California’s Latest Delusion: Calexit

Millions of Californians greeted the election of Donald Trump with cries of “Not my president!” For more than few of them, it was a short trip from “Not my president!” to “Not my country!”

And so Calexit was born … and quickly died in the spring. Because, apart from the legal and logistical challenges of exiting from the union, the quixotic secession effort’s main sponsor had strange and unexplained ties to Russia. Talk about a PR nightmare.

 Undeterred, Calexiters regrouped and strategized anew. Late last month, they returned with a new proposal they’re certain will catch on. Calexit II would repeal a provision of the state’s labyrinthine constitution that says California is “an inseparable part of the United States.” Who doesn’t love silver bullets?
Read the rest at The Sacramento Bee. 


Support Free & Independent Journalism Your support helps protect our independence so that American Greatness can keep delivering top-quality, independent journalism that's free to everyone. Every contribution, however big or small, helps secure our future. If you can, please consider a recurring monthly donation.

Want news updates?

Sign up for our newsletter to stay up to date.

10 responses to “California’s Latest Delusion: Calexit”

  1. I was hoping that they actually had a workable plan. But alas! no such luck.
    It’s more like when your twenty-five year old son, the one who’s been living in the basement since he finished dropped out of college five years ago, tells you he’s leaving home. Hopefully, you wait for his plans. A job, an apartment, perhaps a plan to pay back the student loans? Then he tells you. A girl. A rock band. A tour that can’t fail to lead to stardom. And you understands that if he even tries to go, he’ll be back before you’ve had time to vacuum the potato chips out of the carpet.

    • Yeah, liberals with ‘plans’, you just gotta laugh.

  2. If California decided to leave the US, that would be the time for a large geographic part of California to leave California Nazi-Fascist-Commie (Progressivism for short) government.

  3. Actually, in reading Buchanan’s article this morning, I am coming around to the idea that splitting the country into three pieces may be about the only way we can peacefully settle our major differences. If the two coastal states wish to implement their grievance hierarchies, socialist wealth distribution schemes, and to discourage white middle class family-oriented culture, then by all means allow them to have at it. Whatever economic disadvantage the flyover state has initially I am confident can be overcome in time. I would be more than willing to assist my neighbor as we all adjusted to dramatically new circumstances.

    This solution would require re adjudicating the states right issue to ensure the central government, which must remain in dramatically smaller form to provide for the common defense (it makes no sense for three states to implement nuclear defenses). The three states would themselves become responsible for most of their central administrative functions. All interstate issues would need to be resolved through negotiation versus imposition of federal power. I.e., if the coastal states think the flyover state produces too much CO2 they may need to pay us to produce less.

    A complex solution, but certainly better than a war coupled with imposition of policies opposed by free men and women. Plus, humankind will learn once and for all, which approach to organizing societies produces a better result. I have no more in common with the the views of people expressed in the NYT or on CNN than I do with a man on the moon. I would rather see us divorce from one another…for the sake of the kids.

    • I think this is basically how the original Constitution intended for issues to be handled. Unfortunately the misinterpretation of the commerce clause – intended to prevent inter-state tariffs has been expanded out of all recognition to allow the feds to micromanage every aspect of a business on the specious grounds that a local business handling only local customers is engaged in interstate commerce because they use toilet paper made in another state. If we ever get a Constitutional Convention done, this would be one of the biggest wording errors to correct to restrict the feds back to monitoring inter-state tariffs not predominately intra-state commerce. Restricting the Feds to the enumerated powers would also help as would shrinking the federal regulatory bureaucracies by 95% and relegating them to helping support and coordinate the state bureaucracies for environmental etc policy.

  4. It’s a mystery (somewhat) as to how Calexit proponents manage to not be laughed out of town.

  5. Easy to see that the Mexifornia piece doesn’t fit the picture puzzle.

  6. Hopefully the Feds will subsidize bussing leftists from the Western states and Pacific coast states that have been Californicated -to go back to California before Calexit. Hell, it would be fine with me to subsidize moving vans to facilitate the rest. The whole West would benefit from the exit of Californians who fled the consequences of leftist politics in California – the excessive taxation, the hyper-regulation, the anti-business atmosphere, the fascism of the college leftists and the equally leftist state legislature, the environmental suppression of the agricultural industry – but kept their leftist politics when the escaped to Colorado, Arizona, New Mexica, Nevada, Oregon and Texas. If we can get rid of all of them, California can see if their leftist state will succeed (probably not) but in any case the other 49 states will be immeasurably improved in their chances to succeed.