Trust me here 7_Sorrows, not dividing California into THAT VERSION is a good thing.
You are correct, basically the whole coast is extremely Liberal, while the rest of the state is Conservative, with most of the population living along the coast. With that massive Liberal population, they control the state. The way Cali would have been split into three states in that version, all the largest coastal cities would have been included into the three new states. Northern Cali. would have included San Francisco, Silicon Valley and Sacramento, Southern Cali. would include San Diego and all the agriculture areas in the middle of the state where most of the migrant workers who usually vote Democratic live. California would have included the rest of the coast from the Monterey Bay area down to, and including, the whole Los Angeles area.
So, instead of the super Liberal Cali. with two senators and numerous House Representative members, you would get two more Super Liberal states with four more Liberal senators and numerous more Liberal House members.
The people who live in other areas of the state besides the coast who have no representation now, would still not have any representation. The coast has nothing in common with the jobs, way of life, needs and life style of those of us that don’t live in the large coastal cities. Just look at one thing, weather. The coast weather doesn’t change much between winter and summer, ( It’s normally between 60-80 degrees ), so they aren’t running their heaters or air conditioners that much. But Cali. has Death Valley as well as the very tall, snow covered Sierra Mountains. You bet the people that live anywhere besides the coast run their heat or air conditioners. But we are all paying what the more numerous coastal elected sets. ( Remember, setting a higher price to use something they rarely use won’t really affect them much ).
Two more of the SAME California would be