Splitting states

[RoadWarrior56]

We could always give California back to Mexico.  Let them deal with the ecco-nuts and the rest of the loonies out there.  They will probably eventually end up with it anyway by default.  In all seriousness, I have been out there five times over the last 12 years.  It is probably the most interesting and beautiful place I have ever visited.  I would love to keep visiting out there, but not to LIVE.  And besides, they do have In N Out Burger, that is always a positive.  But politically and to a certain extent culturally, it is the most disfunctional mess I have ever seen.  I will quit with my comments while I am ahead, hahaha.

[florida]

There was an amusing news story a few months ago about a state representative who wanted to split Miami-Dade, Broward, and Palm Beach Counties into a state called South Florida. 

The governor just laughed at the proposal.



But, why not make the State of Carolina? It would make traveling up that area much more easier. By the time I make it through Georgia and South Carolina to the NC border, it's like I just want to kill myself. 

States that only take ~1 hour or so to cross 

[signalman]

But, why not make the State of Carolina? It would make traveling up that area much more easier. By the time I make it through Georgia and South Carolina to the NC border, it's like I just want to kill myself.   

States that only take ~1 hour or so to cross 

But wouldn't that just make one bigger state that would take much more than an hour to traverse?

[Scott5114]

Oklahoma was originally planned to be two states, roughly split down the middle of the current state, with the state of Oklahoma to the west and the State of Sequoyah to the east. But for whatever reason the people in charge of the US didn't like that and said that they had to be admitted as one state.

[RoadWarrior56]

Why is Carolina split between two states in the first place?  I know the Dakota was originally supposed to be a single state, but only divided at statehood, mainly due to a dispute as to where the state capital would be.

[vdeane]

North Carolina was settled at least a year before the south was, and therefore had a different government.

[florida]

But, why not make the State of Carolina? It would make traveling up that area much more easier. By the time I make it through Georgia and South Carolina to the NC border, it's like I just want to kill myself.   

States that only take ~1 hour or so to cross 

But wouldn't that just make one bigger state that would take much more than an hour to traverse?

Sorry, I meant it as SC, Carolina, and then NC. Three states.

[Revive 755]

Came across an article with some past proposals to split Texas.  Would be nice if it had a few maps:

http://www.tshaonline.org/handbook/online/articles/DD/mqd1.html

[andy3175]

A more recent proposal came forward to split California into six states:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2014/02/21/california-six-states-plan-tim-draper/5673283/

A plan to divide California into six states is one step closer to a vote.

Silicon Valley venture capitalist Tim Draper got the go-ahead this week to collect signatures for his "Six Californias" plan, according to the California Secretary of State's Office.

Draper needs more than 807,000 signatures of registered voters by July 18 to get his proposal on the November ballot.

With 38 million people, California is too big and diverse to properly represent all of its residents, according to Draper's plan.

The six states would be:

South California: San Diego and Orange counties
West California: includes Los Angeles and Santa Barbara
Central California: includes Bakersfield, Fresno and Stockton
Silicon Valley: includes San Francisco and San Jose
North California: Sacramento area
Jefferson: Redding and Eureka areas

Draper said each region has different priorities, and a separate state would allow those areas to focus on what's important to the citizens there. For example, in the south, residents are concerned about immigration, in the Central Valley the big issue is water rights and in the north it's taxation without representation, Draper said.

But the prospect of a six-state California becoming a reality is unlikely. Even if passed by voters, Congress would still have to approve the plan, including the addition of 10 more senators.

"The implications would have tremendous repercussions at every level of government, from Congress all the way down," said Kurt Bardella, president of public relations firm Endeavor Strategic Communications and former aide to Rep. Darrell Issa. "Even just adding five more stars to the American flag."

This isn't the first proposal to split up California. Other proposals over the years have suggested making California two, three or four separate states.

Regards,
Andy

[NE2]

A more recent proposal came forward to split California into six states:

It's already been beaten to death in the fictional ghetto.

[Brandon]

I'm curious and wanting some opinions from those living in these states:

* Illinois:  Have the southern half split away?  I'm thinking having the dividing line somewhere near Galesburg.

Screw that.  How about placing the split along the Will-Cook County Line with NW Cook placed in "Illinois" and the rest of Crook County placed in "Chicago".

[Brandon]

splitting Texas would be very stupid!!

It already has been anyway.  Part went to New Mexico, parts went to Colorado, Kansas, and Wyoming, and a part is now the panhandle of Oklahoma.

[txstateends]

I remember years ago when I lived in Amarillo, there was talk then of splitting off the panhandle into a separate state with Amarillo as the capital.  They seemed to think they were pretty much forgotten in Austin.  But, just as with any splitting or secession talk in TX, it pops up, then it fades just as quickly.

[texaskdog]

Texas:  Split into east and west, with the line running somewhere around Abilene?  Though Texas seems more stable than California, is there any dissatisfaction around El Paso with the rest of the state?

speaking of Texas, if they don't split into east-west, they could follow Chuck Norris who wants to be candidate as future president of Texas
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=91103
http://www.star-telegram.com/804/story/1250723.html

We legally can split into 5 states.  But we don't because we're TEXAS!!!

[1995hoo]

@DTP
Remember, Virginia already split back in 1863.  Up until then West Virginia was part of Virginia.

Also, Maine was part of Massachusetts until Maine was admitted in 1820.

It's often forgotten that Kentucky was originally part of Virginia as well but was split off much earlier (with Virginia's consent, unlike the secession of certain counties in the 1860s).

As far as the current debate over California goes, I understand they're using the referendum process to put the question on the ballot. (I think they may euphemistically call it a "ballot initiative.") As an issue of California law, that might (I emphasize "might") mean the legislature would have to go along with it if the people approved it. But it doesn't mean California would actually split into multiple states. The Constitution provides that Congress has the authority to admit new states. As long as the Democrats control either house of Congress, they will never agree to split up California because the more rural parts of that state as it now exists tend not to be solidly Democrat the way the urban areas are, such that the Democrats in Congress won't want to admit states that might give their electoral votes to the Republicans and that might result in more Republican members of Congress (since each new state would, presumably, have two senators and at least one representative, the Senate would grow to 108 members if you split California into five states; the House would not grow, except maybe for an interim period prior to either the next regular elections or the next census, but the balance of power might shift).

[Doctor Whom]

Every so often, someone proposes to split off either Western Maryland or the Eastern Shore of Maryland as a separate state.

[hbelkins]

I wish evidence would be discovered that shows the Ohio River's course in 1792 went followed the border of Jefferson County, Ky., so we could give Louisville to Indiana.

[Jardine]

No one ever seems to consider having California counties adjacent to, Oregon, for instance, peeling off and joining that state.  The 'overhead' in establishing a new legislature, administration, law enforcement, regulations, etc. is STAGGERING.  It would be way cheaper to sign on to an existing adjacent state if they thought they would get a better deal.

If the true costs of establishing a 'new' state were billed equally and individually to everyone wanting to secede the issue wouldn't even come up.

[kkt]

As long as the Democrats control either house of Congress, they will never agree to split up California because the more rural parts of that state as it now exists tend not to be solidly Democrat the way the urban areas are, such that the Democrats in Congress won't want to admit states that might give their electoral votes to the Republicans and that might result in more Republican members of Congress.

I think you have the partisanship reversed.  The new states created out of California would be more Democratic than Republican, at least on national issues, and therefore it's the Republicans in Congress who would oppose splitting the state.

We legally can split into 5 states.  But we don't because we're TEXAS!!!

I've heard this as an urban legend.  Is there any truth to it?

No one ever seems to consider having California counties adjacent to, Oregon, for instance, peeling off and joining that state.  The 'overhead' in establishing a new legislature, administration, law enforcement, regulations, etc. is STAGGERING.  It would be way cheaper to sign on to an existing adjacent state if they thought they would get a better deal.

If the true costs of establishing a 'new' state were billed equally and individually to everyone wanting to secede the issue wouldn't even come up.

Absolutely true.  However, I've heard that the southern, mountainous counties of Oregon are about as alienated from Salem as the northern, mountainous counties of California are from Sacramento.

[dfilpus]

No one ever seems to consider having California counties adjacent to, Oregon, for instance, peeling off and joining that state.  The 'overhead' in establishing a new legislature, administration, law enforcement, regulations, etc. is STAGGERING.  It would be way cheaper to sign on to an existing adjacent state if they thought they would get a better deal.

If the true costs of establishing a 'new' state were billed equally and individually to everyone wanting to secede the issue wouldn't even come up.

The State of Jefferson http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jefferson_%28proposed_Pacific_state%29

[texaskdog]

http://www.snopes.com/history/american/texas.asp

[BamaZeus]

To take the opposite viewpoint, I personally wonder why we need 2 Dakotas, or why Rhode Island and Connecticut can't merge.  Same deal with Delaware/Maryland. 

If we did that, then splitting other states would work well to keep the round number of 50.


Don't take any of this seriously, btw.

[english si]

As long as the Democrats control either house of Congress, they will never agree to split up California because the more rural parts of that state as it now exists tend not to be solidly Democrat the way the urban areas are, such that the Democrats in Congress won't want to admit states that might give their electoral votes to the Republicans and that might result in more Republican members of Congress.

I think you have the partisanship reversed.  The new states created out of California would be more Democratic than Republican, at least on national issues, and therefore it's the Republicans in Congress who would oppose splitting the state.

However, even if you have four blue states and two red ones*, the Dems only get two senators advantage on the split over now. Importantly for the GOP, it would break up the huge block of electoral college votes that CA gets, giving them some reward for the millions of votes for their candidate.

*South California - R, West California - D, Central California - R, Silicon Valley - D, North California - D, Jefferson - D

[hotdogPi]

My idea for redesigning the states (just my idea):

1. California gets split into California and Alta California. The split will be at the same latitude as Utah/Arizona.

2. Anything inside I-287 and in Long Island becomes the state of NYC.

3. Rhode Island becomes part of Connecticut.

4. Florida gets split into 3 states: Florida, Coast (anything within 20 miles of I-95), and the Conch Republic (Key West).

5. Puerto Rico and Washington DC become states.

6. Texas is split by a straight north-south line from Laredo.

7. North Dakota and South Dakota become Dakota.

[vdeane]

To take the opposite viewpoint, I personally wonder why we need 2 Dakotas, or why Rhode Island and Connecticut can't merge.  Same deal with Delaware/Maryland. 

If we did that, then splitting other states would work well to keep the round number of 50.


Don't take any of this seriously, btw.

The two Dakotas is from the Dakota territory being too big for one state and neither wanting to lose the name (I presume).  Rhode Island was founded by people who were exiled from Massachusetts because they weren't in favor of a theocracy.  Delaware was settled by the Dutch and then given to Pennsylvania (the Duke who fought off Maryland's claim wanted to give William Penn's colony access to the ocean) before breaking off.  The two Carolinas is the result of one colony splitting due to cultural differences that developed.  And Vermont exists because it declared independence while New York and New Hampshire were to busy fighting the British to tend to their land dispute.