Exactly what I was going to post. The territory of Texas was split up into several parts already, and the current State of Texas is just one of those parts.
As for splitting or merging states, here’s the Constitution:
Since that is never going to happen, it’s never going to happen.
The last time it happened was the formation of West Virginia during some unpleasantness. Unless we’re planning a new unpleasantness sometime soon…
Someone should mention that the next time some Texans want to secede.
But that was when it went from being a territory to a state. Didn’t that poster state that Texas could do that again, now, as a state?
I mean, really, who cares about dis-proportionality? We have the House. They have to agree to send a bill to the POTUS. Yeah, sure, they approve judges and such, but I don’t see that Delaware has screwed us in any way.
I was thinking the same thing. Split the state then skuttle the new states’ entry into the Union and your left with an independent Texas with the weirdos in Austin excised. 
Two problems.
First, having the same number of senators for each state is the whole point of the Senate existing in the first place.
Second, they saw this coming when they wrote the Constitution; the one thing that cannot be amended (well, the one thing now that it’s after 1808) is the right of every state to have the same number of senators as every other state.
Is that really true though? All you have to do is amend the Constitution first to get rid of that clause. Sure, it’ll take 2 rounds through the amendment process, but it’s not impossible. Obviously if they tried it would end up in court, and who knows what the justices would think.
The easy solution to that is to redraw the state borders so that each state is of equal population.
ROTFLMAO. That’s the “easy” solution
And I don’t think it could even be done. The population is too unevenly distributed. It is mathematically possible, probably, but the resulting map of states would make the currently gerrymandered state district maps look like a paragon of order and logic.
I’d love it if that clause in the Constitution were to be disappeared, but c’mon: it would clearly defeat the intent of the Founders to do so.
Obviously their prohibition against amending the Constitution to deprive states of equal representation in the Senate would be meaningless if all you had to do was amend the prohibition first, so the very existence of the prohibition strongly implies that it can’t be amended either.
Now the Constitution could theoretically be amended to abolish the Senate entirely, and then replace it with something else that could have differential representation.
This would be a pipe dream, of course.
Utah 2.996 million
Oh im sorry, you did not qualify for land conglomeration, but you DO qualify for land partitioning. Do you want your half name Ute or Tah ?
The Senate was designed the way it was to balance the smaller population states against the larger population states. In that sense it works today exactly as designed.
On the other hand, the number of House representatives was fixed in size by legislation long ago. An argument can certainly be made that there are far too many constituents per representative, and many have suggested that this should be changed.
A question for the lawyers out there. How much of a nightmare would this be from a legal standpoint?
Let’s say the relative populations of Pennsylvania and New York changed so that the borders had to be redrawn in New York’s favor. So the Federal Border Commission takes Erie, Pennsylvania and the rest of Erie County and turns it over to New York.
What happens to the legal status of all those people who were living in Pennsylvania and now find themselves living in New York. Overnight, they suddenly find themselves living under a different set of laws. Does everyone in the county have to got to the DMV and re-register their car? Who’s running the DMV; do the Pennsylvania state employees who lived and worked in Erie get transferred to New York employment? If you’re a state employee and you retire a week after Erie, PA became Erie, NY, who pays your pension, Albany or Harrisburg? If you own a restaurant that has its current health code inspection from Pennsylvania do you have to close down until you can get a New York health code inspection? What happens if you own a house that was compliant with Pennsylvania building codes but isn’t compliant with New York codes? Were people who were arrested before the transfer and are awaiting their trial get tried under Pennsylvania law of New York law? What happens to the casino (it’s one of Erie’s biggest businesses) if it’s legal under Pennsylvania law but not legal under New York law? Does it have to shut down?
Yes, but back in the days of the original 13 colonies, Virginia didn’t have 50 times the population of Delaware.
California today: 39 million people.
Wyoming today: 600,000 people.
Back when the constitution was drafted at least the state populations were within an order of magnitude of each other. That is no longer the case.
As I understood it the Union is 50 sovereign “United States”. Each of which has the power to approve of any changes to its borders.
There have been numerous State squabbles over the smallest pieces of land that go all the way up to the Supreme Court to be decided. The New Hampshire-Maine issue over Navel Shipyard island is the one I am most aware of and that was 10-15 years ago. I’m am sure there are other State squabbles perhaps ongoing.
Now lets just re-draw the State borders someone says, this seems inconvenient to me. Ha ha, Love it.
That would lead to a fascinating semantic argument as to whether removing all Senate representation would unconstitutionally deprive every state of equal representation (they had representation, now they don’t) or not (they’re all still equal).
However, the clause would not prevent the Constitution from being amended to put the Senate in charge of declaring National Whatever Days and remove all its other powers.
Since you’re probably not talking about the Constitutional Convention method, since that is just a wild card and anything can happen - you’re talking about the Senate voting, by a two-thirds majority, to remove all its powers. Just a tad far-fetched.
Can’t the president just have all of congress shot? It seems a popular approach in many parts of the world.
In any case, this is a silly question. It can’t happen without the consent of the states in question, and they will never give such consent. So it’s never going to happen unless we get a political revolution that radically and unilaterally changes our constitution.
It would be easier IMO to start building Megalopolis between Bismark and Pierre with the intent of making the LA basin a radioactive wasteland in 10 years. Move the people to where the land is. Make it undesirable to all live piled one atop another in small landmass areas. Not californy necessarily but Massachusetts or Connecticut.