From **(mostly) Harmless **
My suggestion is to give Southern California back to Mexico. Help right an old wrong. And I think it would be hilarious to see a statue of the Virgin Mary on practically every street corner in Hollywood.
Yes and the Senate too.
Sure the states are distinct cultures. They each have unique laws, customs and histories, which attract people in different ways. If you don’t consider Texas and Oregon to have different cultures then I don’t know what to think.
There is considerable doubt as to how different any separate “cultures” there are in the United States and where the boundaries are to be found. To the extent that there might be, I believe that state lines are not a very good guide to identifying them. As far as laws, histories, and customs are concerned, I think that Americans in general have much more in common with each other than not. And to the extent that there are differences, they are more along the lines of rural and urban, which are not well defined by state boundaries.
No. Freakin’ Jeffersonian Separatists. Get off my radio!
Not really. I mean, I’m not really attached at all to the current boundaries of Ohio, and I don’t think they really enclose any society that’s particularly distinct from that of neighboring states, but I also can’t see how changing them would really better anything.
There’s long been a push in my state, New South Wales, for the New England area to secede and become a new state. I can’t see any particular merit in the proposal.
It isn’t evident? Why don’t we start with the thing that has been mentioned in this thread. You can’t formulate or implement public policy in any rational way if people who are actually part of your community – people who benefit from the public and private advantages and amenities, and more importantly help create the problems facing the community – can simply step across the border when it comes to paying the costs or participate in the solutions. Is that good for a start?
OK, I just wanted the argument spelled out.
Forget about splitting states up. Just sign over Idaho to me and be done with it!
Posting from Montreal. I would love to see the province split it two, with the western half of Montreal, parts of the province along the VT border and the region around Ottawa (now called Gatineau) put into one half that would be officially bilingual and the rest of it put into the other half and if they want to be unilingual French, let them. For the past month, the province has been in an uproar because the Canadiens chose an acting hockey coach who doesn’t speak French and this is considered an enormous affront to the citizenry. Don’t they have more important things to worry about? Guess not. I would assume that the second province would want to secede and I would say let them do that too. Western Quebec could include a corridor to New Brunswick.
Someone mentioned what he called the “T” in Pennsylvania. I assume he meant Erie County. No way that is not part of the commonwealth. It used to be NY state but PA bought and paid for it so that they would have an outlet on the lake. I was listening when I was forced to take the history of the commonwealth. But it might make sense to divide it between the part that is dependent economically on Philadelphia and the part dependent on Pittsburgh. (There might be a third state in the middle called Paterno.)
Mine already is. 
Wisconsin is being split up?
The real problem with any of these problems & solutions is that borders are bright lines. Culture & attitude & allegiance are not bright lines; they smoosh (technical term) smoothly from one extreme to the other across many hundreds of miles.
I agree that rural vs. urban or at least low-density versus mid-density vs high-density is by far the biggest difference we see today. And that a major driver of government ineffectivity is the competition to dump problems in somebody else’s district while reserving the bennies for our own. (ref discussion of split conurbations above). Whether a person thinks that’s a good or a bad thing is mostly a matter of political leaning.
I know we’re just shooting the breeze here, but I go back to my point that until somebody says what problem they’re trying to solve with their proposed change, the proposal is meaningless & it’s impossible to evaluate the proposal’s merit according to its intended purpose, much less to evaluate any other effects.
I’m gonna suggest that most people at first blush would like to create smaller and hence more economically & culturally homogenous divisions. That way government would be more “responsive” to their wants (not needs). Think suburbia writ large, with districts segregated carefully by color & income. What that would actually do in practice is greatly increase single-issue, zero-sum, and NIMBY thinking and encourage an even more obstructionist log-jammed legislative system.
And it would greatly increase the total cost of the executive & legislative side of government through duplication. e.g. All of New England would fit neatly inside greater LA with much reduced duplication of agencies.
So the sensible and efficiet thing is to go the other way, right? Not really. Imagine abolishing the states & counties & leaving the Feds for all the big issues and the cities/towns providing police, fire, and dog catcher services and maybe zoning & building plans approvals. That’s not an obvious winner either.
The OP is 100% right the current arrangements of states, provinces, etc., is mostly just random legacy. But it’s the random legacy we’re all used to. If we re-ran the history of the last 400-ish years the names & boundaries would all be different. Some better, some worse.
Yep - I’m in Northern Virginia and we’re politically, culturally and economically VERY different from pretty much anywhere else in the state with the possible exception of the Tidewater area (for non-Virginians, that means the southeastern part of the state, around Norfolk etc.). From that standpoint we’d be better off separated from the rest of the state. My county alone has more people in it that most cities (hell, if you look at Wyoming and Alaska, it has more people than some states). But we’re ruled by Richmond.
Scarlett is making sad faces because when the State of Wisconsin was created more than 160 years ago, it didn’t incorporate the entire extent of the Wisconsin Territory?
Splitting California would never work. We could never agree on who gets stuck with Bakersfield.
As a former Californian …
Sure we could. It gets its own mini-state, kinda like DC. And all the sewers from all the other was-California-chunks will drain to there. Easy peasy.
Don’t they do that already? Sure smells like it.