Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Showing Original Post only (View all)

onehandle

(51,122 posts)
Wed Jun 25, 2014, 12:35 PM Jun 2014

The Map With Only 38 States [View all]



In 1973, California State University geography professor George Etzel Pearcy suggested that the U.S. redraw its antiquated state boundaries and narrow the overall number of states to 38.

Pearcy's proposed state lines were drawn in less-populated areas, isolating large cities and reducing their number within each state. He argued that if there were fewer cities vying for a state's tax dollars, more money would be available for projects that would benefit all citizens.

Because the current states were being chopped up beyond recognition, part of his plan included renaming the new states by referencing natural geologic features or the region's cultural history.

While he did have a rather staunch support network—economists, geographers, and even a few politicians argued that Pearcy's plan might be crazy enough to work—the proposal lost steam in Washington. Imagine all the work that would have to be done to enact Pearcy's plan: re-surveying the land, setting up new voter districts, new taxation infrastructure—basically starting the whole country over. It's easy to see why the government balked (though that doesn't mean it was a bad idea).

http://mentalfloss.com/article/57444/map-only-38-states
41 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
The Map With Only 38 States [View all] onehandle Jun 2014 OP
Ok - i get that they are named after geographical features - but Bitterroot? Superior? el_bryanto Jun 2014 #1
Most of the regions are historical names, Indian names, or geographical names. Igel Jun 2014 #14
"Superior" is the favored name for Michigan Upper Peninsula secessionists caraher Jun 2014 #20
Mohawk, really just one of the five nations! whistler162 Jun 2014 #35
Personally I think Biscayne stinks as a name csziggy Jun 2014 #37
Much simpler idea... DAMANgoldberg Jun 2014 #39
That map doesn't make a lot of sense pscot Jun 2014 #2
Not sure the current one makes sense either CreekDog Jun 2014 #29
Folding Wyoming, Idaho and Montana pscot Jun 2014 #31
*pats Dr Pearcy on head* Um, ok, no, but thanks for playing NightWatcher Jun 2014 #3
Why this would never fly with Washington Takket Jun 2014 #4
The names are going to frost those "english only" people. uppityperson Jun 2014 #5
Also... he has 3 territories that border Lake Erie, but the Erie territory does not. *facepalm* Takket Jun 2014 #6
That state would be known as "Buckeye Nation" anyway. So it doesn't matter. (nt) Jeff In Milwaukee Jun 2014 #25
K & R for an interesting idea Coventina Jun 2014 #7
Sounds like the poor sections of states would just get more poor Boom Sound 416 Jun 2014 #8
Exactly right. djean111 Jun 2014 #27
al franken would have to relearn how to draw the country! unblock Jun 2014 #9
Suck it up, Al! nt onehandle Jun 2014 #15
It is an interesting concept sarisataka Jun 2014 #10
Alaska is definitely a mess in this scheme caraher Jun 2014 #21
This is what comes from an academic. Jenoch Jun 2014 #11
right. more to the point, states *exists* for historical reasons. unblock Jun 2014 #18
I would not be in favor of 'federal legislative districts' Jenoch Jun 2014 #23
the idea of federal districts is that it would allow for regional differences unblock Jun 2014 #24
Well, it was a high cost, Jenoch Jun 2014 #34
it doesn't seem to reduce the number of large cities within states at all muriel_volestrangler Jun 2014 #12
i think the point was to reduce problems like chicago, which spills into indiana unblock Jun 2014 #16
I am totally into this. The_Commonist Jun 2014 #13
That was pre-Reagan. Taxes are now too local. ieoeja Jun 2014 #17
Reccing because I like weird maps A Little Weird Jun 2014 #19
This makes too much sense tabasco Jun 2014 #22
Why would you rename Hawaii? Jeff In Milwaukee Jun 2014 #26
Good question. And, as long as we're radically reconstructing the country, why not liberate them? Coventina Jun 2014 #38
Put this on the shelf for another 50ys until the climate change effects are better understood. CK_John Jun 2014 #28
Not a bad idea, but I dont like his selection of colors. Just sayin. nm rhett o rick Jun 2014 #30
I guess I don't see the point or advantage fishwax Jun 2014 #32
The population of various parts of the country has shifted since 1973. surrealAmerican Jun 2014 #33
I can't imagine that getting many votes in The Senate. Motown_Johnny Jun 2014 #36
Actually we should double everywhere RobertEarl Jun 2014 #40
Four Senators from North and South Dakota is ludicrous. Split California into 10 States, with 20 Fred Sanders Jun 2014 #41
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»The Map With Only 38 Stat...