The move to break away from the Republik of Kaleefornya continues. 21 of the state's northernmost counties took the petitions to the Secretary of State Dec 6. Here's what the leaders of Jefferson State want:
To elect its own 2 U.S. Senators and Congressional representatives;
To elect its own Governor, State Senate and Assembly, based on Article IV, Section 4 of the Constitution;
Make Jefferson a business friendly state with common sense tax laws and no state corporate income taxes;
Property Taxes to stay in State of Jefferson and more specifically its counties;
Laws to hold elected representatives accountable to its people;
Reduce the 570 state agencies and bureaucracies currently in California;
Constitutionally based laws;
Utilization of its natural resources - timber, water, farming, mining, hunting and fishing; and
A revamping of Social Services.
I cannot remember when there hasn't been this argument about breaking California up – one part in the north and the other the south. Historically, this goes back to the early 1800s when new Mexican citizens argued over whether the state capitol should be in Monte Rey or Los Angeles. They even went so far as to try to make it two separate Mexican provinces.
No difference a century and a half later.
Full story @
State of Jefferson Amasses 21 Total Counties
Wow, if CA pulls this off before the districts in Houston overthrown corrupt City Govt,
I will be amazed. I was expecting this to blow up in Houston first. Maybe we should
have a race to see who will establish Constitutional Govt first, in CA or TX. Cool!
there's already a constitutional government. it's called the united states of america.
neoconfederate insurrectionists are funny
Hi
jillian from what has been happening in Houston, Texas:
The Constitutional responsibilities stop at the County Level.
The Cities are private municipalities and aren't required to take an oath or enforce the Constitution.
The police take oaths to do so, but not their employers.
This explains why the City of Houston got away with so many unconstitutional ordinances and actions.
Unless the City is sued in court, the petitioners win, and the orders are enforced,
then the petitioners have no Constitutional defenses. The city can override these like a private
corporation that can do whatever the board in charge decides UNTIL THEY ARE SUED AND LOSE.
Untll they are sued, and until the court orders them otherwise,
the City can continue to pass unconstitutional ordinances and enforce them.
In the City of Houston, the Mayor overrode petitions that followed the process,
until a Court ruled otherwise and forced the City to follow its own procedures it was bypassing!
And for the red light cameras ruled unconstitutional, the taxpayers still had to pay 4.8 million
in settlement to the camera company, when the citizens had opposed the contract the whole time
on Constitution grounds. So the taxpayers, even though they sued and won and were found right,
had to pay the past fines, had to pay for the contracts, had to pay for legal costs, and pay the settlement.
Do you call that "Constitutional rights under govt"
if it costs that much time and money to restore rights taken away by bad city govt?
Sorry
jillian but you are out of touch with reality if you don't
understand the legal system and that corporate entities, including City govts,
can violate rights and deprive liberties, costing citizens time and money to TRY to get those rights restored,
with NO guarantees. The wrongdoers never pay the costs, the taxpayers do.
So there is no motivation to prevent infractions since the taxpayers pay all the costs anyway.
It's all on us, so what do the office holders care if they cost us money?
They answer to the people who finance their campaigns to get them elected.