California should secede
All stages have been completed. The voting points distribution and the result are presented below.
With 3 votes and 3 points ahead, the winner is ...
- Publication date
- Last update date
- Time for argument
- Three days
- Voting system
- Open voting
- Voting period
- One week
- Point system
- Winner selection
- Rating mode
- Characters per argument
http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2018/11/maybe-its-time-for-america-to-split-up.html maybe its time we went our separate ways amerika
- Secession implies theft of huge chucks of US National property- National Parks, Military Bases, Native American Reservations, etc.
The federal government owns 47.70 percent of California's total land, 47,797,533 acres out of 100,206,720 total acres. 
- PRO must demonstrate how land will be re-apportioned to both parties' satisfaction. PRO must describe how California will compensate US for highways, parks, dams, bridges, ports, etc.
- PRO must estimate the costs of California secession and the economic impact of secession.
- If war with US is averted, California is the still the fifth-wealthiest state in the world suddenly stripped of the protections of the world's finest military. An undefended, independent California would be a tempting takeover target for a number of states, China first and foremost. Secession would certainly shift global power to Asia in a big way.
- California law subjects 'all able-bodied male citizens and declared citizens between 18 and 45 years old" to service in the California militia. The young men are required to defend the state in need.
- In the absence of a large navy, air force, or nuclear arsenal, California would be required to lean heavily, probably exclusively on this unorganized, untrained militia in any war.
- PRO must show that California's military is sufficient to preserve California's sovereignty and independence.
- PRO must address the threat of additional counter-secession and reduction to anarchy.
- A quarter of Californians are of Mexican ancestry and may prefer that Southern California return to Mexico.
- Half of Californian counties are very conservative and may counter-secede, taking much of California's natural resources with them.
- Many large corporate entities currently headquartered in California will likely choose to relocate to the US. Will California permit large scale migration of industry leaders?
- California gets two-thirds of its usable water from other US states. The US is capable of radically dehydrating California in the space of weeks. PRO must address how California assures external water supplies or survives on the insufficient internal supply.
- We should note that the only 21st century secessionist movement in California was "Yes California," which disbanded after US intelligence and law enforcement agencies advised that Yes California's leadership and funding came were rooted in Vladimir Putin's Russian Oligarchy, that its founder Louis J. Marinelli had fled to Moscow and that the movement was essentially a Russian attack on US sovereignty via illegal foreign propaganda and illegal foreign campaign contributions. 
- That is, secession is such a stupid idea that US enemies promote the idea as likely to bring about or accelerate the decline of the United States as an international power.
There are different theories regarding fiat:
"Normal means" – going through the same political process comparable with normal legislative processes. There is no overarching, accepted definition of the legislative pathways which constitute "normal means," but clarification about what an affirmative team regards as "normal means" can be obtained as part of cross-examination by the negative team.
"Infinite" or "durable fiat" – the degree to which an imagined, or "fiated", action is considered permanent. In many policy debates, debaters argue about the reversibility "fiated" actions. For example, in a debate about whether the United States Federal Government should implement new regulations designed to reduce climate change, a Negative team might argue that regulations would be repealed if the Republican Party gained control of the Presidency or Congress. Various interpretations of fiats have been constructed in order to promote more realistic policy debates." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glossary_of_policy_debate_terms#Fiat
But these tragic events cannot take away from the beauty, nor the wonder, of California. And when somebody decides the state should secede, it is not a calamity. Secession is an opportunity.
If California was admitted into the Union by a simple majority vote (as it was), under what basis would a supermajority be required for her to exit?
I contend a simple majority establishes this consent, but would this vote take place in Congress or in state legislatures? These questions remain unanswered, but can you think of 25 red states that might like to see blue California secede? I can think of 30 that voted for Donald Trump.
Look, the United States claims to be the freest country in the world. We ought to enjoy the fundamental right of self-determination, and if we so determine, self-rule.
Then California can sign a military base agreement with the Americans to lease land for their existing bases. California will not be hostile towards them, but our immigrants will be protected from them.
Yes, California is incredible. But just wait until we are independent.
- In R1, CON required PRO to define a benchmark for "too polarized" and explain how surpassing that benchmark represents a harm to California in need of dramatic remedy.
- Instead, PRO dropped the argument entirely. PRO never mentioned polarization in R2 at all.
- That is, PRO has failed to demonstrate any harm to California in need of remedy, much less show how secession is the best or only remedy.
- CON recalled the terrible violence of the Civil War and asked for successful examples of secession.
- PRO offered one example- the peaceful separation of Czechoslovakia after the Velvet Revolution which wasn't secession so much as mutual dissolution along traditional ethnic divisions. CON notes that Czechoslovakia itself seceded from the Austrian Empire and did manage to maintain democracy and sovereignty for 20 years of the next 75 but mostly was subjected to invasion, war, mass murder and totalitarian subjugation as a consequence of succession.
- PRO never engages CON regarding the concern of subsequent secessions resulting in the balkanization of California.
- PRO never considers the grevious harm done by secession to fellow Americans in the rest of the US.
- PRO irrelevantly cut and pastes a description of fiat in debate. CON acknowledges that PRO has no authority to secede on California behalf and recognized that we are only the theoretical advisability of such secession.
- PRO bizarrely argues that the Constitution, Civil War, and Texas v. White did not require a supermajority of states to consent.
- That is only true because the Constitution, Civil War, and Texas v. White all unequivocally rejected the legality of secession under any circumstance.
- If Madison wasn't sufficiently clear, Lincoln made the question pristine: once joined in federation, any and all attempts to secede are attacks on the sovereignty of the Union and automatically acts of war. If California secedes, the US is legally and constitutionally required to get it back by any means necessary. Californians may opt out of citizenship but the state of California legally belongs to the US and its citizens in perpetuity.
- Con irrelevantly argues that questions of secession are unanswered and that a simple majority vote might authorize secession but such was the ignorance of Southern Democrats immediately before their legal destruction and re-absorption by the United States in the 1860s.
- PRO rather blithely assumes that California GDP will remain status quo following secession and makes plans for spending the anticipated surplus revenue. Let's recall that many Brexiters thought this way when voting to secede from the EU in 2016 but three years later Britain has already wasted $66 billion and lost 2.5%GDP dithering while actually leaving the EU would cost 2 to 3 times that and almost certainly predicate a long recession across Europe. CON assumes that if California (larger than UK economy) seceded from the Union the result would be global depression as Pacific trade collapses (59% of Chinese imports entered US at Long Beach in 2015, for example.) 
- CON asked PRO to estimate the costs of California secession and the economic impact of secession.
- PRO ignored CON's reasonable request.
- CON asked PRO to show that California's military is sufficient to preserve California's sovereignty and independence.
- PRO ignored CON reasonable ask.
- CON asked PRO whether California would permit large scale Corporation migration out of state.
- PRO made no answer.
- CON asked PRO where California would get clean water and at what price after secession.
- California agriculture and energy sectors would certainly see great harm from any reduced water supply.
- CON noted that secession is such a terrible idea that US enemies initiated and funded Yes California in 2016.
- PRO failed to address why he is promoting plans developed by his enemies.