In OTL, only two US states have been formed from within existing states: Maine and West Virginia. However, there've been many, many more proposed state splits, from New York City to southern Oregon to eastern Tennessee to many more I haven't listed here. Each of these movements could have individual PoD's leading to its success, but what overall PoD's could lead to more state split movements succeeding in the United States?
AHC: More US state splits succeed
- Thread starter Evan
- Start date
Your best bet, like with most state boundary redrawing projects, is an alternative Civil War and/or Reconstruction which obviates the need for the consent of the states having their borders affected as otherwise required by Article IV, Section 3. Problem there is that a Civil War in which Delaware and/or Maryland secede but the Union wins nonetheless is going to be so alien that a State of Delmarva will be buried under a mountain of other butterflies. (And I'd think it'd be named something to draw attention away from its fusionist nature. When I've used it, my go-to name has been Chesapeake.)
That probably fits what I was actually looking for: one PoD which opens the doors for a whole lot of state boundary redrawing projects in the future. In this case, it'll at least be a huge precedent, but perhaps they can actually amend Article IV Section 3 out of the Constitution?
The problem with amending Article IV, Section 3 into oblivion is that it requires the process requires the approval of three-quarters of the states. And you will always be able to get a veto-proof minority of the states together to shoot down empowering the federal government to redraw their borders without their consent. And, given the zeitgeist of the original Constitutional Convention, you're probably not able to butterfly away its inclusion into the Constitution. (Or, at least, not the Constitution as we know it.) If you want to get rid of, it's easier to engineer a national crisis and convene a new constitutional convention. Such a convention could provide your forum for plowing-under dissent and undertaking a massive redrawing of frontiers, or simply neglect to reincorporate Article IV, Section or an equivalent.
I've heard that the New Jersey Plan would have made it easier for new states to be formed from old ones. Is there any verification of this? If so, it's possible that that element of the plan could have been kept in the final Constitution, which would have lead to more states splitting apart earlier on.
while there has been many proposals to split states only one additional one was actually sent to congress. CA actually approved splitting off the southern part of the state into the territory of Colorado. This did not happen because of the timing the proposal reached congress: 1859 I think congress was slightly busy with avoiding civil war
I think you need a POD where one or two states split based on voters in a defined geographic area asking to be split off, and then after that it becomes a precedent. No, technically the whole state doesn't have to agree to it when a geographic section asks to be let off, but its the practice that you do.
East Tennessee could work if the government makes an effort to protect it. Then, maybe make East Carolina or North Arkansas things.
Md139115
Banned
Honestly, for a general POD, I think what you need is a section of a state to, peacefully of its own accord, vote to secede, and have it approved by the state legislature and Congress. If it happens even once, it'll create a precedent that would allow others to get away with the same thing.
There have been a few attempts over the decades. The one I'm most familiar with is the South Jersey secession referendum in 1980. In that one, the southern six counties of New Jersey voted to secede by 51%, but the legislature ignored them.
There have been a few attempts over the decades. The one I'm most familiar with is the South Jersey secession referendum in 1980. In that one, the southern six counties of New Jersey voted to secede by 51%, but the legislature ignored them.
Okay, I thought that the District of Maine did just that, but it turned out that (after a whole lot of popular outcry) the Massachusetts state legislature approved statehood conditional upon a referendum that then passed with a large majority. Still, I don't think "referendum then legislative okay" is so different from "popular sentiment then legislative okay then referendum" as to set up a precedent.
What might be needed is for some other state to follow up on it. There were a lot of statehood movements which could've taken the example of Maine, such as western Virginia, but forty-three years separated Maine from West Virginia. Two examples in a generation, even, might start the ball rolling.
There was a proposal for the Eastern Shore of Maryland to transfer to Delaware; it failed by one vote in the MD Senate. Circa 1836.
Sounds fascinating! Do you have any sources? I'd love to read more!
History Learner
Banned
Actually would favor the South, given the composition of those regions:
On the whole, going about dismantling States during and after the Civil War basically undermines the North's view on secession, as such moves tacitly acknowledge such occurred. It also plays into Confederate propaganda, in that it shows the Federal Government has no respect for the Constitution, given Article IV Section 3.