Twenty-One Northern Counties Want Out of California ASAP…

Citizens For Fair Representation group asks Siskiyou County to officially join lawsuit against State of California… 

Opinion by “Deplorable” Consumer Advocate Tim Bolen

There is a HUGE war going on in California and you will not hear about it on the Evening Mainstream News.  Liberal Democrats tightly control the California government, claiming to have a super-majority in the legislature.

But do they really?  A lot of people don’t think so.  Even President Trump has indicated that California’s election process needs investigation, pointing out evidence of Voter Fraud.  Hillary Clinton allegedly carried the State by four million votes.  But “did she actually do that?” is a question many are asking.

To hear Sacramento lawmakers tell the story California is the progessive Democrats’ answer to America’s turn back to Judeo/Christian family values in the last presidential election.  California is attempting to hurriedly enact laws to counter federal legislation which would remove shiploads of under-the-table funding of Democrat feed-at-the-federal-trough sleaze operations set in place under eight years of Obama.

Some say that the repeal of ObamaCare alone would remove funding for Democratic Party operations virtually destroying Democratic party funding sources, gutting the Democratic Party across the country.  Democrats are screaching and screaming.

Liberal Democrat California 2017 legislators are gathering in Sacramento in an attempt to push through almost Emergency legislation removing ALL of California’s children into State custody, creating another massive bureucracy to raise those children as wards of the State, under the thumb of Child Protective Services (CPS).  Surprise home inspections of California parents’ child raising are planned with immediate seizure of children should the liberal Democrat “Inspectors” find something they don’t personally like.

But, twenty-one of California’s fifty-eight Counties have had enough of Sacramento antics and want out of the State permanently – forming a new State they will call “Jefferson.”

It is really all about values…

At Tuesday’s meeting of the Siskiyou County Board of Supervisors, a group partially comprised of Siskiyou County citizens, known as Citizens for Fair Representation, asked the county to join a lawsuit against the state of California.
The suit accuses the state of failing to give adequate representation for all state citizens and diluting citizens’ votes.

Board chair Michael Kobseff emphasized that the presentation – given by CFR’s Mark Baird – was an informational item only and thus the board would not be taking any action on it.

Baird, who is also one of Siskiyou County’s foremost proponents of the State of Jefferson movement, noted at the beginning of his presentation that the Citizens for Fair Representation lawsuit is in no way related to the State of Jefferson. The lawsuit, he said, “is being brought in order to gain more representation for all counties in California.”

Rural California Counties simply lack representation in Sacramento…

Rural counties especially lack representation at the state level, Baird stated, and in order to foster a change in that realm, “we have to sue the state because they’re not going to do this on their own.”

The founders of California outlined their reason to form the state in the preamble of the California Constitution, Baird stated. When the state was founded in 1850, each county – there were only 10 at the time – had a state senator and each had at least one assemblyman.

The ratio of assemblymen to constituents at that time was 1 to 2,500. “That stayed in effect for at least a decade, and perhaps more,” Baird said. Then, in 1862, the state capped the California legislature at 40 state senators and 80 assemblymembers.

In 1926, Baird reported, California voters approved Proposition 28 – the California Legislative Reapportionment Proposition – which required the state legislature to divide the state into 40 senatorial and 80 assembly districts immediately following each federal census.

The measure also created a Reapportionment Commission composed of the lieutenant governor, attorney general, surveyor general, secretary of state and state superintendent of public instruction. The Commission was tasked with making reapportionments if the legislature failed to act.

The laws have changed and California has not kept up…

Now, Baird continued, as laws in the U.S. have since changed, Californians have approximately one state senator per one million people and one assemblymember representing approximately 500,000 people. This presents a major problem, Baird claimed, as “a state senator cannot possibly adequately represent a million people.” He said that he believes that “a state senator who represents 11 counties – counties that often have competing political interests – is an utter failure as a political model.”

His comment was partially made in reference to assemblymembers like Brian Dahle, who is the assemblymember for California’s First District. District 1 encompasses 100 percent of Lassen, Modoc, Nevada, Plumas, Shasta, Sierra and Siskiyou counties. It also covers 9 percent of Butte County and nearly 17 percent of Placer County.

An assemblymember responsible for so many counties, Baird said, will be forced to represent the interests of certain counties over the interests of others when those interests are in conflict with one another.

Other lawsuit participants…

The American Independent Party has agreed to be a plaintiff in the lawsuit, Baird stated. He added that, even if the total of that party’s membership were all in one district, the AIP would still not be able to win an election. Citizens for Fair Representation is also petitioning the Green Party to be a plaintiff in the lawsuit, Baird said, as that party also “would not have enough membership to win a seat in the legislature if everyone lived in the same town because they physically would not possess enough votes to be a majority.” A county sheriff, multiple county supervisors, the Shasta Nation and Pit River Tribe have also agreed to be plaintiffs, according to Baird.

“What we’re asking for is representation adequate to our needs in this county and in every county,” Baird told the board. What form that will take is up to the court, he added. Glenn County, one of the counties CFR is attempting to bring on board in its suit, is hoping for one state senator for every California county and one assemblymember per 30,000 citizens, Baird said.

CFR is also advocating for smaller districts with the belief that it will be easier to hold assemblymembers accountable. With smaller districts, Baird said, if an assemblymember were considered to not be doing a decent job, “it would be glaringly apparent” to their constituents and it would be easier to “get rid of” that person.

We want the Counties as Plaintiffs too…

“We need county government as a plaintiff,” Baird told the board. He explained, “It’s very difficult for the federal court to ignore a governmental body.” The county’s representation would lend credence to the lawsuit, he said, making it more likely to advance to the Supreme Court.

Baird also made it clear to the board that CFR “does not need any money” and “will not ask for any money” from the county. CFR is also prepared to indemnify the county against any recapture of fees and has the funds to do so, Baird stated confidently.

Baird was adamant that CFR would stand a very good chance of winning its case if the county joins the suit as a plaintiff, stating, “If we couldn’t win this, I wouldn’t be here.”

The supervisors were receptive to Baird’s extensive presentation and thanked him for the time he had spent on the lawsuit thus far. Baird stated that while CFR is hoping for the county’s support, it will file the lawsuit whether it receives the county’s backing or not.

District 1 Supervisor Brandon Criss expressed that while he personally is in support of the suit, whether he can support it as a county representative is a more complex issue. He repeatedly apologized for “being a wet blanket,” but noted that there are many issues to consider before the board of supervisors can agree to expend its time and resources in the effort.

That sentiment was echoed by Kobseff, District 5 Supervisor Ray Haupt and District 4 Supervisor Lisa Nixon. District 2 Supervisor Ed Valenzuela took a different stance, explaining that he represents a largely democratic district whose interests are in line with the majority of the state of California. For that reason, Valenzuela said, it is unlikely that he will ultimately support the board being a plaintiff in the suit.

Siskiyou takes it under advisement…

Finally, Kobseff told Baird that the board would take the issue under advisement until they can further discuss the case and how the county would be affected should the board choose to get involved. He asked that Baird give a final draft of CFR’s complaint to the board before they consider it further. Baird said he would direct CFR’s attorneys to finish revising the document, estimating it will be finished by Friday.

For the liberal Democrats it is ALL about money…

Liberal Democrats fully expected to win the November 2016 Presidential Election.  They could then continue funding of their public/private partnerships designed to destroy America in favor of Agenda 21.

But they did not win.  Now all of those public/private partnerships are coming to an abrupt halt under the Trump Administration.  Democrats are going to have to go out and look for REAL jobs. But, as everyone knows, the liberal Democrat way to find a job is to make some new laws and regulations to create ANOTHER public agency we do not need…

So, the war is on…

Opinion by “Deplorable” Consumer Advocate Tim Bolen

 

15 thoughts on “Twenty-One Northern Counties Want Out of California ASAP…”

  1. This is truly a fascinating and rational idea. As a Los Angeles area resident, I’ve often felt ignored and not-represented by my elected officials. Hopefully the lawsuit will be a success and a massive overhaul of CA Leadership will happen. Thanks so much for this valuable information.

  2. Why do you even think about re-modelling a worn-out system which, from its inception, was never intended to be anything other than a stop-gap?

    Because slow communication made direct participation in government impossible, a system of representatives was created until the time arrived when direct government became realisable.
    This has now been possible for some years and it’s time to wake up to this reality and to let the temporary expedient go.

    This works best in a two-tier system; local matters decided locally by everyone together, State matters decided state-wide.

    Proposed legislation: put it up on a website and let everyone discuss it and, then, vote online.
    Proposing legislation: Put it on the “suggestions” website and, if it gets sufficient numbers of supporters, it then goes forward for the discussion and voting procedure.

    As not even the pharma-conglomerate can bribe everyone, this eliminates almost all opportunities for corruption.

    If you want to see a working model, try this:
    http://www.kingdomofgermany.org

    Blessed be

    Karma Singh

  3. California has always been too large to govern. In 1850, when we became a state, they said then that it should probably be two or even three states – but the Gold Rush was happening and they just wanted to get California admitted and would deal with it later. Sound familiar? It is now later, and our state is more diverse and lacking of representation exacerbates the problem. We want a smaller, rural state among counties that have similar needs and problems to solve. The Time Has Come For 51! http://www.soj51.net

  4. The increasing rate of the California’s failing economy is all well orchestrated by a small group of people that continue to destroy our way of life. They attack every aspect of our Liberty. We do have few Patriotic Representative but for the most part these trusted servants are traitors. Not one CA Representative wants to go back to what makes a good representative, “A Part-time Legislation”.
    I am in full agreement with creating a Republic Form of Government in the North State once again.

  5. I love all of the people that say “if” this will happen…We the residents of Jefferson are not asking permission, we are offering the courtesy of informing California of our departure. We will no longer suffer as an occupied people in our own homes. We will not surrender our children or their future to the State. We will no longer tolerate the decimation of our families, our economy, our values and culture.

  6. The time has come for 51….all rural unrepresented areas in many, over 20 other states will follow on; unless there is a redo of the amount of representatives allowed by population and senators only allowed 2 to a county in each state is set back to the way our Congress is set up…equal representation.

  7. It is becoming readily apparent that the political direction of the State of California is more towards Socialistic control and less toward self sufficiency and freedom. The unfunded debt of the Calpers pension overload will only get worse with time and the cost over runs by corrupt contractors on ridiculously unnecessary projects add up to more of the same by fiscally inept liberal spenders who only have one solution for their lack of financial education, find something new to tax and raise taxes on the existing taxed items. Brainwashed students, “entitled” illegals and weak minded urbanites coerced by fear tactics continue to add liberals to the cartel in Sacramento whose intent is for their own good not the good of the people of this state. Politicians who exempt themselves from the laws they pass for the people of the state are not ethically sober, they are drunk on power. The time has come for 51, The State of Jefferson will succeed, because the people demand it.

  8. We need the state of Jefferson! Living up in the far northeastern corner of California for the past 6 years, I can really see it firsthand! It is TIME for 51 !!!

  9. I have lived in California for 60 plus years, and have seen a beautiful, special state implode, we in the northern state, and smaller populated counties have no say anything concerning the State of California. Yes! we are given the right vote as we see fit under the Constitution. We however in the smaller populated counties in California our vote means nothing. The State of California is going to continue on a corrupt, fiscally irresponsible path, the only way things can change for those of us in smaller populated areas, is a State of Jefferson,

  10. Yes! Yes! Yes! The time has come for 51! I am so ready for this, the State of Jefferson! Most of us in the North State are tired of inadequate representation in Sacramento.

  11. Hear-Hear-Cheryl Hammon and Tim Pynkos! Whatever Jefferson county youreside in GET INVOLVED and help make it happen! Go to our webite soj51.net and click on the groups tab to find your county group and contact them. There is much going on that you can help do! Or email me directly and I can send you more information! Time Has Come For 51!

  12. To clarify a point, the “Super Majority” of the California state legislature, especially in a federal constitutional republic, is no such thing; it’s a totalitarian dictatorship! The official congressional record showed that the population of California was a little over 97,000 at the time when it was admitted into the union. In the 1870’s, the California Constitution, (in legal circles, the biggest joke ever put to paper), capped the state legislature at 80 assembly members and the Senate to 40 seats. So with 120 legislators, along with the 10 constitutionally elected officers, “rule” the nearly 39 million subjects living in the state of California.

    My support for the State of Jefferson is purely selfish. I want my grandchildren to live in a state where their liberties will be respected and protected according to the US Constitution, and they will not be controlled, indoctrinated and forced to live under totalitarian rule. The time has come for 51

  13. 5th Generation Siskiyou county resident. I’d be gone if I could financially afford to. We have been taxed without representation here in Siskiyou County since 1964. My grandparents, my parents, myself, my children, and my grandchildren all have payed taxes to a entity in the USA without representation. The time has come for 51. Resident of Weed, Jefferson.

  14. Sue-I hope that you are helping on the Jefferson committee in siskiyou county! We need you! Go to SOJ51.net and click on the groups tab to contact your county committee.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *