Humboldt County was not originally a part of the 1941 push for a new state of Jefferson. Neither was Mendocino. Maps at the time included only four counties in California (Del Norte, Siskiyou, Lassen and Modoc) and Curry county on Oregon's south coast, but more recent iterations have spread out to encompass a total of 19 counties, including Humboldt.
The movement toward independent statehood for parts of Northern California and Southern Oregon dates back to the 1850s, almost immediately after California was granted statehood. Some of the early names considered included Shasta, Klamath and Jackson. The idea of using Jefferson came from a naming contest in 1941.
In 1941 Jeffersonians were advocating for independence from California and Oregon, not from the federal government of the United States.
"Secessionist" activity by the Jeffersonians was limited to one day per week. That ended quite abruptly when the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor drew the United States into World War II.
At that time, Judge L. Childs of Crescent City had been elected governor of a provisional government in Yreka that was assessing the feasibility of a new state along the California\Oregon state-line. Thursdays became "Secession Day," and Jeffersonians took to setting up armed roadblocks on Highway 99, collecting tolls from vehicles crossing the "state line." Mostly, they were handing out pamphlets.
While 19th century statehood efforts were earnest, Jefferson Public Radio's write-up on their own local history indicates that 20th century statehood efforts have been "largely tongue in cheek." They have served as a grassroots effort to publicize the region's natural resources and as a means of political agitation to petition indifferent governments for redress of legitimate grievances, but little else.
Mike Baird said he means to change that. He is visiting communities throughout Northern California, networking with conservative grassroots activist groups that hope to build support for an independent breakaway state. They are working county-by-county, and Baird said that when 12-13 counties have signed on he will take the fight to Sacramento.
Last month the Siskiyou County board of supervisors voted 4-1 in favor of withdrawal from California. Now the movement is looking to other counties, and with the deep-water seaport and four-year university campus, Humboldt is on the list.
At the October board meeting of the Humboldt Taxpayer's Association, Baird urged those in attendance to assemble a committee and build a local movement. Once the groundwork has been done, he means to take this to the Humboldt County board of supervisors.
The movement toward independent statehood for parts of Northern California and Southern Oregon dates back to the 1850s, almost immediately after California was granted statehood. Some of the early names considered included Shasta, Klamath and Jackson. The idea of using Jefferson came from a naming contest in 1941.
In 1941 Jeffersonians were advocating for independence from California and Oregon, not from the federal government of the United States.
"Secessionist" activity by the Jeffersonians was limited to one day per week. That ended quite abruptly when the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor drew the United States into World War II.
At that time, Judge L. Childs of Crescent City had been elected governor of a provisional government in Yreka that was assessing the feasibility of a new state along the California\Oregon state-line. Thursdays became "Secession Day," and Jeffersonians took to setting up armed roadblocks on Highway 99, collecting tolls from vehicles crossing the "state line." Mostly, they were handing out pamphlets.
While 19th century statehood efforts were earnest, Jefferson Public Radio's write-up on their own local history indicates that 20th century statehood efforts have been "largely tongue in cheek." They have served as a grassroots effort to publicize the region's natural resources and as a means of political agitation to petition indifferent governments for redress of legitimate grievances, but little else.
Mike Baird said he means to change that. He is visiting communities throughout Northern California, networking with conservative grassroots activist groups that hope to build support for an independent breakaway state. They are working county-by-county, and Baird said that when 12-13 counties have signed on he will take the fight to Sacramento.
Last month the Siskiyou County board of supervisors voted 4-1 in favor of withdrawal from California. Now the movement is looking to other counties, and with the deep-water seaport and four-year university campus, Humboldt is on the list.
At the October board meeting of the Humboldt Taxpayer's Association, Baird urged those in attendance to assemble a committee and build a local movement. Once the groundwork has been done, he means to take this to the Humboldt County board of supervisors.
Photo courtesy of www.Heraldandnews.com
Mark Baird says that he is no secessionist. He is fighting for the withdrawal of lands in Northern California and Southern Oregon from their respective states, securing approval from the legislatures of those states and from United States congress under the process outlined in the Constitution.
His argument boiled down to this: residents of rural northern counties are bound by the same legislation that affects major metropolitan areas like Los Angeles. He also said that rural counties are under-represented in the state legislature, since assembly-members are apportioned based on population.
"Our contention is that California is ungovernable in its current size, and I think there's a lot of evidence to support that." Baird said at a recent meeting of the Humboldt Taxpayer's league.
"I think we've reached a point in our discourse where the separation between rural Northern California and Southern California is necessary not only for our survival, but for the well-being of people in Southern California. We are what amounts to an unfunded liability for Southern California. They have a name for us: the welfare counties. So when they go through their budgetary process every year they're faced with funding the welfare counties of Northern California. We, on the other hand, suffer under policies for which we have no representation."
That part about the "unfunded liability" is key, he said. Baird said that is how the county will convince the rest of California to let the northern counties withdraw.
His vision for a new state is very different from the state of today with a dramatically altered regulatory environment. Baird has proposed cutting the California Highway Patrol and other statewide law enforcement agencies, favoring a model where patrolling the highway becomes the responsibility of the local sheriff. Federal agencies might still be allowed to operate in Humboldt County, but they would have to pay an administrative fee to the locals for their use of staff-time and other resources.
Baird has also argued for the elimination of a wide variety of other state agencies in order to create a more business-friendly Jefferson with fewer regulations than California. He said this could go a long way towards rebuilding the North State's rural economies and creating jobs in a region where good ones are hard to come by. He cited environmental regulations that seem to be designed with the state's urban population centers in mind, like new requirements for costly particulate-matter filters on large diesel engines like the ones in semi-trucks or the aging tractor Baird uses at home on his ranch.
Baird said it is also worth examining what kind of an impact withdrawal from the state of California would have on social issues like medical marijuana and gay marriage. These controversial topics are largely regulated on a statewide basis, but Baird says he'd prefer to see them dealt with county-by-county. Still, the political landscape surrounding such issues might shift in a dramatic fashion after redrawing state lines to create a new conservative majority.
One of Baird's more publicized talking points involves AB 1266, a recently-passed bill which will allow transgender students at public schools to use the bathroom facilities assigned to the gender with which they identify. The bill may be seen as a victory for the LGBT community and their allies, but Baird sees it differently.
"I can't imagine anyone, even the most liberal, Hispanic, hardworking family in Southeast Los Angeles wants their daughter to shower with a little boy because he thinks he should've been born a girl," Baird said. "This is a poorly planned, poorly executed piece of trash that parades as legislation. And I think most people can agree with that."
His argument boiled down to this: residents of rural northern counties are bound by the same legislation that affects major metropolitan areas like Los Angeles. He also said that rural counties are under-represented in the state legislature, since assembly-members are apportioned based on population.
"Our contention is that California is ungovernable in its current size, and I think there's a lot of evidence to support that." Baird said at a recent meeting of the Humboldt Taxpayer's league.
"I think we've reached a point in our discourse where the separation between rural Northern California and Southern California is necessary not only for our survival, but for the well-being of people in Southern California. We are what amounts to an unfunded liability for Southern California. They have a name for us: the welfare counties. So when they go through their budgetary process every year they're faced with funding the welfare counties of Northern California. We, on the other hand, suffer under policies for which we have no representation."
That part about the "unfunded liability" is key, he said. Baird said that is how the county will convince the rest of California to let the northern counties withdraw.
His vision for a new state is very different from the state of today with a dramatically altered regulatory environment. Baird has proposed cutting the California Highway Patrol and other statewide law enforcement agencies, favoring a model where patrolling the highway becomes the responsibility of the local sheriff. Federal agencies might still be allowed to operate in Humboldt County, but they would have to pay an administrative fee to the locals for their use of staff-time and other resources.
Baird has also argued for the elimination of a wide variety of other state agencies in order to create a more business-friendly Jefferson with fewer regulations than California. He said this could go a long way towards rebuilding the North State's rural economies and creating jobs in a region where good ones are hard to come by. He cited environmental regulations that seem to be designed with the state's urban population centers in mind, like new requirements for costly particulate-matter filters on large diesel engines like the ones in semi-trucks or the aging tractor Baird uses at home on his ranch.
Baird said it is also worth examining what kind of an impact withdrawal from the state of California would have on social issues like medical marijuana and gay marriage. These controversial topics are largely regulated on a statewide basis, but Baird says he'd prefer to see them dealt with county-by-county. Still, the political landscape surrounding such issues might shift in a dramatic fashion after redrawing state lines to create a new conservative majority.
One of Baird's more publicized talking points involves AB 1266, a recently-passed bill which will allow transgender students at public schools to use the bathroom facilities assigned to the gender with which they identify. The bill may be seen as a victory for the LGBT community and their allies, but Baird sees it differently.
"I can't imagine anyone, even the most liberal, Hispanic, hardworking family in Southeast Los Angeles wants their daughter to shower with a little boy because he thinks he should've been born a girl," Baird said. "This is a poorly planned, poorly executed piece of trash that parades as legislation. And I think most people can agree with that."
First District Humboldt County supervisor Rex Bohn has been seen at two recent meetings of organizers advocating for the state of Jefferson. Bohn said that the real questions are about fiscal issues. His support for a declaration like the one in Siskiyou County would be largely dependent upon the results of an in-depth economic study. In the meanwhile, he said the facts just aren't in yet.
Bohn isn't convinced by the assertion that Humboldt is a "welfare county," and has asked county staff to review the finances involved and build an accurate picture of how much money Humboldt pays to the state of California and how much it receives in return.
"I've got to see the financials," Bohn said. "The idea of a bunch of poor counties forming a poor state doesn't work for me."
Bohn said that Jefferson is unlikely, but definitely possible.
Still, he is not willing to support the formation of a state where the budget is balanced on unsustainable exploitation of natural resources. But Humboldt has water, timber, and an impressive coastline with a deep-water seaport, and those might be the deciding factors that make withdrawal from the rest of California possible.
"We have a lot of resources up here. The number one thing in the future is going to be water, and we have that," Bohn said. "But if we lose the environmental quality we have now, we have nothing. That's what scares me."
The other major factor, as far as Bohn is concerned, is the support of his constituents. So far, a majority of those who have contacted him to discuss the state of Jefferson have supported the idea, he said.
Bohn isn't convinced by the assertion that Humboldt is a "welfare county," and has asked county staff to review the finances involved and build an accurate picture of how much money Humboldt pays to the state of California and how much it receives in return.
"I've got to see the financials," Bohn said. "The idea of a bunch of poor counties forming a poor state doesn't work for me."
Bohn said that Jefferson is unlikely, but definitely possible.
Still, he is not willing to support the formation of a state where the budget is balanced on unsustainable exploitation of natural resources. But Humboldt has water, timber, and an impressive coastline with a deep-water seaport, and those might be the deciding factors that make withdrawal from the rest of California possible.
"We have a lot of resources up here. The number one thing in the future is going to be water, and we have that," Bohn said. "But if we lose the environmental quality we have now, we have nothing. That's what scares me."
The other major factor, as far as Bohn is concerned, is the support of his constituents. So far, a majority of those who have contacted him to discuss the state of Jefferson have supported the idea, he said.
Photo courtesy of RexBohnforSupervisor.com
"You would not believe the number of calls I get about this," Bohn said. "About 75% say we should look into this, because everybody's interested. About 25% say, ‘You're not serious, are you?' I give the same answer to everyone. I don't think this will go very far, but it's certainly something to look at just for the purpose of piquing people's interest."
There are a wide variety of services provided or paid for by the state of California that get utilized in Humboldt County. Caltrans builds most of the roads, or hires contractors to get the work done for them. The California Highway Patrol's dispatch handles many 911 calls. Cal Fire keeps the wildfires in check. Public schools rely on state funding to educate the children.
If Humboldt left the state of California, it would get to take its tax dollars. As part of Jefferson, the county would have to (or get to) figure out how to provide necessary services on its own. But that could take time to work out, and the entities providing those services might have to do so with more limited resources available to get the job done.
When the Redwood Times asked supervisor Bohn to list some of the vital services that might be adversely affected if Humboldt County were to leave the state of California the first one he mentioned was MediCal, which many local residents depend on for access to health care. Bohn was also asked to list the advantages of joining the state of Jefferson.
"I don't know if there are any advantages," Bohn said.
There are a wide variety of services provided or paid for by the state of California that get utilized in Humboldt County. Caltrans builds most of the roads, or hires contractors to get the work done for them. The California Highway Patrol's dispatch handles many 911 calls. Cal Fire keeps the wildfires in check. Public schools rely on state funding to educate the children.
If Humboldt left the state of California, it would get to take its tax dollars. As part of Jefferson, the county would have to (or get to) figure out how to provide necessary services on its own. But that could take time to work out, and the entities providing those services might have to do so with more limited resources available to get the job done.
When the Redwood Times asked supervisor Bohn to list some of the vital services that might be adversely affected if Humboldt County were to leave the state of California the first one he mentioned was MediCal, which many local residents depend on for access to health care. Bohn was also asked to list the advantages of joining the state of Jefferson.
"I don't know if there are any advantages," Bohn said.
This conversation started up again in April of 2013 when Redding's Record Searchlight newspaper launched a straw poll on their website asking readers to vote for or against breaking away to form a new state. That poll got coverage in Humboldt from the Redwood Times and other local publications. One local news blog ran their coverage under a banner reading "Help Us Screw With Redding."
There is the state of Jefferson's Citizens Militia. Their Facebook page has gone quiet in recent years, but was active from 2009 to 2011. It mostly reads like ad copy for the statehood effort, focusing on the region's natural resources and other economic opportunities. But there were a few antagonistic posts in 2009, like "Have you punched a Southern Californian today?" and "What do you think would happen if Jeffersonians closed off the dams and shut off the pumps? How long would SoCal last?"
The language is terse, though not particularly hateful. While punching Southern Californians certainly qualifies as violence, it falls short of the kind of armed insurrection typically associated with extremist militias or the so-called "patriot movement," which includes domestic terrorists like Timothy McVeigh.
The Jefferson State Militia (JSM) website conveys a more stereotypical image with references to FEMA camps, illegal aliens and "the Coming American Revolution." There are 2nd Amendment infographics and a picture of a sniper wearing a t-shirt reading "When all else fails... VOTE FROM THE ROOFTOPS."
There is the state of Jefferson's Citizens Militia. Their Facebook page has gone quiet in recent years, but was active from 2009 to 2011. It mostly reads like ad copy for the statehood effort, focusing on the region's natural resources and other economic opportunities. But there were a few antagonistic posts in 2009, like "Have you punched a Southern Californian today?" and "What do you think would happen if Jeffersonians closed off the dams and shut off the pumps? How long would SoCal last?"
The language is terse, though not particularly hateful. While punching Southern Californians certainly qualifies as violence, it falls short of the kind of armed insurrection typically associated with extremist militias or the so-called "patriot movement," which includes domestic terrorists like Timothy McVeigh.
The Jefferson State Militia (JSM) website conveys a more stereotypical image with references to FEMA camps, illegal aliens and "the Coming American Revolution." There are 2nd Amendment infographics and a picture of a sniper wearing a t-shirt reading "When all else fails... VOTE FROM THE ROOFTOPS."
Their website is actively maintained, and has been updated this month. Recent posts include links to online resources for training militia cells like a guide to using improvised explosive devices (IEDs) to attack MRAPs, the armored vehicles used by the U.S. Military for transporting ground troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.
It is hard to gauge the size of JSM's membership. The website features successful recruitment anecdotes but it's also possible that founder Jim Mark, of Shasta Lake, is the organization's only militiaman.
In a recent email dialog, printed here as received, Mark told the Redwood Times, "JSM is Comprised of a HUGE Collection of ‘Secret Cells' Understanding The In-Your-Face American Militias are In Jeopardy to be quickly PICKED UP by the Forces of the NWO Hijackers of America after posting pics, info, etc of their members / drills .. We have cells as far as the East Coast and All Western States ..."
Mark said that there are ‘secret cells' in Humboldt and Mendocino counties. He declined to take a position on violence against civilians, but when asked for comment on the April bombing of the Boston Marathon, Mark called it a false flag operation.
On the bright side, the JSM is purportedly more open-minded than some of their contemporaries in the militia movement. In an email to Mark, published on www. jeffersonstatemilitia.com, Major Rainbow (U.S. Army Special Forces, Retired) wrote, "the Jefferson State Militia are the only such militia group in America that recruits Gays, Blacks, Jews, and other so called ‘undesirables' ... the New World Order is too big - too powerful - to NOT BRING IN US AMERICAN GAYS..."
Jim Mark and his militia are not documented in the Southern Poverty Law Center's intelligence files. Calls to local law enforcement indicate that he is not on their radar, either.
So why should you care about any of this? Jim Mark's website says the JSM's "jurisdiction" includes Humboldt and Mendocino counties. Whatever this Shasta Lake resident and his "secret cells" are doing, Commander Mark says they're doing it here.
Mark Baird, the man spearheading the most recent push for Jeffersonian statehood, said he hasn't been approached by the Jefferson State Militia or any other radicalized militants.
"I'm not one of those guys. I don't believe in that," Baird said. "What I'm interested in is a government that represents the people in this county and other counties."
It is hard to gauge the size of JSM's membership. The website features successful recruitment anecdotes but it's also possible that founder Jim Mark, of Shasta Lake, is the organization's only militiaman.
In a recent email dialog, printed here as received, Mark told the Redwood Times, "JSM is Comprised of a HUGE Collection of ‘Secret Cells' Understanding The In-Your-Face American Militias are In Jeopardy to be quickly PICKED UP by the Forces of the NWO Hijackers of America after posting pics, info, etc of their members / drills .. We have cells as far as the East Coast and All Western States ..."
Mark said that there are ‘secret cells' in Humboldt and Mendocino counties. He declined to take a position on violence against civilians, but when asked for comment on the April bombing of the Boston Marathon, Mark called it a false flag operation.
On the bright side, the JSM is purportedly more open-minded than some of their contemporaries in the militia movement. In an email to Mark, published on www. jeffersonstatemilitia.com, Major Rainbow (U.S. Army Special Forces, Retired) wrote, "the Jefferson State Militia are the only such militia group in America that recruits Gays, Blacks, Jews, and other so called ‘undesirables' ... the New World Order is too big - too powerful - to NOT BRING IN US AMERICAN GAYS..."
Jim Mark and his militia are not documented in the Southern Poverty Law Center's intelligence files. Calls to local law enforcement indicate that he is not on their radar, either.
So why should you care about any of this? Jim Mark's website says the JSM's "jurisdiction" includes Humboldt and Mendocino counties. Whatever this Shasta Lake resident and his "secret cells" are doing, Commander Mark says they're doing it here.
Mark Baird, the man spearheading the most recent push for Jeffersonian statehood, said he hasn't been approached by the Jefferson State Militia or any other radicalized militants.
"I'm not one of those guys. I don't believe in that," Baird said. "What I'm interested in is a government that represents the people in this county and other counties."
The right-wing-extremist vibe seems to be pretty rare among Jefferson state enthusiasts.
There is the Jefferson Statehood Project, which maintains an online archive of content related to the 1941 "secession" effort as well as coverage of more recent developments. Jefferson Public Radio and The Jefferson State Post are media outlets that both use the statehood movement as a namesake and purport to target a "Jeffersonian" audience in their branding.
There is a State of Jefferson Chamber, also known as the State of Jefferson Citizen's Committee, whose mission is to promote the "State of Jefferson State of Mind," and foster the spirit of the state of Jefferson. Rule 10 of the by-rules requires members to, "Have as much fun with the ‘State of Jefferson' ‘Chamber' and ‘Citizen's Committee' as is legally possible."
There are several books about the state of Jefferson, and numerous articles published on a sporadic basis over the years. There's also a growing library of recent media coverage, much of which sensationalizes the statehood effort as a form of "secession." But even in 1941 at the height of the Jeffersonian revolt the primary political activity of the "secessionist" was to hand out pamphlets every Thursday.
Mostly, it's a about nostalgia. There's a noticeable sense of separatism stemming from the area's inherent culture clash with Southern California
There is the Jefferson Statehood Project, which maintains an online archive of content related to the 1941 "secession" effort as well as coverage of more recent developments. Jefferson Public Radio and The Jefferson State Post are media outlets that both use the statehood movement as a namesake and purport to target a "Jeffersonian" audience in their branding.
There is a State of Jefferson Chamber, also known as the State of Jefferson Citizen's Committee, whose mission is to promote the "State of Jefferson State of Mind," and foster the spirit of the state of Jefferson. Rule 10 of the by-rules requires members to, "Have as much fun with the ‘State of Jefferson' ‘Chamber' and ‘Citizen's Committee' as is legally possible."
There are several books about the state of Jefferson, and numerous articles published on a sporadic basis over the years. There's also a growing library of recent media coverage, much of which sensationalizes the statehood effort as a form of "secession." But even in 1941 at the height of the Jeffersonian revolt the primary political activity of the "secessionist" was to hand out pamphlets every Thursday.
Mostly, it's a about nostalgia. There's a noticeable sense of separatism stemming from the area's inherent culture clash with Southern California
The United States of America does admit new states to this imperfect union -- and at various times in our nation's history that's involved dividing an existing state in two.
It happens. Not terribly often, but often enough to require a political process prescribed in the Constitution.
Article 4, Section 3 of the United States Constitution states that, "New states may be admitted by the Congress into this union; but no new states shall be formed ... within the jurisdiction of any other state; nor any state be formed by the junction of two or more states, or parts of states, without the consent of the legislatures of the states concerned as well as of the Congress."
In theory the state of Jefferson could break away with approval from California and Oregon with the consent of both legislatures and the United States congress. North and South Carolina were divided in 1712, well before the American Revolution. The Dakota Territories were divided into North and South during the statehood process. They did not start as a single state, then break apart.
West Virginia did. It seceded from confederate Virginia during the Civil War. And that was a proper secession. Afterward, West Virginia was in the Union, not the confederacy.
It has been a long time since the last earnest attempt to secure Jeffersonian statehood through the Constitutional process detailed above. And the United States of America has not admitted a new state to the union since 1959 when stars were added to the flag for Alaska and Hawaii, both of which were territories at the time.
It happens. Not terribly often, but often enough to require a political process prescribed in the Constitution.
Article 4, Section 3 of the United States Constitution states that, "New states may be admitted by the Congress into this union; but no new states shall be formed ... within the jurisdiction of any other state; nor any state be formed by the junction of two or more states, or parts of states, without the consent of the legislatures of the states concerned as well as of the Congress."
In theory the state of Jefferson could break away with approval from California and Oregon with the consent of both legislatures and the United States congress. North and South Carolina were divided in 1712, well before the American Revolution. The Dakota Territories were divided into North and South during the statehood process. They did not start as a single state, then break apart.
West Virginia did. It seceded from confederate Virginia during the Civil War. And that was a proper secession. Afterward, West Virginia was in the Union, not the confederacy.
It has been a long time since the last earnest attempt to secure Jeffersonian statehood through the Constitutional process detailed above. And the United States of America has not admitted a new state to the union since 1959 when stars were added to the flag for Alaska and Hawaii, both of which were territories at the time.
In 2011 Jeff Stone, a republican on the Riverside County board of supervisors proposed that 13 southern counties split away to form South California. The plan would have carved off Los Angeles, the Central and North Coasts, the Bay Area and Sacramento, creating a conservative enclave to the east.
"Los Angeles is purposely excluded because they have the same liberal policies that Sacramento does. The last thing I want to do is create a state that's a carbon copy of what we have now,'' Stone told the Los Angeles Times.
That seems to be the primary motive for a divided California, giving conservatives a louder voice in a smaller state where they would no longer be a political minority. A breakdown like that might follow the geographical boundaries set by current congressional districts, and as such a second state might not have much impact on conservative representation in congress. But in the senate, a new state would enjoy the representation of two newly created senate seats.
There is another major political motivation for conservative regions of California to consider "seceding." California is not a swing state. California hasn't gone red since electing Ronald Reagan in 1988, leaving many conservative voters feeling marginalized after decades of watching "the other guy" win.
Presidential elections are won state by state in a winner-takes-all fashion, so California's Republican voters have watched their representation in the electoral college be awarded to Democratic nominees for 25 years. If they break away to form a new state, Republican voters residing in those regions could matter in presidential elections.
In 2012, Mitt Romney garnered 36% of Humboldt County voters, with 18,825 votes cast for the conservative candidate. In 2008 more than 16,700 or 33% of Humboldt County voters cast their ballot for John McCain. Mendocino County leaned slightly further to the left, with 27% support for Romney and 26% for McCain.
The North Coast has a strong conservative presence but it is a political minority. They can impact local elections and ballot measures, but as red voters in blue counties of a blue state, there is no hope of influencing national politics.
That could change if the Jeffersonians redrew state lines with an eye for the sparsely populated, right-leaning counties north of Sacramento.
The question in Humboldt and Mendocino counties is would we want to join them? We're essentially the little blue corner in territory that is otherwise decidedly red -- so the motivations at work with inland counties like Siskiyou and Modoc may not matter to an adequate majority of voters here on the more liberal coast.
How would leaving the California affect those who depend on MediCal or other programs run by the state? How would a new, conservative state government affect marijuana policy and enforcement? What about environmental regulations, timber harvest policies, and gay marriage?
For now, it's too soon to tell.
"Los Angeles is purposely excluded because they have the same liberal policies that Sacramento does. The last thing I want to do is create a state that's a carbon copy of what we have now,'' Stone told the Los Angeles Times.
That seems to be the primary motive for a divided California, giving conservatives a louder voice in a smaller state where they would no longer be a political minority. A breakdown like that might follow the geographical boundaries set by current congressional districts, and as such a second state might not have much impact on conservative representation in congress. But in the senate, a new state would enjoy the representation of two newly created senate seats.
There is another major political motivation for conservative regions of California to consider "seceding." California is not a swing state. California hasn't gone red since electing Ronald Reagan in 1988, leaving many conservative voters feeling marginalized after decades of watching "the other guy" win.
Presidential elections are won state by state in a winner-takes-all fashion, so California's Republican voters have watched their representation in the electoral college be awarded to Democratic nominees for 25 years. If they break away to form a new state, Republican voters residing in those regions could matter in presidential elections.
In 2012, Mitt Romney garnered 36% of Humboldt County voters, with 18,825 votes cast for the conservative candidate. In 2008 more than 16,700 or 33% of Humboldt County voters cast their ballot for John McCain. Mendocino County leaned slightly further to the left, with 27% support for Romney and 26% for McCain.
The North Coast has a strong conservative presence but it is a political minority. They can impact local elections and ballot measures, but as red voters in blue counties of a blue state, there is no hope of influencing national politics.
That could change if the Jeffersonians redrew state lines with an eye for the sparsely populated, right-leaning counties north of Sacramento.
The question in Humboldt and Mendocino counties is would we want to join them? We're essentially the little blue corner in territory that is otherwise decidedly red -- so the motivations at work with inland counties like Siskiyou and Modoc may not matter to an adequate majority of voters here on the more liberal coast.
How would leaving the California affect those who depend on MediCal or other programs run by the state? How would a new, conservative state government affect marijuana policy and enforcement? What about environmental regulations, timber harvest policies, and gay marriage?
For now, it's too soon to tell.
Local coverage of the State of Jefferson: