What If California Split Into Multiple States?

The Actual History

California joined the United States as the 31st state on September 9, 1850, following the 1848 Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo that ended the Mexican-American War and the subsequent California Gold Rush that dramatically increased its non-indigenous population. The state was admitted to the Union as a free state under the Compromise of 1850, which attempted to maintain the balance between free and slave states.

Despite its vast and diverse geography spanning nearly 164,000 square miles—making it the third-largest state by area—and its varied regional economies and cultures, California has remained a single political entity for over 170 years. The state encompasses dramatic geographical contrasts, from the Sierra Nevada mountains to the Central Valley agricultural heartland, from the Mojave Desert to 840 miles of Pacific coastline.

Throughout its history, California has experienced multiple serious proposals to divide it into smaller states. As early as 1855, the California State Assembly passed a proposal to split the state into three parts, though it never received federal approval. During the Civil War era, southern counties with Confederate sympathies attempted to separate. In 1859, the California legislature actually approved the creation of "Colorado Territory" from its southern counties, but the initiative stalled when the Civil War broke out.

The 20th century saw additional division proposals. In 1941, several northern counties threatened to join with southern Oregon counties to form the state of "Jefferson." In 1965, a state senator proposed splitting California at the Tehachapi Mountains into North and South California. The 1970s and 1980s saw further proposals from various legislators and activists.

More recently, venture capitalist Tim Draper led a "Six Californias" initiative in 2014, gathering over 1.3 million signatures to place the division of California into six separate states on the ballot. However, this initiative failed to qualify due to invalid signatures. Draper tried again in 2018 with a "Cal 3" proposal for three Californias, but the California Supreme Court removed it from the ballot.

In all cases, proposals to divide California have failed due to a combination of factors: constitutional hurdles, political resistance, economic complications, and infrastructure interdependencies—particularly regarding water resources. The U.S. Constitution requires that any new state created from an existing state must receive approval from both the state legislature and Congress, a double barrier that has proven insurmountable.

Today, California remains a unified state with the largest population (approximately 39 million) and largest economy of any U.S. state. If it were an independent country, it would rank as the world's fifth-largest economy. Its unified status gives it tremendous political influence with 52 representatives in the House (as of 2024) and significant economic leverage, despite the persistent regional differences between its coastal urban centers and inland rural areas that continue to fuel occasional calls for division.

The Point of Divergence

What if California had actually split into multiple states? In this alternate timeline, we explore a scenario where one of the many historical attempts to divide California succeeded, permanently altering the composition of the United States and the balance of power in American politics.

Several plausible moments of divergence exist when examining California's history:

The most compelling point of divergence occurs in 1859, when the California legislature actually approved the creation of the "Territory of Colorado" from its southern counties. In our timeline, this initiative stalled when the Civil War began in 1861. However, in this alternate history, we posit that the secession of the southern counties was expedited and approved by the U.S. Congress in early 1860, before the Civil War erupted.

This approval might have occurred for several reasons:

First, the Buchanan administration, sympathetic to southern interests and seeking to potentially create another slave-friendly state or territory, could have fast-tracked the approval process. Many southern California residents at the time had migrated from southern states and held pro-slavery views, making the territory potentially aligned with southern interests.

Second, northern California political leaders might have more aggressively supported the split to consolidate their political power and eliminate the need to compromise with southern representatives on issues like water rights, transportation funding, and economic development.

Third, practical governance challenges in the massive state—where communication between Los Angeles and Sacramento took weeks in the 1850s—could have provided compelling administrative reasons to approve the division.

In this alternate timeline, the Territory of Colorado (not to be confused with the Colorado Territory established in 1861 in our timeline) became an established entity by presidential proclamation in February 1860. This initial division created the precedent and legal pathway that would eventually lead to California splitting into three distinct states before the end of the 19th century: California (northern section), Colorado (southern coastal section), and Sierra (eastern section).

This divergence fundamentally altered the development of the American West, the balance of power in Congress, and eventually the entire political and economic landscape of the United States.

Immediate Aftermath

Territorial Reorganization (1860-1865)

The immediate consequence of the 1860 division was the establishment of the Territory of Colorado, encompassing Los Angeles, San Diego, and the southern counties of California. This new territory required the appointment of a territorial governor, the establishment of a territorial legislature, and the creation of new governmental institutions.

President Buchanan appointed John B. Weller, a former California governor with southern sympathies, as the first governor of Colorado Territory. The territorial capital was established in Los Angeles, which at the time had a population of only about 4,400 people but was the largest settlement in the region.

Meanwhile, the remaining State of California, with its capital in Sacramento, had to reorganize its legislature and recalibrate its budget. Governor John G. Downey, who took office in January 1860, faced the immediate challenge of reorganizing state government with significantly reduced territory and tax base, though the gold-producing regions remained within California's borders.

Civil War Complications (1861-1865)

When the Civil War erupted in April 1861, the division of California took on new significance. While California remained firmly in the Union, Colorado Territory became a hotbed of Confederate sympathy. Though it never formally joined the Confederacy, pro-Southern militias formed throughout the territory, and federal troops had to be dispatched to maintain control.

The "El Monte Boys," a pro-Confederate militia in Southern California, grew in significance in this timeline and conducted guerrilla operations against Union forces. Federal control of the territory remained tenuous throughout the war, with Los Angeles and San Diego harbors requiring Union naval blockades to prevent supplies from reaching Confederate sympathizers.

President Lincoln appointed a military governor to replace Weller in 1861, sending General Edward R.S. Canby to establish martial law in parts of the territory. This military occupation created lasting resentment among the population that would influence regional politics for generations.

Water Rights Crisis (1863-1870)

One of the most immediate and contentious issues that emerged was water rights. The Kern, Kings, and Los Angeles Rivers now crossed territorial boundaries. In 1863, the first major legal battle erupted when California restricted water flow to Colorado Territory during a drought year.

The case of Colorado Territory v. California (1864) reached the U.S. Supreme Court, which established the first interstate water rights doctrine in American history, predating similar disputes in the Colorado River basin by decades. The court ruled that upstream states had obligations to allow reasonable water flow to downstream territories, establishing an important precedent in American water law.

This ruling necessitated the creation of the first interstate water commission in 1865, the California-Colorado Water Authority, which became a model for later interstate compact commissions.

Statehood Movements and Further Division (1865-1880)

Following the Civil War, Colorado Territory began pushing for statehood. However, Radical Republicans in Congress were wary of admitting a potentially Democratic state with former Confederate sympathies. This led to a statehood process that lasted nearly a decade longer than it might have otherwise.

Meanwhile, the eastern counties of what remained of California, frustrated by Sacramento's focus on coastal issues and the growing mining-agricultural divide, began their own separation movement. In 1872, the eastern counties, including the Sierra Nevada region and the mining territories, petitioned Congress for separation.

President Grant, seeing an opportunity to create another likely Republican state, supported this second division. In 1874, Congress approved the creation of the Territory of Sierra from California's eastern counties, with its capital in Virginia City, which was experiencing the height of the Comstock Lode silver mining boom.

By 1876, three distinct political entities existed where a single California had once stood:

The State of California: Consisting primarily of the northern and central coastal regions, with its capital in Sacramento
The Territory of Colorado: Encompassing the southern coastal regions, with its capital in Los Angeles
The Territory of Sierra: Comprising the eastern mountainous regions and mining territories, with its capital in Virginia City

This tripartite division of the former California set the stage for dramatic long-term political, economic, and social changes that would reshape American history.

Long-term Impact

The New States Era (1880-1900)

By 1880, both Colorado Territory and Sierra Territory were actively pursuing statehood. Colorado achieved statehood in 1881, becoming the nation's 38th state under President Garfield. Sierra followed in 1889 as part of the omnibus statehood bill that also admitted North Dakota, South Dakota, Montana, and Washington.

The admission of these states fundamentally altered the balance of power in Congress. Instead of California's consolidated congressional delegation, three separate states now sent representatives and senators to Washington. By 1900, the former California territory contributed six senators rather than two, dramatically increasing Western influence in the upper chamber.

Water Development and Infrastructure (1880-1930)

The division of California transformed the development of water infrastructure in the American West. Without a unified state government to create massive water projects, each state developed its own approach:

California focused on the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and northern water resources, developing the Central Valley Project decades earlier than in our timeline, as they could not rely on southern resources.
Colorado State (former Territory) faced severe water shortages that led to the earlier development of the Colorado River Aqueduct in the 1910s rather than the 1930s, requiring interstate compacts with Arizona and Nevada.
Sierra developed extensive mining-related water infrastructure but struggled with agricultural development due to its mountainous terrain. Its economy remained primarily extraction-based for decades longer than in our timeline.

The most significant infrastructural difference emerged in the 1920s when the three states, along with Arizona and Nevada, negotiated the landmark Western Waters Compact of 1922, which allocated water rights in ways dramatically different from our timeline's Colorado River Compact. Sierra's needs for mining water and California's inability to tap into southern resources created a completely different water politics in the American West.

Economic Divergence (1900-1950)

By the early 20th century, the three states had developed distinctly different economic profiles:

California became the center of northern agriculture, shipping, and later technology. San Francisco maintained its position as the West's financial capital, while Sacramento developed as a significant inland port city. Without Hollywood, the state developed a stronger focus on agriculture and early computing.
Colorado State emerged as the entertainment and tourism capital of the West. Los Angeles developed more rapidly as a state capital, and the film industry established itself there even earlier—by 1905, it had already become the center of American filmmaking. Without having to share resources with northern counties, southern California developed a more extensive urban infrastructure decades earlier.
Sierra remained primarily extraction-focused until the decline of mining in the 1920s forced economic diversification. It developed a unique economy based on mining, forestry, and eventually tourism. Lake Tahoe became its premier destination, and the state built its identity around outdoor recreation and natural resources.

The Great Depression affected each state differently. California, with its diverse agricultural base, weathered the crisis relatively well. Colorado suffered from a collapse in entertainment spending but received significant federal infrastructure investments. Sierra, still dependent on mining, faced the most severe depression and required substantial federal intervention.

Political Implications (1900-Present)

The three-state division created ripple effects throughout American political history:

Electoral College Impact

With six senators and proportionally more electoral votes than a unified California would have had, the former California region gained political influence. Presidential candidates couldn't simply campaign in Los Angeles and San Francisco—they needed to address the distinct concerns of three separate states.

In close elections, these states often voted differently. In the alternate 1960 election, for instance, California and Sierra went for Nixon while Colorado supported Kennedy, potentially changing electoral outcomes. The 2000 election, razor-thin in our timeline, would have had a decisively different outcome with Sierra's electoral votes likely going Republican.

Congressional Politics

The increased Senate representation from the region shifted legislative priorities. Water infrastructure bills passed more easily with six senators advocating for Western water needs rather than two. Defense spending in the region increased as each state competed for military bases and contracts.

Sierra's senators became known as the "Silver Bloc" in the early 20th century, consistently supporting mining interests and hard-money policies, while Colorado's representatives championed entertainment industry copyright laws and early aerospace development.

State Political Cultures

By 2025, the three states had developed distinct political identities:

California evolved into a moderate state with strong environmental leanings, progressive on environmental issues but more moderate on fiscal policy than our timeline's California.
Colorado became a center of entertainment industry liberalism along its coast but maintained conservative strongholds in inland regions, creating a consistently purple state with dramatic urban-rural divides.
Sierra developed a libertarian political culture with strong environmental conservation ethics combined with skepticism toward federal authority—a unique blend that made it unpredictable in national elections.

Technological and Cultural Development (1950-2025)

The technological landscape of the former California region developed along different tracks:

The Technology Industry

Without the unified economic power of California, Silicon Valley emerged more slowly. Instead, technology centers developed in multiple locations:

Stanford Research Park still became a technology hub in California, but with greater focus on hardware and agricultural technology.
The aerospace industry concentrated in Colorado State around Los Angeles, creating a technology corridor that specialized in aviation, defense, and later, digital entertainment technology.
Sierra, with its less developed infrastructure, became a surprising center for telecommunications and remote work technology beginning in the 1990s, as it sought economic development compatible with its mountainous geography.

Cultural Divergence

By 2025, the three states had developed distinct cultural identities that would have been regional differences in our timeline:

California culture centered around its Bay Area urban hub and agricultural heritage, with a distinct northern California cuisine and arts scene focused in San Francisco.
Colorado became known globally for its entertainment industry, beach culture, and aerospace innovation. Its Hispanic heritage remained more pronounced and politically influential than in our timeline.
Sierra developed a unique outdoor-focused culture built around its mountain geography and history of mining boom towns. It became known for adventure sports, mountain crafts, and a distinctive architectural style that incorporated mining-era aesthetics with modern design.

Expert Opinions

Dr. Miranda Chen, Professor of Political Science at University of California, Berkeley, offers this perspective: "The division of California into three states fundamentally altered the development of American federalism. What we see in 2025 is a West Coast where regional power is more distributed but also more contentious. Interstate compacts have become the primary governance mechanism for everything from water to transportation to emissions. This has created a laboratory of democracy effect, where policies can be tested in one state before adoption by others, but it has also created tremendous coordination problems. The Western States Council, formed in 1972, has essentially become a shadow regional government trying to coordinate what would have been state-level decisions in a unified California."

Dr. James Martinez, Historian at Colorado State University, Los Angeles, explains: "The cultural divergence between these three states cannot be overstated. By preserving and amplifying the north-south divide that existed in historical California, the split allowed distinct cultural identities to develop more fully. Colorado's entertainment industry developed earlier and with less outside influence, creating a film tradition more connected to Mexican and Spanish cultural roots. Meanwhile, Sierra's isolation preserved mining-era cultural patterns that disappeared elsewhere. When we look at linguistic patterns, cuisine, architecture, and political attitudes, these three states have diverged far more than regions within our timeline's California. They're as different from each other as Massachusetts is from South Carolina."

Michael Ohanesian, Senior Fellow at the Sierra Institute for Water Policy, provides an economic perspective: "The water conflicts between these three states have driven technological innovation in water conservation that wouldn't have happened otherwise. Sierra developed advanced snowpack monitoring systems decades before our timeline due to its water disputes with California and Colorado. Colorado pioneered desalination and water recycling technologies in the 1970s that our timeline didn't see until the 21st century. Without a unified state government to create massive water transfer projects, these states had to innovate or die. The result is that in 2025, the former California region is probably more drought-resilient than in our timeline, even though it experienced more severe water conflicts along the way."