A simple law that I think could fix the nation (slowly).

Discussion in 'Political Science' started by modernpaladin, Nov 11, 2020.

  1. modernpaladin

    modernpaladin Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2017
    Messages:
    16,205
    Likes Received:
    11,571
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    It would go something like this:

    Any county (or parish or borough) of a state that borders another state may vote by a 60% majority of its legal residents to secede from their state and join the bordering state. The bordering state they vote to join must agree via a 2/3 majority vote by its legislature for the transition to take effect. The county will then switch states. The state that the county voted to leave will be fully compensated at fair market value over a period not to exceed 10 years for any state property that can be demonstrated to not have been funded and supported by The People of the seceding county. The seceding county may not vote to switch states again until the compensation for the switch has been completed.

    I'm sure the actual wording would necessarily be a lot more legal and less clear, but you get the idea- let the borders of states be fluid so The People have more choice in how they are governed. Not only will people have less animosity as a result of feeling 'stuck' in a state run by political polar opposites, but state governments will likely be a lot more interested in keeping their people happy, lest those people all vote to leave.

    Thoughts?
     
  2. modernpaladin

    modernpaladin Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2017
    Messages:
    16,205
    Likes Received:
    11,571
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    What I'm not sure of is how Electoral College votes would be handled. In some cases, voting districts a county borders would make the allocation simple. But I think in most cases it would just have to go with whatever percentage of the population is switching states, they take that same percentage of the original states EC points with them, rounded to the nearest point. That could be a problem down the road, if, for example, a large portion of a state switches, but does so one at a time over decades, the EC college allocation could drift out of balance. There's surely a better way though.
     
  3. Spooky

    Spooky Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2013
    Messages:
    30,671
    Likes Received:
    12,555
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Impossible.

    There are so many issues tied in with a county the lawsuits alone would take forever. Look at Arizona and California who've had a bitter fight over water since forever, if California could start gobbling up counties it would impact every state the Colorado river flows through.

    Massive fights between states about who controls waterways in the NE and especially the taxes, it's taken the Supreme Court countless rulings to get it somewhat stable. States could literally pay off counties in a straight line to join them and cut another state in half and stick a toll bridge on it.

    Just way to complicated.
     
  4. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    17,067
    Likes Received:
    4,996
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It's an interesting idea, but I think you'd eventually get some very weird looking borders, and it would result in some very strange politics. There might be a whole little region of local counties that want to secede from a state, but need a "corridor" to connect to another state to do so. So they might start using their influence to create a "tunnel" of counties to connect to the state they want to join.

    And what happens if a county joins to another state, but later certain counties change their mind, and that county is no longer connected to that state? Would that county have to automatically revert back to the original state it was part of? Or would a county that became surrounded by other counties in another state have to join the state that completely surrounded them?
    In that case, the political map might resemble a giant game of the Japanese board game "Go".
     
  5. jhil2020

    jhil2020 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2020
    Messages:
    69
    Likes Received:
    39
    Trophy Points:
    18
    I don't think any competent state legislature would vote down an opportunity to gain more districts (and thus more representation in the House). Governors would likely be more inclined to antagonize one another, as would the people.
    n
    I read some literature that describes how Rep. voters in a Dem. state are generally happy so long as the President is of the same party, and vice versa. Only when their party controls neither the state nor the executive do they feel less efficacious.

    I think this plan would raise the stakes for local governments to reflect the popular will in a few places, but I'm not sure that popular consensus should be so powerful, especially if we start cannibalizing electoral districts based on the idea.
     

Share This Page