Do you think some U.S. states should the RIGHT to become a NEW state?

Question

In the Pacific Northwest, I hear it all the time where political citizens want part of their own state to break away and create their own.

Examples include the split between North and South California or the division between Western Washington and Eastern Washington.

Based on your knowledge, would you or would you not agree with this political idea? And if so why?

Answer 1

This is something that is possible but requires great effort to make it happen. There are good reasons for changing our states' boundaries. Western and eastern Washngton have very different interests and economies, as do northern and southern California. I grew up in the San Joaquin Valley of California. I saw over time the millions in southern California having an inordinate influence on the lives and affairs of the rest of California. All are good people but their interests can be so dramatically different and continuously at odds, leading to unending stalemates and unresolved problems.

Answer 2

I think all states have the right to re-district themselves into a new state, but for what purpose? (BTW, the Dakotas have been toying with unification for a few years)

If a state were to subdivide based on gepolitical differences (i.e. eastern washington is conservative, western is liberal), it wouldn't affect the elections because electoral votes are given away on population (well, on # of congressmen, which is apportioned on population).

It also would cost the taxpayers a FORTUNE, and cause more bureaucratic red tape where it isn't needed. Imagine you'd now have to fill out all new papers, the new state would have to establish new systems and government forms, rearrange funding and financing arrangements, etc., it would be a slow, long, and painful process.

The argument that states like Illinois and New York are unfair because the rural parts pay for the urban is just untrue. Yes, some taxes from these places pay for roads and other infrastructure, but my federal taxes pay for stuff in wisconsin, and I live nowhere near there! In fact, it's better for the rural areas to be a part of a state with a large population because they get more federal funding. Places like Mississippi and Arkansas get less federal cash than Georgia or Louisiana because of the major cities those states have. Just because there's an urban/rural divide in a state (all states except Jersey has this) issue) doesn't give a good enough excuse for a split.

Answer 3

Yes, I agree, but I think New York City should be come independent of the rest of New York State.

The reason, New York City is a financial drain on the rest of the state, receiving a disproportionately large amount of the tax dollars, this puts an unfair burden on the rest of the state.

Answer 4

living on the coast of washington state..im for making a new state here that doesnt have to put up with the socialist democrats that get ellected by the liberals in the big city corridor...we live rurally and almost always vote republican here...because we have to work for a living...


they tell us how to manage our trees, fish, ocean, and even our water....and they live in a freeking parking lot...

Answer 5

Cool, it would be the "Ununited States"