Well, to my pleasant surprise, the head of Yes California generously responded to my article concerning what would happen if California seceded from the United States. Of course he has the right to considering I bashed his campaign with my beliefs. It is with great pleasure that I reiterate California could not possibly secede, and that it would be very problematic for the new nation if the state did so. This could be considered as a follow-up of my previous article, except this time I’ll delve deep into the hurdles California would have to jump over, and I will bring out another potential problem not mentioned in the previous article.
It seems that we can expect a few more than the four million trump voters in the state to be in disagreement with this movement, which is a very small fraction of the forty million in the state. What if there were other Californians who voted Hillary Clinton, but do not wish to secede? Well, articles from Newsweek and L.A Times in 2017 say that perhaps there are a bit more than four million that don’t agree breaking away from the Union. Although many people are opposed to President Trump, a poll from Newsweek shows that many more Californians wouldn’t like to leave the United States. Author Janice Williams in this Newsweek article stated that 68 percent of voters wouldn’t like to secede, while only 32 percent said that they would. Granted, the percentage has gone up slightly throughout the year, but not by significant standards. Either way, even if it were half the state that wanted to secede, I’m pretty sure it would be a big loss for the Calexit movement if half of the hard-working Californians left the new nation, wouldn’t you think?
Furthermore, in order to gain permission to leave the United States, the state of California would have to win the heart of two-thirds of Congress as well as 38 states in votes. Aaron Bandler, writer for The Daily Wire, claims that California would have to create a new amendment in order to allow the secession. This is because it would be “constitutionally viable.” This process of creating an amendment, of course, is rather difficult. Could California accomplish such a feat? Most unlikely.
California receives at least a third of freshwater and other resources from the Colorado River, as stated the PPIC water policy center on the Colorado River. That’s a good portion, 27 percent, the most out of all the states that use it. And of course, not receiving any funding from the federal government, what if the weather is not in California’s favor? Depending on mother nature would be a risky chance. What if, unsuspectedly, a natural disaster took a hold on this new nation? If an earthquake strikes, would California be able to pick itself up without the U.S’s assistance? The U.S. could provide aid out of generosity, but most likely not as much as they would to a state of their own. They’re a country now, so couldn’t they take care of themselves? This risk may be a hurdle too high for the nation, especially with those nuclear facilities around. Could California save itself from something like that? No way.
Would the United States really be okay with having to gain permission from something that was once theirs, like their military strongholds in California? Tensions may not lead to another Civil War, but one must expect some angered Americans. The idea of a secession is absurd. Why is this suddenly an issue now, when Donald Trump became president? What else brought up these complaints of this Calexit movement, of Yes California, that already haven’t been existing for years? What sparked this movement to take action now? It’s just like Texas in 2012, when the state tried to secede because of their dislike of the presidential re-election. This Calexit movement is simply upset with the election of 2016. Well, if the majority of California can deal with President Trump, so can the Californians who want to secede.
Joseph Frare is a contributor for The Daily Campus. He can be reached via email at email@example.com