Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 03-23-2020, 11:10 AM
RickJay is offline
Charter Jays Fan
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Oakville, Canada
Posts: 42,618

If Washington DC became a state, what would it be called?


The District of Columbia is shamefully undemocratically governed, having no representation in the U.S. Congress. It really should be a state, but what would it be called?

"District of Columbia" seems unwieldly. Would it then be the "State of the District of Columbia"? That's stupid. If it is styled as "The District of Columbia" despite being a state - which is fine, as four states are styled "Commonwealth of..." then its short name would be Columbia. "Columbia" is overused, though, and the city is, technically, Washington.

But if it was called the State of Washington... uhh, that's taken.

Should the name change entirely?
__________________
Providing useless posts since 1999!
  #2  
Old 03-23-2020, 11:18 AM
Green Bean is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: NJ, Exit #137
Posts: 12,243
“Columbia” may be overused, but changing the name to something else entirely would be even more confusing. There’s no reason to keep the “District” part - other states having Commonwealth in their names is just a bit of historical detritus. No need to repeat that. So I vote plain old “Columbia.”
  #3  
Old 03-23-2020, 11:26 AM
Jonathan Chance is online now
Domo Arigato Mister Moderato
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: On the run with Kilroy
Posts: 23,441
Yeah, I know that was the proposed name on at least one of the 1990s resolutions from the District Council.

Gotta be named something, after all. As you say, Washington is taken.
  #4  
Old 03-23-2020, 11:28 AM
FinsToTheLeft is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 681
Quote:
Originally Posted by RickJay View Post
The District of Columbia is shamefully undemocratically governed, having no representation in the U.S. Congress. It really should be a state, but what would it be called?
But why should it be a state? I just look a look at Population by State/Territory and DC has fewer people than every state but Vermont and Wyoming and 20% of Puerto Rico. Why don't they just retroceed the rest of DC to Maryland just keep the Capitol/White House as DC?
  #5  
Old 03-23-2020, 11:29 AM
DCnDC's Avatar
DCnDC is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Dueling Grounds
Posts: 13,676
Let's just call it "George." It's the 21st century; we should be on a first-name basis with our country's capital.
  #6  
Old 03-23-2020, 11:48 AM
Little Nemo is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Western New York
Posts: 85,131
We already have Virginia and West Virginia. I say we continue the trend and call it North Virginia.
  #7  
Old 03-23-2020, 12:01 PM
madmonk28 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 12,852
Quote:
Originally Posted by FinsToTheLeft View Post
But why should it be a state? I just look a look at Population by State/Territory and DC has fewer people than every state but Vermont and Wyoming and 20% of Puerto Rico. Why don't they just retroceed the rest of DC to Maryland just keep the Capitol/White House as DC?
Because DC hasn’t been part of Maryland for two hundred years. People always propose these weird hoops to keep Washingtonians from having representation and I always wonder why.
  #8  
Old 03-23-2020, 12:04 PM
Kent Clark's Avatar
Kent Clark is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Posts: 27,758
East Washington
  #9  
Old 03-23-2020, 12:07 PM
Procrustus is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Pacific NW. ¥
Posts: 12,981
Quote:
Originally Posted by madmonk28 View Post
Because DC hasn’t been part of Maryland for two hundred years. People always propose these weird hoops to keep Washingtonians from having representation and I always wonder why.
Well, they would have representation, as citizens of Maryland. (Although I support DC statehood)
  #10  
Old 03-23-2020, 12:29 PM
Omar Little's Avatar
Omar Little is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Within
Posts: 13,497
If this is necessary, it should just be annexed by Virginia. No need for another state.
  #11  
Old 03-23-2020, 01:10 PM
madmonk28 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 12,852
Quote:
Originally Posted by Procrustus View Post
Well, they would have representation, as citizens of Maryland. (Although I support DC statehood)
Yeah, but why? By the same logic, West Virginia should rejoin Virginia as it was part of the state more recently. I know you’re not making the case, but it’s always been an odd suggestion.

Ken Starr, yeah that guy, is surprisingly supportive of DC voting rights:

Quote:
But Starr says despite that silence, Congress has the authority to adapt to the fact that a full-fledged city grew up here; the Constitution expressly says that "The Congress shall have power ... to
exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever" over the District of Columbia.

The longstanding argument against D.C. representation is based on the idea that the Constitution reserves that right for "states," and the District is not a state. But Starr notes that Congress routinely regulates the flow of commerce between the District and the states, and that power is also expressly reserved in the Constitution for Congress to act on commerce "among the several states." That means Congress can also decide that the best way to govern the District is for Washingtonians to have the same voting rights as other taxpaying Americans.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/raw..._for_dc_v.html

But this thread is about to call the State, I think some version of Washington DC is fine, but there’s obviously a lot of work to get there.
  #12  
Old 03-23-2020, 01:12 PM
Larry Borgia's Avatar
Larry Borgia is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Washington DC
Posts: 10,971
Quote:
Originally Posted by Omar Little View Post
If this is necessary, it should just be annexed by Virginia. No need for another state.
Maryland would make more sense, but neither Maryland or Virginia want DC, and most residents, myself included, would prefer our own statehood. More people live here than in Wyoming.

ETA: I don't really care what it would be called. Since acronyms with meanings removed are the rage now--think BP or KFC--I'd like DC. But anything's fine.

Last edited by Larry Borgia; 03-23-2020 at 01:15 PM.
  #13  
Old 03-23-2020, 01:38 PM
Intergalactic Gladiator's Avatar
Intergalactic Gladiator is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Chicago
Posts: 12,605
Quote:
Originally Posted by DCnDC View Post
Let's just call it "George." It's the 21st century; we should be on a first-name basis with our country's capital.
Don't let people vote for the name on the Internet because then everyone will choose "Captially McCaptialface."
  #14  
Old 03-23-2020, 01:40 PM
pulykamell is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: SW Side, Chicago
Posts: 49,361
I would just go with DC. Why complicate things? It’s already there on a bunch of forms and a recognized postal state abbreviation and well known as that.
  #15  
Old 03-23-2020, 01:48 PM
BwanaBob's Avatar
BwanaBob is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Maryland
Posts: 4,345
I recently read it is to be called Douglass Commonwealth, after Frederick Douglass. It can retain its DC abbreviation for postal purposes.
__________________
Go wherever you can be
And live for the day
It's only wear and tear
-IQ
  #16  
Old 03-23-2020, 01:52 PM
Ravenman is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 27,888
I’d propose the Republic of Trump if it would get the job done.

Then in Trumpian style, we would change our minds immediately after getting what we want.
  #17  
Old 03-23-2020, 04:04 PM
ftg's Avatar
ftg is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Not the PNW :-(
Posts: 21,672
Since the SW part was returned to Virginia in 1846, I don't see why most of the rest can't be returned to MD.

Key areas around the Mall and whatnot could be kept as the DC. No real houses except for the White one. So no voters. The Feds run those areas as they do now.

MD gets a few more House seats ...

And that's where it falls apart. These would likely be Democratic seats and getting 2/3 of everybody to agree to do that isn't going to happen.

So much for rationally doing things.
  #18  
Old 03-23-2020, 04:39 PM
rbroome is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 3,606
If we were being semi-rational (and so this post goes down in flames) the logical thing to do is to take everything inside the beltway (got to stop somewhere) and make it a new state. Large geographic parts of Virginia would be happy to lose all those northern liberals. Maryland would be consoled with 2 more democratic senators, governance of the Metro would become somewhat easier. It all could make some sense.
  #19  
Old 03-23-2020, 04:52 PM
Wilson is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Metro NYC
Posts: 1,522
It should be annexed by Delaware.

Because I like weird geographical quirks.
  #20  
Old 03-23-2020, 05:01 PM
Little Nemo is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Western New York
Posts: 85,131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wilson View Post
It should be annexed by Delaware.

Because I like weird geographical quirks.
Then let's just have it annexed by the state of Washington and clear up the redundancy.
  #21  
Old 03-23-2020, 05:21 PM
Hari Seldon is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Trantor
Posts: 13,678
Why would it take 2/3? Congress admits states by joint resolutions.

I think Columbia is the obvious solution. Oddly enough, that name was originally proposed for Washington state, but was rejected because it would get confused with DC. I guess the city was not commonly called Washington in those days.
  #22  
Old 03-23-2020, 05:50 PM
susan's Avatar
susan is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Coastal USA
Posts: 10,031
There's already a Columbia, Maryland, not very far away. My vote at the moment is for Shitsylvania.
  #23  
Old 03-23-2020, 05:53 PM
Musicat is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Sturgeon Bay, WI USA
Posts: 21,808
It would be called DC, pronounced Dick.
  #24  
Old 03-23-2020, 06:15 PM
Magiver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Dayton Ohio USA
Posts: 29,033
It would be called Confusion.
  #25  
Old 03-23-2020, 06:19 PM
RickJay is offline
Charter Jays Fan
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Oakville, Canada
Posts: 42,618
Quote:
Originally Posted by FinsToTheLeft View Post
But why should it be a state?
Having it be a part of Maryland would be opkay too, but that kind of takes the fun out of the thread.

It should be a state or part of a state, though, because that is the right thing to do.
__________________
Providing useless posts since 1999!
  #26  
Old 03-23-2020, 06:21 PM
Acsenray is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 37,156
Activists around here seem to prefer “State if New Columbia,” but I would just call it the “State of Columbia.”
__________________
*I'm experimenting with E, em, and es and emself as pronouns that do not indicate any specific gender nor exclude any specific gender.
  #27  
Old 03-23-2020, 06:22 PM
RickJay is offline
Charter Jays Fan
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Oakville, Canada
Posts: 42,618
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hari Seldon View Post
Why would it take 2/3? Congress admits states by joint resolutions.
It's not admitting it as a state that requires an amendment; it's making it not exclusively a federal jurisdiction so it's a territory to be admitted. Article I, Section 8, gives Congress exclusive legislative power over the designated capital. To make it a state - and therefore to have its own Constitutional powers - you have to rescind that statement.
__________________
Providing useless posts since 1999!
  #28  
Old 03-23-2020, 06:31 PM
Ravenman is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 27,888
Quote:
Originally Posted by RickJay View Post
It's not admitting it as a state that requires an amendment; it's making it not exclusively a federal jurisdiction so it's a territory to be admitted. Article I, Section 8, gives Congress exclusive legislative power over the designated capital. To make it a state - and therefore to have its own Constitutional powers - you have to rescind that statement.
Incorrect. The Federal district to be administered by Congress would consist only of Federal property. Everything outside of that Federal property (that is, if it is not a government building, National Park, etc) would then be part of the new state.
  #29  
Old 03-23-2020, 07:02 PM
Bear_Nenno's Avatar
Bear_Nenno is offline
Endowment Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Bavaria
Posts: 9,391
District 9
  #30  
Old 03-23-2020, 07:02 PM
UDS is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 9,163
If you can have the state of West Virginia, you can have the state of East Virginia also, surely? There would be a pleasing symmetry there.
  #31  
Old 03-23-2020, 07:07 PM
pool is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Inside
Posts: 4,981
Winchestertonfieldville

Or maybe
MarBarry
__________________
"You can do anything you set your mind to...But money helps"
  #32  
Old 03-23-2020, 07:09 PM
scr4 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Alabama
Posts: 16,472
Most people in the world think "Washington = capital city of the US." So let's call the new state Washington, and rename the current State of Washington to something else.
  #33  
Old 03-23-2020, 07:25 PM
MEBuckner's Avatar
MEBuckner is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Posts: 12,383
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ravenman View Post
Incorrect. The Federal district to be administered by Congress would consist only of Federal property. Everything outside of that Federal property (that is, if it is not a government building, National Park, etc) would then be part of the new state.
The bulk of the current District of Columbia could certainly be either retroceded to Maryland, or admitted as a state, without a constitutional amendment. From this map, you could include everything in the new state (or if y'all insist, in the area retroceded to Maryland) except for the grounds of the White House (including the Old Executive Office Building and the Treasury Building, and the Ellipse), the National Mall (all the way from the Lincoln Memorial on the west and the Jefferson Memorial on the south, and including the Smithsonian and the National Gallery of Art), the U.S. Capitol (including the main Congressional office buildings), the Supreme Court, the Library of Congress, and (I think) everything in that triangle between Pennsylvania Avenue and Constitution Avenue. I believe all of that (contiguous and reasonably compact) area is already federal lands and U.S. government buildings, monuments, and museums; and most importantly (with the exception of one family) no one lives there. That would constitute the area over which Congress exercises "exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever"; such a mini-federal district would obviously not exceed "ten Miles square" and so would be compatible with the Constitution (the District of Columbia already having been reduced from a full "ten Miles square"--that is, 100 square miles--to its current area of 68 and a bit square miles back in 1834).

Somewhat paradoxically, the issue would be the 23rd Amendment, which allows the "District constituting the seat of Government of the United States" to select three electors in presidential elections. Unless we want to give every incumbent POTUS the right to appoint three of his or her own electors (in addition to the 538 selected by the now-51 states) we'd need a constitutional amendment to repeal the 23rd Amendment. Which should be pretty straightforward to pass, you would think, if Congress has admitted the rest of D.C. as a new state, but in this Age of Gridlock, who the hell knows? Probably best to first pass the 28th(?) Amendment as a conditional amendment along the lines of "Upon the admission by the Congress as a state of any part of the district which currently constitutes the seat of Government of the United States, the twenty-third article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States shall be thereby repealed".



I was under the impression that people had already settled on "New Columbia", but apparently there is now a move to call it "Douglass Commonwealth". Whatever the people of the new state want, I would say--just hold a referendum. (Maybe with two or three choices; let people submit names, but nothing automatically gets put on the final selection ballot, to avoid "CapitalCityMcCapitalFace" type high jinks.)
__________________
"In our obscurity, in all this vastness, there is no hint that help will come from elsewhere to save us from ourselves." -- Carl Sagan

Ceterum censeo imperium Trumpi esse delendam
  #34  
Old 03-23-2020, 10:10 PM
Daylate is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 1,690
I vote for "Area 51"
  #35  
Old 03-23-2020, 10:21 PM
Lumpy's Avatar
Lumpy is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota US
Posts: 16,859
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kent Clark View Post
East Washington
This is what it's called in J.D. Robb's In Death novels, set in the period of 2059-2062 A.D.
  #36  
Old 03-24-2020, 12:08 AM
Lord Feldon's Avatar
Lord Feldon is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Ohio, USA
Posts: 6,825
Quote:
Originally Posted by MEBuckner View Post
Somewhat paradoxically, the issue would be the 23rd Amendment, which allows the "District constituting the seat of Government of the United States" to select three electors in presidential elections. Unless we want to give every incumbent POTUS the right to appoint three of his or her own electors (in addition to the 538 selected by the now-51 states) we'd need a constitutional amendment to repeal the 23rd Amendment.
The current statehood bill provides for expedited consideration of a repeal amendment, but in the meantime, after statehood, it prohibits anyone from having voting rights in the rump district by assigning them to their most recent residence before the district, and also prohibits the rump district from appointing presidential electors; the district chooses its electors "in such manner as the Congress may direct," so Congress would just direct that the manner be nothing.

Last edited by Lord Feldon; 03-24-2020 at 12:10 AM.
  #37  
Old 03-24-2020, 03:22 AM
dtilque is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: My own private Nogero
Posts: 7,653
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hari Seldon View Post
Oddly enough, that name was originally proposed for Washington state, but was rejected because it would get confused with DC. I guess the city was not commonly called Washington in those days.
The city was, but that was in 1852 which was before the city had expanded to encompass the entire district. I visited there 20-odd years ago and noticed that most people refered to the place as DC, not as Washington.

As for why it's very unlikely to get statehood, the two senators and congressperson they elect will most likely be Democrats. More or less the same reason why the State of Jefferson is a non-starter except the other party. Well, OK, Jefferson would have significant problems (the country doesn't really need an instant western equivalent of Mississippi), but DC as a state would have a few problems as well.
  #38  
Old 03-24-2020, 04:46 AM
Johanna's Avatar
Johanna is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Altered States of America
Posts: 13,768
East Washington is the only one that makes logical sense. It would be better if the current Washington were renamed West Washington, but they had it as a state name first, so you can't ask them to change it.

The city of Washington used to be only a relatively small part of the District. The other cities were Georgetown and Anacostia, and outside them was Washington County. But eventually the city of Washington annexed all of that and became coterminous with the District, and Washington County became extinct.

Now there are two names where only one is really needed, but neither can be deleted, because of tradition and history. Being coterminous makes it a puzzler whichever way you take it.

My sentiment would be to revert all the way back to the original Indian name: Anacostia.
  #39  
Old 03-24-2020, 06:24 AM
Lord Feldon's Avatar
Lord Feldon is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Ohio, USA
Posts: 6,825
nm

Last edited by Lord Feldon; 03-24-2020 at 06:24 AM. Reason: missed a post
  #40  
Old 03-24-2020, 06:56 AM
jerez is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 838
Why not Washington City? Even if it's made a state, that name would identify it well and unambiguously.
  #41  
Old 03-24-2020, 07:00 AM
MEBuckner's Avatar
MEBuckner is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Posts: 12,383
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johanna View Post
The city of Washington used to be only a relatively small part of the District. The other cities were Georgetown and Anacostia, and outside them was Washington County. But eventually the city of Washington annexed all of that and became coterminous with the District, and Washington County became extinct....

My sentiment would be to revert all the way back to the original Indian name: Anacostia.
I don't believe Anacostia was ever one of the cities within the District of Columbia; originally, the District included the City of Washington (then much smaller in extent), two other cities of Georgetown and Alexandria, and two counties, Washington County (the non-urban area of the District east of the Potomac) and Alexandria County (the non-urban area of the District west of the Potomac). Alexandria and Alexandria County were the part retroceded to Virginia (in 1846, not 1834 as I mistakenly said above); Alexandria County become the current Arlington County (and you can still see the old perfectly square border of the original District of Columbia in the Arlington County line); the independent City of Alexandria has since annexed some territory beyond the limits of the original District.

A new state formed from D.C. could be called Anacostia if that's what the people of D.C. wanted--it's a pretty name, really--but I suspect the name "Anacostia" is these days too strongly identified with one particular section of the city for that to work.
  #42  
Old 03-24-2020, 07:10 AM
BobLibDem is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Home 07 NCAA HockeyChamps
Posts: 22,218
Washington AC?
Washington Marvel?

I like Columbia. Of course, that is reminiscent of Columbus which isn't exactly trendy these days. One section of the city is already called Georgetown, how about Marthatown?

Whatever, it will never happen. Republicans would never allow an extra 3 Democratic electors.
  #43  
Old 03-24-2020, 08:02 AM
Lord Feldon's Avatar
Lord Feldon is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Ohio, USA
Posts: 6,825
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobLibDem View Post
Whatever, it will never happen. Republicans would never allow an extra 3 Democratic electors.
The two senators would be a big deal, but it already has three electors, and there's little chance that the rump district would get to keep those three in addition to the new state's three. So assuming the House of Representatives wasn't increased in size, this would reduce the total number of electors by one at the next census (so only 269 would be needed to win), and there's every possibility that that elector would come out of the Democrats' total depending on how the next census went (Rhode Island is always on the bubble of losing a seat).

Last edited by Lord Feldon; 03-24-2020 at 08:06 AM.
  #44  
Old 03-24-2020, 09:29 AM
BobLibDem is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Home 07 NCAA HockeyChamps
Posts: 22,218
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Feldon View Post
The two senators would be a big deal, but it already has three electors, and there's little chance that the rump district would get to keep those three in addition to the new state's three. So assuming the House of Representatives wasn't increased in size, this would reduce the total number of electors by one at the next census (so only 269 would be needed to win), and there's every possibility that that elector would come out of the Democrats' total depending on how the next census went (Rhode Island is always on the bubble of losing a seat).
Oh duh, my mistake. Of course DC already has electors. But two automatic D Senators and one automatic D House seat wouldn't fly with Republicans.
  #45  
Old 03-24-2020, 10:20 AM
racer72 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Auburn, WA
Posts: 6,533
Quote:
Originally Posted by scr4 View Post
Most people in the world think "Washington = capital city of the US." So let's call the new state Washington, and rename the current State of Washington to something else.
The residents of George would not like this.
  #46  
Old 03-24-2020, 10:34 AM
RaftPeople is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: 7-Eleven
Posts: 6,852
Washington 2.0
  #47  
Old 03-24-2020, 01:02 PM
Acsenray is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 37,156
Just to be clear, the “City of Washington” is a phantom entity or “paper city.” So far as I know, there are no municipal governmental entities or services whose name incorporates the phrase “City Of Washington.” They are in the name of the District of Columbia.”

And local residents almost always refer to it as “the District” or “D.C.” I believe even the Washington Post styles it as “the District.”

The only entities I can think of with “Washington” in the name are multi-jurisdictional—Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority and Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority. And no one ever references them by their full name.

So I don’t think any local residents would miss the “Washington” moniker.
__________________
*I'm experimenting with E, em, and es and emself as pronouns that do not indicate any specific gender nor exclude any specific gender.
  #48  
Old 03-24-2020, 03:31 PM
ftg's Avatar
ftg is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Not the PNW :-(
Posts: 21,672
Regarding 2/3 vote vs. simple majority to retrocede most of DC.

Due to the elector thing, you'd definitely want to amend the Constitution. A simple state line redrawing only requires state and Congressional approval.

It would be a big problem if a tiny number of voters got to pick 1 elector (the minimum it could have). This isn't Wyoming, after all.

I forgot to mention that a large scale, but not 100% retrocession would avoid the state name issue. It would be called "Maryland".
  #49  
Old 03-24-2020, 03:58 PM
susan's Avatar
susan is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Coastal USA
Posts: 10,031
Go with local pronunciation and call it "Warshington."
  #50  
Old 03-24-2020, 11:20 PM
Gatopescado is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: on your last raw nerve
Posts: 23,516
Quote:
Originally Posted by Musicat View Post
It would be called DC, pronounced Dick.
I think we have a winner.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Daylate View Post
I vote for "Area 51"
Already got one, where little of note happens. And lots of toxic waste.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:25 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017