Well that "seemed" a little more informed, and a lot less hate.
They will pay for the roads the same way every other state does. If Jefferson did exist, it would be the 16 smallest state population wise. How does Montana with a population of 1.1 million pay for roads in the third largest state? Because they don't use California's horrible model. Same with Jefferson, if your main concern is roads, that is super easy to overcome......What about roads seems so hard for you?
The rural counties of Jefferson already have a tax income of 209,000,000. Plenty for roads, and frankly, a pointless argument.
BTW - The federal government doesn't own any of that land. They manage it with the request of the state. If the feds aren't welcome, out they go. It's BLM land, being managed, but the federal government does not own that land. The federal government is only allowed to own 10 square miles in Washington D.C. and ports. That's it, they own nothing in the state of Jefferson's proposed areas.
No offence, but both arguments against the state of Jefferson you bring up, are really easily overcome.
As for a representative, Tom is ok. I have talked with him on several different occasions in person. However, I personally feel he lobbies the interests of the big cities 100 times before anything of rural importance is addressed. Hence the reason for a state of Jefferson. The state of Jefferson doesn't want to succeed from the USA, the founders love the USA. They just want a bigger voice. They just want to separate from Sacramento and Salem and remain part of the USA. If your using the word succeed, your not using the right word. I will define at the bottom of the post.
Think about it, look on the east coast, in the same amount of land you have New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, D.C., West Virginia, Virginia, North Carolina, Carolina, Georgia, and part of Tennessee in the same geological footprint. Each state gets to represent their people, just broken down into more voices for the people. Nobody in their right mind would argue these states don't have the ability to build roads, why in the state of Jefferson?
So I believe Jefferson has no issues paying for roads, that is simple. They are not trying to succeed from anything. They just want a bigger voice, in smaller geographical areas, just like the east coast does. Doesn't seem evil or stupid to me..... In fact, I think it would be smart, and the money from cannabis once legal would stay in the communities that generate that money. That 209mil a year income would turn into the billions. We could have gold roads.
suc·ceed
səkˈsēd/
verb
verb:
succeed; 3rd person present:
succeeds; past tense:
succeeded; past participle:
succeeded; gerund or present participle:
succeeding
- 1.
achieve the desired aim or result.
"a mission which could not possibly succeed"
synonyms: triumph, achieve success, be successful, do well, flourish, thrive;More
antonyms: fail, flop
- 2.
take over a throne, inheritance, office, or other position from.
"he would succeed Hawke as prime minister"
synonyms: replace, take the place of, take over from, follow, supersede;
informalstep into someone's shoes
"upon Taylor's death, his vice president succeeded him"
antonyms: precede
- become the new rightful holder of an inheritance, office, title, or property.
"he succeeded to his father's kingdom"
synonyms: inherit, assume, acquire, attain;
formalaccede to
"he succeeded to the throne"
antonyms: renounce, abdicate
- come after and take the place of.
"her embarrassment was succeeded by fear"
synonyms: follow, come after, follow after More
antonyms: precede
