Splitting states

[Revive 755]

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

* California:  I've heard the northern half (the part north of LA, or the part north of Sacramento) has considered breaking away.  Would it really be better to split California into three separate states.  Maybe a South California from the Mexican border to somewhere near Bakersfield, a Middle California from Bakersfield to somewhere near Oroville, and a North California for the rest of the state?

* 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?

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

* Kansas:  I believe some book I don't remember the title of said the part west of US 81 wanted to break off instead of having their tax dollars sent to the eastern half (like southern Illinois feels).

[yanksfan6129]

New York: There are common proposals to separate downstate, cosmopolitan New York with Upstate New York, mainly because of taxes. People that live in Westchester, Long Island, and NYC commonly complain that they pay the vast majority of the states' taxes, but they get a lesser amount of benefit from them (i.e. state spends more on upstate ny). America the Book jokingly referred to the new state created out of Manhattan and Westchester as "Manhattachester."

[rawr apples]

the Upper Peninsula of Michigan is still kindof sorta trying to break away and form 'Superior'. Not gonna happen though, they rely too much on the LP for money

Also, Eastern Oregon wanted to break away because their taxes were being spent in the valley and not on them.

[deathtopumpkins]

Never heard any official proposals on splitting Virginia again, but NoVA/Western VA and Richmond/Hampton Roads sure seem like completely different states to many Virginians.

As for NY splitting, would the new state formed out of NYC absorb parts of Connecticut and Jersey too, so the metro area would be in mostly one state?

[mapman]

California:  While breaking up the state does come up every so often, but the topography, politics, water, and economic factors make it very unlikely.

Some parts of the state, such as the backside of the Sierra Nevada mountains, are rather inaccessible from northern California (especially during the winter).  Therefore, splitting the state near Bakersfield won't work, unless the new Southern California also took the backside of the Sierras.

Politically, the S.F. Bay Area, Sacramento, the North Coast, and Los Angeles are generally Democratic strongholds, while the Central Valley, Orange County, San Diego, and the northeast corner are more Republican strongholds.  Breaking up the state into northern, central, and southern pieces would leave the state just as split politically as it is now, leaving those new states in just as much political disfunction as the existing California.

Water is probably the biggest factor.  Southern California gets most of its water from the Sierras and the Colorado River.  Northern California takes it from local reservoirs, the Sierras, and the Central Valley.  If new state lines break up those water pipelines and aqueducts between multiple states, the Water Wars will become even more heated than they are now.

Economically, each portion of the state has its individual strengths that balance the other.  Southern California has tourism, the TV/Movie industry, and some high tech.  The Bay Area has high tech, some agriculture, and some tourism.  Northern California has mostly eco-tourism.  The Central Valley has agriculture.  As individual pieces, no one area would probably have a sufficient tax base to succeed, but as a whole, it works better.  (Notice that I did NOT use the word "great.")

Overall, I think that it's in the best interest of us Californians to remain as one state.

P.S.:  You may have also hear of The State of Jefferson, which was once proposed to take a handful of counties in extreme northern California and extreme southern Oregon and combine them into a new state.  That's also never come into fruition.

[mightyace]

@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.

[froggie]

Never heard any official proposals on splitting Virginia again, but NoVA/Western VA and Richmond/Hampton Roads sure seem like completely different states to many Virginians.

No official proposals (since it's unlikely Richmond and the General Assembly would approve anyway), but it gets discussed up here from time to time and also got a cover article in the Washingtonian magazine back in November.  They basically "draw the border" at the Rappahannock and the Blue Ridge, including Stafford, Fauquier, and Loudoun Counties in with Northern Virginia, but keeping Winchester, Front Royal, Culpeper, and Fredericksburg in with "mainstream" Virginia.

[un1]

Northern Ontario and Toronto want to split out of Ontario (Yes, Province of Toronto).
Most Northern Ontario cities have considered moving to Manitoba, and that includes Thunder Bay moving to Minnesota.

[Chris]

I think the New York/Chicago issue is a problem in many countries, out-of-towners feel left behind because most focus seems to be on the major city, while citizens from those countries complain about taxes being spend in rural areas.

[mightyace]

Posted on: March 18 at 10:41:31 AM
Posted by: Chris

I think the New York/Chicago issue is a problem in many countries, out-of-towners feel left behind because most focus seems to be on the major city, while citizens from those countries complain about taxes being spend in rural areas.

I agree with you there, Chris.  Part of the whole debate about Tolling I-80 in Pennsylvania involves using that money (directly or indirectly) to fund transportation including public transit in Philadelphia and Pittsburgh.  If you've ever looked at a map, it doesn't go anywhere near either of PA's two big cities.

However, there would be no good way to split PA up on this basis.  I have, at times, though of splitting PA east-west using the Susquehanna as a starting point.  My reason is simple.  Philly is definitely an east coast city.  While Pittsburgh has more in common with Midwestern cities like Cleveland and Detroit than its cross state cousin.

[Stephane Dumas]

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

[vdeane]

Upstate NY wants to separate from NYC too.  The reason is simple: the bosses from NYC run our government.  Recently a lot of upstate taxpayer money was spent of a football stadium in Manhattan.

[deathtopumpkins]

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

That's why I said "split again." 

And froggie, that border actually somewhat makes sense, though I'd move it possibly a bit farther south.

[BigMattFromTexas]

If enyone tries to split Texas I think i'll have to hurt them very badly   
   
                        LOL (maybe)

[yanksfan6129]

Motto of each new Texas (assuming they get split): They Messed With Texas!

[Bryant5493]

Well, my comment isn't about splitting states -- it's about splitting of a county. Some residents of Fulton County (GA) -- as well as some politicians -- are talking about re-creating Milton County. Milton County joined Fulton County during the Great Depression, to save money. Fulton County is currently 70 miles, from head to tail. North Fulton forms the "head." Atlanta forms the "mid-section." South Fulton forms the "butt" or the "tail."

Milton County would be comprised of Alpharetta, Johns Creek, Milton, Mountain Park, Roswell and Sandy Springs. Most of the wealth in Fulton County is in the northern portion of the county, which would be Milton County, if the Georgia House and Senate passed the bill. Right now, Georgia can't have more than 159 counties. Some legislators have been in talks, so I've heard, to get some of the smaller south Georgia counties to consolidate (which wouldn't be a bad idea).

This is really, when it comes down to it, a racial issue. North Fulton County is mostly white, while South Fulton County is mostly black. The northern portion became fully municipalized (creating Johns Creek, Milton and Sandy Springs), so that most of their income would stay in their communities and not trickle down to South Fulton.


Be well,

Bryant

[mightyace]

This is really, when it comes down to it, a racial issue. North Fulton County is mostly white, while South Fulton County is mostly black. The northern portion became fully municipalized (creating Johns Creek, Milton and Sandy Springs), so that most of their income would stay in their communities and not trickle down to South Fulton.

Well, Bryant5493, I can't say that you're wrong and there is a high probability that you are correct.  However, there is another motivation that may also be coming into play.  That is simple greed.  The richer people of North Fulton don't want to subsidize their poorer neighbors to the south.

This issue of distribution of tax dollars from one area to another has been a common theme in many of the post in this topic.

[Bryant5493]

mightyace said:
Well, Bryant5493, I can't say that you're wrong and there is a high probability that you are correct.  However, there is another motivation that may also be coming into play.  That is simple greed.  The richer people of North Fulton don't want to subsidize their poorer neighbors to the south.

This issue of distribution of tax dollars from one area to another has been a common theme in many of the post in this topic.

Bryant5943 says:
That's just the P.C. way of saying what I said. 

But, seriously, I don't think that North Fultonities should have to bear all of the burden for subsidizing the South Fulton region of the county. However, many businesses have left South Fulton, due to the influx of crime and the dilapidation of the different neighborhoods: Old National, East Point, College Park, some areas of southern Atlanta, etc. The businesses are slowly returning, so hopefully things will improve here. There is some noticeable improvement, but there is a long road ahead, I think.

In short, bite the bullet or leave. (This comment is not reflected at you, mightyace, as you're in Middle Tennessee.)


Be well,

Bryant

[Revive 755]

To add to the talk of splitting counties, there was some talk last spring about the southern half of St. Louis County in Missouri splitting away.  I'm not quite in agreement with the main reason for the split, which was residents mad at a new county program to have only one garbage hauler for small areas of the county instead of around a dozen.  I don't remember all the details, but one of the county's reasons was to reduce the number of trucks on the subdivsions streets, and I think there was an opt-out provision for subdivisions.

There are plenty of other reasons why South County should break away.  First issue is the lack of decent access to the county seat in Clayton and the nearby commercial areas.  At least with the partial completion of the Highway 40 rebuild there is a non-direct freeway route (didn't use to be an EB US 40 to NB I-170 ramp), but that option doesn't work well with I-270 overloading between I-44 and US 44.  Can't use I-55 to US 40 for an indirect freeway route from the east, as the planned access between I-55 and US 40 died.  Access using arterial streets is just as bad, with several missing links hindering access.

Then there's where the money is going/how it's being spent.  The light rail line promised as a replacement for the I-170 extension is on indefinite hold - although that's true with any light rail expansion around St. Louis right now - but there was a lot more consideration being given to a new one connecting Clayton to Westport (area near the I-270/MO 364 interchange).

But even then, I'm not sure I'd want to see South County split since it would become like St. Louis City with a four-way stop every block.

[Dougtone]

That football stadium in Manhattan was never built due to community opposition.

[Sykotyk]

If you drive up I-15 in California, the road is adopted by the "State of Jefferson Chamber of Commerce".

There's also the proposed "State of Lincoln" which would've been eastern Washington and Oregon along with the northern part of Idaho.

Sykotyk

[Voyager]

I don't see them splitting California.

[ComputerGuy]

Linclon! Eatern WA and Panhandle..

[BigMattFromTexas]

splitting Texas would be very stupid!!

[yanksfan6129]

again, motto of each new Texas, Matt, would be: THEY MESSED WITH TEXAS!