• Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    3 days ago

    Specifically it fucks over CA and benefits states small enough they only get one Representative. Most of the rest aren’t too bad.

    If we can’t expand the House, we could always chop CA into multiple states which also eases the gripes about the Senate some too. And maybe merge the Dakotas and create “Montoming” on the other end.

    • OneOrTheOtherDontAskMe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 days ago

      Wait hold on, Californian’s wouldn’t go for it, but splitting them up into two blue states and one red state grabs 4 new Democrat senators (maybe) and 2 republican ones, allows California Republicans the chance to build the state they say they dream about, and gives the rest of the rural US a NEW California to removed about

      I like this

      • yngmnwntr
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 days ago

        If we no longer have a nice even 50 we can do all kinds of crazy shit like allow representation for US territories like Guam and the Virgin Islands and Washington DC. We could break Texas up too. End up with like 80 states. But noooo we can’t change the flag, we have 50 states forever.

        • Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          We could break Texas up too.

          Texas can break Texas up any time it wants, into no more than 5 pieces. Part of the act making it a state uniquely gives it this power. It could be fought and argued that to do so would require approval of Congress, but the counter argument is that the bill granting it statehood including that is essentially pre-approval.