45 votes

Northern California Counties Vote to Secede from California, Form New State Called 'Jefferson'


California is a geographically massive state. Stretching from the southern border of the United States all the way up the west coast to Oregon, state officials are tasked with finding compromise between communities facing drastically different circumstances. The state struggles to keep its budget under control, and intense regulations have proven frustrating for residents in northernmost counties.

As a result, a secessionist movement has emerged, leading two counties, Siskiyou and Modoc, to formally vote in favor of beginning the process. Officials are hoping that 12 counties will join the effort and form a new state called “Jefferson.”

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Ya know...

They just need to do it. Call a Jefferson State constitutional convention. Go to the counties grab someone to represent the area and hash it all out in one big plan. Put out flyers simply declaring independence, put up the new constitution on the walls and streets. Then see what happens. Will cali send in the guard, will the guard fire on the people?? WTF will happen if they just do it? It really could get bad, but you'll never know till you do it.

if this works

I would imagine 48 counties in illinois would succeed from chicago

Secede to Survive

Western Maryland, Northern Colorado, and this one should team up to create a league of inter-state secessionist movements.
They should go for the full gusto though- out of the Union.

"The Yankee is compelled to toil to make the world go around."
-Admiral Raphael Semmes, CSN

if this is successful

and thats a big IF! i would drop my 70k a year job and my future ownership of my family business to move to the state of Jefferson and start a new and FREE life.

Headline from 1941

In late 1941 a movement was started to form a new state, the State of Jefferson, from southern Oregon and Northern California. The first governor was chosen December 4th, 1941. Newsreels of the movement were set to be shown nationally starting December 8th.

The films were never shown. WWII began December 7th and the State of Jefferson movement took a back seat to the war effort.

If you've seen "One Man's Terrorist", it takes place in the State of Jefferson and he wears a hat with the state flag on it.

WearsMyLiberty.com - Liberty shirts and Ron Paul shirts to spread the message

This secession barred by the US Constitution

Article IV, Section 3 of the US Constitution provides that:
"New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new State shall be formed or erected with 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."

So without amending this portion of the Constitution, no new state can be legally formed by counties within the state of California. Counties from California and a neighboring state such as Oregon could form a new state, but only with "the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress."

Are you a POT or a PET - Person Embracing Tyranny?

they dont follow the Constitution

so why should we, get it done Jefferson.

Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must. like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it.-Thomas Paine

The R3volution requires action, not observation!!!!

good point

While this effort has an almost zero chance of succeeding, it will at least brand those counties as some sort of an imaginary refuge from the State's suicidal politics. When the rest of the State struggles to succeed to become part of Atzlan, perhaps this will make a difference for these counties.

I didnt go read a direct

Quote from A4 Sc3, but even from your quote it seems that as long as you have the consent of the legislatures of involved states, and that of Congress, you can make a new state anywhere. Not that the necessary consent is likely, I'm just saying it is in fact legal.

I stand corrected

tsv0728 - I believe that you are correct that with the consent of Congress and the legislatures of the state or states involved, a new state can be formed, even within the boundaries of one state, such as California. To the extent I stated otherwise, I stand corrected.

Are you a POT or a PET - Person Embracing Tyranny?

I am so moving there

if they pull this shit off

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."-- Albert Einstein

Well that would pretty much destroy

any gains they made if you moved there.

The most powerful Law of Nature is Time. It is finite and we all will run out of it. Use this Law to your advantage, for it offers you infinite possibilities...

I find this really interesting!

My son lives in Shasta County. I will have to talk to him and get his opinions on this.

Formerly rprevolutionist

only one way I think it could happen

I don't live in California but from my understanding they are in huge debt, a great reason to want to secede. It's also a great reason for the California legislature to oppose the idea, they need the tax base.

If the movement wants to succeed they will likely have to offer to take on a sizeable portion of California's debt, probably oversized in relation to the new state's population. I'm sure there are other things that could be bargained, but this would in my opinion seal the deal.

How could they oppose a deal that unloads a huge portion of their debt? Sure it would be tough starting out for the new state, but presumably it would be run by more fiscally responsible people who could quickly dispense with the debt and move forward.

Anyone close to the movement, flat the idea as a bargaining chip. I really think it's the only way to get California to approve the split.

I proposed the State Of Sierra Nevada

at this months Tea Party in the Hills. Northern counties going south from the foothills to the Nevada border to the northern boundary of Fresno Co. Plan to gather signitures for a ballot measures in each county. The state motto "hold the high ground".

I wish them well.

The "State of Jefferson" movement has been around to some degree for several decades. The last serious attempt was halted by WWII, but individuals and small groups in Northern California and Southern Oregon have continued to keep the concept alive.

Much of the current movement seems, in my opinion, to revolve around agriculture, timber, mining, and fishing. With Sacramento and Salem, not to mention our dear leaders in Washington, DC, continuing to pass laws whose result, and at times the intention, is the continued reduction in mining, logging, commercial fishing, and general agriculture.

I really do wish them well in this endeavor. A little revolution now then can be a good thing.

The powers that be - mainly

The powers that be - mainly in the form of the courts - have also been doing "water monopoly empire" style attacks on (Republican-voting) agricultural areas, notably California's central valley. (The fed did it to Oregon's Klamath Valley, too.)

They cut off the water of the "rebellious province": Stop providing irrigation water from other sources, block access to to rivers or pumping of ground water. The land dries out, the crops die (especially long-term stuff like orchards!), the land goes to dryland seasonal grasses and weeds (which then burn and may take out buildings with them), then eventually dries enough that it blows away as dust.

In the modern case it doesn't directly starve the people out - but it does wreck their income, after which they may have to abandon their property to find work and living space elsewhere, or perhaps lose their land to foreclosure.

= = = =
"Obama’s Economists: ‘Stimulus’ Has Cost $278,000 per Job."

That means: For each job "created or saved" about five were destroyed.

i think it would great if they can pull it off

but doesn't the state congress have to agree?

What could they do to simply nullify any decision from the state without any the threat of force and violence from the state? They are broke, perhaps they simply could not afford it. Would the liberals use force against everyone in those counties?....probably.

Read Republics and Representation & Distant Legislatures

The Founders understood that to have adequate representation, the Legislatures had to be very local;

The State Republics small and strong:

Republics and Representation:


Distant Legislatures:


The Constitution allows for smaller states to be formed;

Consider also What makes Representation Work:

The Founders understood the need to have very local legislatures for adequate representation of communities and states.

The Founders Knew that "Distant Legislatures" can not give adequate representation.

Consider this issue and the founders thoughts discussed in greater length here:

The original 13 states were small; Most about the size of counties in the later states;

Oregon became a state with about 40,000 to 80,000 people;

Given that as a criteria, most counties would have more than adequate numbers to become "independent states" representing their "own areas", giving much more adequate representation; Because that would allow the creation of yet smaller counties within the smaller states.

This would greatly reduce the financial "grabbing" and Financial manipulation that most state capitols use to their advantage to sell out the counties and local communities within their present states to federal mandates and other corrupt unconstitutional "arrogated" federal powers;

Samuel Adams - Absolute Rights of the Colonists 1772:

In Full: http://www.americanpatriotparty.cc/Rights_of_the_Colonists/r...

"....Can it be said with any colour of truth and Justice, that this Continent of "three thousand miles in length", and a breadth as yet unexplored, in which however, its supposed, there are five millions of people, has the least voice, vote or influence in the decisions of the British Parliament?

Have they, all together, any more right or power to return a single member to that house of commons, who have not inadvertently, but deliberately assumed a power to dispose of their lives,8 Liberties and properties, than to choose an Emperor of China!

Had the Colonists a right to return members to the british parliament, it would only be hurtfull;

as from their local situation and circumstances it is "impossible they should be ever truly and properly represented there".

The inhabitants of this country in all probability in a few years will be more numerous, than those of Great Britain and Ireland together;

yet it is absurdly expected [Volume 5, Page 397] by the promoters of the present measures, that these, with their posterity to all generations, should be easy while their property, shall be disposed of by a house of commons at "three thousand miles distant" from them;

and who "CANNOT" be supposed to have the least care or concern for their real interest:

Who have not only "NO" natural care for their interest, but must be in effect "bribed against it";

as every burden they lay on the colonists is so much saved or gained to themselves...."

American Patriot Party.CC

Educate Yourself. Educate Others.

Daily Paul: http://www.dailypaul.com/user/14674

Now on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/pages/American-Patriot-Party-CC-Nat...

RichardTaylorAPP - Chair - American Patriot Party.CC

John Locke #201, 202, 212 to 232; Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions 1798; Virginia Ratifying Convention 6-16-1788; Rights of the Colonists 1772.


would be amazing, I'd move to the State of Jefferson!! But how would they get both state legislatures and congress to sign off on the deal?

It is very doubtful those bodies would relinquish their hold.

The "State of Jefferson"

The "State of Jefferson" secessionist underground has been going for years, complete with an (apparently pirate) radio station.

It's a sign of the times that it's becoming mainstream in the local governments. Hurrah!

California has several regions that really don't fit well with the urban-based power structure that runs the state government. Among them are the central valley farming areas, which happen to contain the state capitol (though they'd be a solidly "Red State" while the capitol is solidly "Blue"). It might be nice to split it into more than two states.

Texas, on the other hand, was an independent nation that joined the US by treaty. I understand one of the terms of the treaty was that Texas could, in the future at its option, split into five smaller states, each of which would have full state status, explicitly including two Senators apiece.

= = = =

The upper Michigan / Northeastern Wisconsin "State of Superior" movement has been surfacing intermittently since 1858, as well. I hear there have been similar recent calls for secession in Michigan. I wonder if it's the same proposal mainstreaming there as well.

= = = =
"Obama’s Economists: ‘Stimulus’ Has Cost $278,000 per Job."

That means: For each job "created or saved" about five were destroyed.

California Resident

As a resident I think California should be split into at least SF Bay Area, Greater Los Angeles area, and the rest.

It'll never happen because

It'll never happen because there are too many thumb sucking govt lovers here in the north state. Take a look at the comments in the Redding Newspaper...


I live near Redding and would love to secede but I guess instead I'll just go Galt.

Hope that this comes to

Hope that this comes to fruition. We need more such de-centralization to happen. It is impossible for globalists to control de-centralized authority and makes it easier for libertarians to create pockets of freedom.