Did you know that there have been very recent proposals (within the past 10 years) to split up Eastern Washington and Eastern Oregon. The states are both economically, culturally, and georgraphically different. The West sides have a very rainy, mild climate with millions and millions of people who often think very liberally (especially western Oregon). The east sides have an agriculturally based economy, a very dry climate in most places (dry desert), and sparse populations (The largest city would be Spokane).
2007-10-13
18:36:07
·
14 answers
·
asked by
tooqerq
6
in
Politics & Government
➔ Government
By the way, if there were to be a 51st state I doubt it would actually be eastern oregon and washington....I just wanted to see what people thought.
2007-10-13
18:37:52 ·
update #1
As I understand it, the Easterners don't like the proposals. The West side feels like the East side is holding them back, so a lot of the West side is all for a split.
2007-10-13
18:45:07 ·
update #2
I think it is up to the citizens of that area, it should be their choice, and I would not have a problem with it either way.
2007-10-13 18:46:52
·
answer #1
·
answered by Dina W 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Don't need to do it. They are each managed just fine in they're current state. However, making Porto Rico as the 51st state sounds great! I would love to start taxing them for all the benefits they get as being annexed buy America. Plus, they are good people and I feel that they would be a great contribution.
2007-10-13 18:39:53
·
answer #2
·
answered by ? 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
i have no problem with it , but lets take a look at the requirements , there are not enough people in north Dakota to make it a territory under us law. and right now California has people who want to do a break up also but purerto Rico will probably become either a state or break away from us first.
not to mention the Mexico us Canada is about to happen lol or so we are told
2007-10-13 19:24:19
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Forget it, it's just a scheme to add two more Republican senators to the congress. The western parts of the states won't go for it, and you'd need their ok to do it. And if climate and geography enter into it, then Texas, Colorado, and California would also have to broken up. The states are fine how they are.
2007-10-13 18:42:36
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
You mean the State of Jefferson. Made up out of parts of northern California and southern Oregon. Declared itself a state in 1941.
2007-10-13 19:57:07
·
answer #5
·
answered by ? 6
·
3⤊
0⤋
The more the merrier. Splitting existing states seems a bit petty in this day and age, though.
I say, let's make Puerto Rico a state. Also Guam.
2007-10-13 19:05:00
·
answer #6
·
answered by scruffycat 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
I vote for Washington, District of Columbia. The people there are not represented in the Congress. They should have a say in the government.
2007-10-13 18:47:40
·
answer #7
·
answered by OKIM IM 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
I think it would be kind of cool. But would they split the two and combine another two to prevent having to remake and redestribute every flag in America?
2007-10-13 18:40:31
·
answer #8
·
answered by Tyler660 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
I like 50, round even number easy to remember. No more states, we have enough
2007-10-13 18:39:38
·
answer #9
·
answered by avkedav 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
don't forget Puerto Rico
We do pay taxes, we just don't get to vote and I think after all the experiments that were forced upon the natives paying no tax would be a mediocre apology at best.
2007-10-13 18:39:02
·
answer #10
·
answered by The Gate Keeper 1
·
0⤊
1⤋