"New California State" Resolves to Ask Congress for Statehood in the Union
- Elisa Ballard
- 12 hours ago
- 4 min read
Statehood Inching Closer to Reality? Many Hurdles Ahead
The “Restored California” (also known as New California State) movement held its fifth constitutional convention on Thursday, May 14, 2026, at the Veterans Memorial Hall in Roseville, California. Approximately 150 attendees gathered for a full day of presentations led by Governor Pro Tempore Paul Preston. Speakers included Chriss Street (Chief Financial Officer and Vice President), attorney Robert Thomas, independent researcher Simone Anderson, petroleum engineer Rod Guice, and historian Don Wilson. (Prior conventions have been held in San Diego, Redding, San Luis Obispo, and Bakersfield.)
Why Pursue a New State 176 Years After California’s Admission?
California became the 31st state on September 9, 1850. Proponents of New California argue that profound changes in population, governance, and policy have eroded effective representation, justifying a state split and a petition to Congress for statehood under Article IV, Sections 3 and 4 of the U.S. Constitution. The current map of the proposed state split places Los Angeles, San Francisco, parts of the Bay Area, and Sacramento in Old California, with the remaining areas in New California. This structure, though not contiguous, aligns with the island model of the State of Hawaii.
Representation and the Republican Form of Government
After the landmark U.S. Supreme Court case Reynolds v. Sims (1964), which established the “one person, one vote” principle and required legislative districts to be apportioned by population rather than geographic units like counties, speakers highlighted severe representation imbalances that have developed in modern California.
Today, each California State Assembly member represents roughly 494,000 people (based on the latest apportionment data). Many districts encompass multiple counties, forcing representatives to balance widely diverse interests and geographies. For example:
Assembly District 1 includes all or portions of Lassen, Modoc, Nevada, Plumas, Shasta, Sierra, Siskiyou, Butte, and Placer counties.
Rural voters in California tend to be more conservative, while urban voters, particularly in major metropolitan areas, lean strongly Democratic. Los Angeles County, for example, holds 19 seats in the State Assembly, 18 of which are currently held by Democrats. Critics and advocates of reform argue that this heavy urban concentration of power dilutes the political voice of rural communities and deviates from the republican form of government guaranteed to every state under Article IV, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution. This imbalance is reflected in the overall composition of the California Legislature: the State Assembly consists of 60 Democrats and 20 Republicans, while the State Senate has 30 Democrats and 10 Republicans.
Declaration of Independence and Right to Alter Government
The convention invoked core American founding principles. When government becomes destructive of the ends for which it was instituted — failing to protect against invasion, failing to secure fair elections, enabling massive financial fraud, human trafficking, or policies perceived as tyrannical — the people have the right and duty to alter or abolish it, as stated in the Declaration of Independence.
Speakers emphasized that the tyranny of the majority must not override the God-given rights of minorities, a concern the Founders addressed through equal Senate representation for states regardless of population.
Economic and Governance Concerns Raised
Fraud and Federal Funds: Chriss Street referenced recent statements by Vice President JD Vance. On May 13–14, 2026, Vance announced the withholding of $1.3 billion in Medicaid payments to California over concerns about fraud. Street and others cited much larger historical losses, including tens of billions in prior EDD (unemployment insurance) fraud during the pandemic, with the federal government covering a significant portion.
Energy and Refineries: Petroleum engineer Rod Guice noted ongoing refinery closures due to burdensome and costly State regulations and taxes. Closures include Phillips 66’s Los Angeles facility (closed in late 2025) and Valero’s Benicia refinery (expected to close in 2026). These represent roughly 17–20% of California’s refining capacity, contributing to rising gasoline prices and increased reliance on imported fuel and out-of-state electricity.
CO₂ and Climate Discussion: Guice argued that concerns over atmospheric CO₂ are overstated. Current levels are approximately 431–432 ppm (0.0431–0.0432%). Antarctic ice cores show levels fluctuated between roughly 180–300 ppm over the past 800,000 years, with solar influences and natural cycles playing major roles. He noted California imports electricity from coal-fired plants in other states while restricting in-state production. When CO₂ levels are high, plants thrive; however, when levels are too low, they can't survive. CO₂ levels have been substantially higher for much of the Earth's history, but not in the relatively recent past that shaped modern ecosystems. Guice criticized Al Gore's 2006 film "An Inconvenient Truth," which warned the public about greenhouse gas emissions and predicted dramatic sea-level rise, increased hurricane frequency, and an ice-free Pole, none of which have come true.
Infrastructure and Water: Speakers criticized decades of underinvestment in infrastructure by California lawmakers despite high tax revenues. New California wishes to align with the Trump Administration on its proposal to raise the level of the Shasta Dam, expand hydroelectric capacity, and improve water storage to mitigate drought-flood cycles and support agriculture. They argued such projects could yield strong economic returns and lower electricity costs.
Street emphasized that President Trump has been working on foreign policy issues but will soon turn his attention to domestic issues, focusing on states like California due to the high levels of corruption here, and on infrastructure, energy, and water management. The State of California could once again be a very desirable place to live, with good government and common-sense approaches to problems, and it could reverse the trend of people leaving the State. Hence, the New California convention provided a needed glimmer of hope for the informed and frustrated citizens.
Outlook
The convention concluded with resolutions advancing the movement’s petition to Congress for recognition as a new state. While significant legal, political, and practical hurdles remain, organizers view the effort as a restoration of foundational American principles amid what they describe as one-party rule and systemic failures in the current California government.
Further coverage of specific proposals and outcomes from the convention will follow in subsequent reports. For more information about New California State, go to:
