Sorry, that’s actually New Madrid, Missouri.
It would be an internation merger, but it would be lovbely to have Ohio and Ontario merge. The resulting state/province could use the letters in common in the existing names, perhaps repeated, as in “Oio” or “Oiooio”. (The pronunciation is left as an exercise for the reader, but it might depend on whether you lived north or south of Lake Erie.)
I remember a story on N.P.R. about all the deciphering that Postal Service workers have to do. Apparently, the most commonly confused state names on addressed letters are “Ohio,” “Iowa,” and “Idaho.” One letter was addressed to a place in “Ohidowa.”
Could Rhode Island and Wyoming merge? It would have the advantages of increasing territory for one, while increasing population density for the other. 
If Maine and Idaho merged they would have a monopoly on potatoes. If Georgia and South Carolina merged, it would truly be the “Peach State”. 
I remember my high school history teacher telling us that Texas is unique in that the Congressional action making it a state included the provision that it could at any time it wanted divide itself into 4 separate states. In the 50 years since then I have never seen this mentioned anywhere else. Did Miss Thompson really know what she was talking about?
What North Carolina?
Well, there is a town named Ohiowa. It’s in Nebraska.
Last I heard, the state of Washington produces more potatoes than Idaho.
While it is true that the accession treaty included such a provision (actually five not four), it states that such subdivision would take place “under the provisions of the Federal Constitution.” The constitution already provides for subdivision of states (as revealed in the discussion above). This implies that Texas has no more right to subdivide than any other state does. Indeed, if that provision has any effect, it might only be that Texas, unlike all the other states, is limited to subdividing itself into no more than five new states; whereas other states are not subject to such a provision.
Growing up in Western Colorado (west of the Continental Divide), we often had political clashes with the eastern part of the state over water rights. They had dug a tunnel through a mountain and erected a wall that diverted melted snow that would’ve fed the Colorardo River into the tunnel and into Denver’s water supply. Eastern Utah had similar issues with Western Utah (Salt Lake City needing a massive fresh-water supply since their lake water isn’t potable).
So there was talk about Western Colorado and Eastern Utah (the part whose drainage was the Colorado River) seceding from their respective states and merging into a new state. But naturally, the other halves wouldn’t like that their natural resources would be in another state’s control. And since the bulk of the original states’ populations (and state legislators) were there, there would be no way that the resolution would ever pass.
And there’s a piece of Kentucky that’s completely cut off from the rest of the state. You have to go through Missouri or Tennessee to get to it.
Or, following from a tourism ad from the early 80s, “Ontariohio”.
DC was actually created from land from both Mayland (about 70 sq.mi.) and Virginia (about 30 sq. mi.)
Question - I could swear I heard on a trip to Washington’s estate Mt. Vernon that the Virginia component of DC was actually land that was selected by Gerorge Washington, from land that he owned, and that he was handsomely compensated for the land. I haven’t been able to (easily) Google a verification. Anyone know?
As was noted previously in this thread, the Virginia portion was returned to Virginia well before the Civil War. That portion now forms Arlington County (formerly Alexandria County) and the northern part of Alexandria City.
It’s possible that they’d lose (or gain) a Representative as well.
North Dakota currently has only one Representative, and South Dakota has two. The sum of their populations might not be enough to get three in hypothetical Dakota.
According to Wikipedia, the population of ND is 633K and that of SD is 764K. The formula for apportioning representatives is here. I didn’t feel like working it out, but someone else might.
My point was that one county in South Carolina produces more peaches than the whole state of Georgia, yet Georgia calls itself The Peach State.
I knew I should research that fact before I posted. Thanks for straightening things out.
That someone else is me.
I wrote a script to do the calculation according to the Census algorithm. Combining the two Dakotas into one state and using the 2000 Census numbers, I find that Dakota would have 2 representatives. So neither gain nor loss.
But, something interesting occurred. I checked the numbers for the other states, for curiosity. Under the same conditions, North Carolina would lose one seat (for 12 total), and Utah would gain one seat (for 4 total)! Very interesting.
A small piece of New Jersey is owned by Delaware. I believe there is a Confederate graveyard on the site.
Whooosh!!