A State of Jefferson?

[Republic of Canador]

The State of Jefferson is a proposed U.S. state that would span the contiguous, mostly rural area of southern Oregon and Northern California, where several attempts to separate from Oregon and California, respectively, have taken place.

In a state dominated by the liberal politics of Los Angeles and San Francisco, an underrepresented conservative population in Northern California and South Oregon are attempting to break away and form their own state; Jefferson. This isn't anything new, Jefferson has been in the planning for over 70 years. But frustrations are rising due to the policies of Sacramento and cultural alienation with the major urban centres of the state.

I recently moved to Northern California from LA. I consider myself liberal but willing to listen to the arguments on both sides of the political spectrum. Up until now I've never even been in central or Northern California.

What I saw on my drive was disappointing. In the lush agricultural fields of the fertile Central Valley were hundreds of signs addressing the topic of water conservation. The residents here were screaming for water and were supporting any candidate who would ensure the area's water supply stay consistent. Unfortunately the actual political power of the region is small.

Further up in Northern California residents are equally as desperate to make their voices heard. In a region where the second amendment is adorned in murals and billboards proclaim the light of Jesus the citizens struggle to cope with how the liberal policies of the cities change their way of life. The effort to save the spotted owl severely harmed the logging industry, giving impression that urban areas with little knowledge of rural life are only advancing their own agenda.

Thus, the concept of breaking away and forming a new state of Jefferson is received with open arms by many. My question is, should it actually be done? While I don't exactly agree with the conservative reasoning behind the separatist cause, I do realise that underrepresentation on this scale can be extremely harmful. I feel the region should form its own state, but the process should be slow and democratic.

What is your opinion on the matter, NSG?

[Great Kauthar]

Give them the state. The more conservative states the better.

[Western Pacific Territories]

Give them the state. The more conservative states the better.

I disagree. We should keep this country completely intact.

[Conserative Morality]

This kind of regionalism is dangerous and leads to further political polarization and isolation.

[Dinake]

I'm fine with giving them the state.

[Insaeldor]

I'm fine with allowing them the state so long as we balance the congress by giving Wahington D.C. Statehood. This way we've got two fairly safe Republican and Democratic seats.

[Washington Resistance Army]

Take eastern WA with you!

[Kelinfort]

Ayyy welcome to Northern Cali. Sacramento's a good place to be.

Anyways, I think the whole state of Jefferson idea is intriguing, but ultimately, a pretty bad idea.

[Renewed Imperial Germany]

I think we're better off with the Free State of Jones.

[Republic of Canador]

Ayyy welcome to Northern Cali. Sacramento's a good place to be.

Anyways, I think the whole state of Jefferson idea is intriguing, but ultimately, a pretty bad idea.

Are you from NorCal?

I've fallen in love with this place.

[Republic of Canador]

Take eastern WA with you!

Does eastern Washington have a similar separatist vibe?

[Washington Resistance Army]

Take eastern WA with you!

Does eastern Washington have a similar separatist vibe?

It does, there's been talk of it becoming it's own state/joining with Idaho for a while now. I'd love to see it happen personally, I'm tired of getting dragged along with all of Seattle's stupidity.

[Wallenburg]

Hehe. At first I thought this was going to be about Jeffersonian and Hamiltonian principles and ideals.

As to the idea of a state of "Jefferson", it quite honestly would become a festering shithole within a year. It could not survive without immense help from both the federal government and California.

[Renewed Imperial Germany]

Does eastern Washington have a similar separatist vibe?

It does, there's been talk of it becoming it's own state/joining with Idaho for a while now. I'd love to see it happen personally, I'm tired of getting dragged along with all of Seattle's stupidity.

I'd hate to see it happen. The GOP doesn't need more electoral votes, looking at the shitshow that group calls a "party."

[Sanctissima]

The one major problem I see with this is that, if a new state were formed out of Northern California and Southern Washington, then there would be no reason not to form similar states elsewhere. And that means turning a 50-state union into one that could potentially double into a 100-state union if enough regionalism warranted it. While that might seem like a minor issue on the surface, this kind of regionalism can lead to further problems down the road, causing more friction, infighting and ultimately calling into question why all these new states with competing views and interests should remain in the same country anyway. And then, before you know it, there's either a territoriality diminished United States of America, or none at all.

[Washington Resistance Army]

It does, there's been talk of it becoming it's own state/joining with Idaho for a while now. I'd love to see it happen personally, I'm tired of getting dragged along with all of Seattle's stupidity.

I'd hate to see it happen. The GOP doesn't need more electoral votes, looking at the shitshow that group calls a "party."

I'd rather that then constantly getting dragged along with whatever the Seattle liberals want to do. My vote is pretty much pointless if it doesn't match up with them.

The one major problem I see with this is that, if a new state were formed out of Northern California and Southern Washington, then there would be no reason not to form similar states elsewhere. And that means turning a 50-state union into one that could potentially double into a 100-state union if enough regionalism warranted it. While that might seem like a minor issue on the surface, this kind of regionalism can lead to further problems down the road, causing more friction, infighting and ultimately calling into question why all these new states with competing views and interests should remain in the same country anyway. And then, before you know it, there's either a territoriality diminished United States of America, or none at all.

Eh, I don't really see it escalating that much.

[Renewed Imperial Germany]

I'd hate to see it happen. The GOP doesn't need more electoral votes, looking at the shitshow that group calls a "party."

I'd rather that then constantly getting dragged along with whatever the Seattle liberals want to do. My vote is pretty much pointless if it doesn't match up with them.

The one major problem I see with this is that, if a new state were formed out of Northern California and Southern Washington, then there would be no reason not to form similar states elsewhere. And that means turning a 50-state union into one that could potentially double into a 100-state union if enough regionalism warranted it. While that might seem like a minor issue on the surface, this kind of regionalism can lead to further problems down the road, causing more friction, infighting and ultimately calling into question why all these new states with competing views and interests should remain in the same country anyway. And then, before you know it, there's either a territoriality diminished United States of America, or none at all.

Eh, I don't really see it escalating that much.

If Jefferson gets to be a state, what is to stop Charlotte NC from breaking away from North Carolina? After all the GOP legislature down there doesn't represent the City of Charlotte well at all.

[Ifreann]

51 states? Ew.

[Threlizdun]

Most states are too large and are no way ideal for administrative divisions. This would definitely be a step in the right direction. If people do not feel their views are represented, they ought to be free to break away.

[Noraika]

Nope. Regardless of my position on the matter, which opposes any breaking up of California to begin with, as we need to be discouraging Federalism not increasing it, but I digress. There are more substantial reasons for opposition.

As we can see with most of the conservative states, it would likely just add to the burden that the Red states place on the nation and its tax payers, and be yet another state needing to be propped up by the federal government, and thus the rest of the nation, as "red states, which tend to advocate for a lesser influence by the federal government, are much more dependent on the federal government than blue states" to keep their basic infrastructure and services operational.

[Washington Resistance Army]

If Jefferson gets to be a state, what is to stop Charlotte NC from breaking away from North Carolina? After all the GOP legislature down there doesn't represent the City of Charlotte well at all.

I'm not really opposed to these things if there's popular support for it, it sucks not having your views represented and constantly being dragged along with shit you don't want.

[Kernen]

If Jefferson gets to be a state, what is to stop Charlotte NC from breaking away from North Carolina? After all the GOP legislature down there doesn't represent the City of Charlotte well at all.

Population demographics, probably. Statehood requires a minimum population. The region of Northern California might have it. Charlotte isn't a huge city by modern standards, as I recall, and wouldn't necessarily manage to meet the threshold depending on where the lines are drawn.

I don't see anything wrong with this. What they gain in local power they lose in national elections. If thats the trade they want to make, go for it. Opposing this because they're conservative is a shitty reason to oppose this. There are a number of reasons to oppose this. Pick one that isn't so partisan.

[Republic of Canador]

I'd rather that then constantly getting dragged along with whatever the Seattle liberals want to do. My vote is pretty much pointless if it doesn't match up with them.



Eh, I don't really see it escalating that much.

If Jefferson gets to be a state, what is to stop Charlotte NC from breaking away from North Carolina? After all the GOP legislature down there doesn't represent the City of Charlotte well at all.

There's quite a big difference between an entire geographical region and a city. Nevertheless, Jefferson has 70+ years behind it. It's not just some new idea that popped out of nowhere. As far as I know, Charlotte doesn't have anywhere near the same history of separatism as Norcal and Southern Oregon

[Kelinfort]

Ayyy welcome to Northern Cali. Sacramento's a good place to be.

Anyways, I think the whole state of Jefferson idea is intriguing, but ultimately, a pretty bad idea.

Are you from NorCal?

I've fallen in love with this place.

Yes I am.

[Threlizdun]

The one major problem I see with this is that, if a new state were formed out of Northern California and Southern Washington, then there would be no reason not to form similar states elsewhere. And that means turning a 50-state union into one that could potentially double into a 100-state union if enough regionalism warranted it. While that might seem like a minor issue on the surface, this kind of regionalism can lead to further problems down the road, causing more friction, infighting and ultimately calling into question why all these new states with competing views and interests should remain in the same country anyway. And then, before you know it, there's either a territoriality diminished United States of America, or none at all.

You say that as if it's a bad thing. Nation states are unsustainable. We'd be much better off breaking off into bioregions and further dividing among ecological and cultural lines.