0

I have read a proposal to merge Vermont and New Hampshire into a state called "Montana Verde", or "Green Mountain". (It is pronounced like the state of Montana plus VER-day.) The reason for this is that they are small in size and population for US states. Another cited reason is that New Hampshire is more racially diverse than Vermont.

The main purpose of the idea is to let DC become a state while keeping the number of US states at 50. Could two US states be merged? If so, how could that be done for Vermont and New Hampshire?

Note: "Montana Verde" seems like a gerrymander to me because it is sucking up a 65% or so Democratic leaning state and putting it into a 50% Democratic leaning state.

Michael Mormon
  • 3,658
  • 2
  • 15
  • 34
  • 5
    "The main purpose of the idea is to let DC become a state while keeping the number of US states at 50": which leaves the question "why keep the number of states at 50?" Another question: why give the new state a Spanish-language name when it is not in a part of the country formerly held by Spain, and it would not contain a significant number of Spanish speakers? – phoog Dec 06 '20 at 16:12
  • 2
    @phoog: Also, why should DC become a state? Roughly 2/3 of Americans oppose the idea, per e.g. this article: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/why-dont-americans-want-d-c-to-be-a-state/ More Americans favor statehood for Puerto Rico: indeed, a greater percentage of Americans are in favor than Puerto Ricans :-) – jamesqf Dec 06 '20 at 18:25
  • 1
    As an aside: if two states ever merged, they would thereby halve their power in the U.S. Senate, with a corresponding loss of electors in the Electoral College. Why would they shoot themselves in the foot like that? – MJ713 Dec 07 '20 at 06:01
  • @jamesqf because DC residents are being taxed by the federal government without voting representation in congress, among other reasons. – phoog Dec 07 '20 at 23:46
  • @phoog: But people who reside in DC have chosen to do so. Arguably, if you look at the original purpose of the District, NO ONE should be a resident. Like Members of Congress, they should be considered residents of some state who are simply in DC temporarily to carry out government functions. – jamesqf Dec 09 '20 at 03:09
  • @jamesqf: You have just described the gist of most DC statehood proposals: shrink the District so that it is just barely large enough to encompass the actual federal buildings, and turn the remaining land into a new state. Then no one would be a resident of the District proper. – Kevin Dec 09 '20 at 05:09
  • @Kevin: Shrink the district, ok, but return the land to Maryland rather than making a new state out of it - something that a majority of Americans oppose. – jamesqf Dec 10 '20 at 03:11
  • @jamesqf: You can't give it back to Maryland because they don't want it back. – Kevin Dec 10 '20 at 06:15
  • @Kevin: And most of the country doesn't want it to become a state. So either the status quo continues, or the Feds force Maryland to take it :-) – jamesqf Dec 11 '20 at 03:35
  • "or the Feds force Maryland to take it" - That's plainly unconstitutional, the New States Clause forbids it without the consent of the Maryland state legislature. – Kevin Dec 11 '20 at 08:49

0 Answers0