy parts of the state are (by and large) blue and support the poor parts which (by and large) are red, and the blue parts are fine with the red parts because they provide a tax base. In my opinion, there is a lot more weight behind giving PR or DC statehood over splitting up California, which most people here don't care about. DC residents want statehood and have approved it through referendum. So have PR residents. 

 

California is too big, but so is America by the same reasoning. The problems here relating to "who gets to represent whom" are similar to what happens on a national level, without being parallels. Like, is the electoral college fair if it overweights less populated states that tend to vote Republican? Is it fair that California only gets two Senators when RI gets two as well? (My mom has roots in a big family that straddles the RI border with CT, so she feels very strongly yes while my dad doesn't quite agree.) Those are issues relating to "who gets to represent whom?" just as much as "why do the big Democratic cities in California have so much clout in Sacto that they crowd out any real nuanced discussion about the CA heartland?"

 

Personally I am not crazy about the CA prop initiative system. It has the potential to go haywire, like with Prop 8 years ago. On the other hand, I think there is a lot of room for direct democracy, so I also think it's not a bad idea, but one in need of fixing.

 

You can call this post: Layla Has Thoughts About California, Part I.  

[Crtcl Rice Theory 2,432]

1 hour ago, laylalex said:

It .... need of fixing.

 

You can call this post: Layla Has Thoughts About California, Part I.  

I created a tl;dr part 1

[laylalex 7,285]

1 minute ago, CanAm1980 said:

I created a tl;dr part 1

Thank you. You can tell I am in need of something to do at the moment. I just finished Bridgerton on Netflix and am thinking about catching up on correspondence. 

[Chauncey 138]

Can one of you guys please create a thread for the Georgia senate race today?