We in Illinois are going through this now. 33 out of 102 counties have voted to begin talks among ourselves on how to secede. Right now, the consensus is to try to start a new state. My plan, (which has been well publicized in Southern Illinois, Eastern Missouri, and Western Indiana) is to have counties secede and join border states. We have Indiana, Kentucky, Missouri, Iowa, and even Wisconsin to consider. My preference is that counties join the nearest state, but I would be fine with all of us joining one state.
We know shat the process is, and it's not likely to be easy, but we have the process started. With enough help and enough publicity, it will be much easier, and likely faster.
I’m totally on board with rearranging state borders. Northern MI should be part of WI. What I also like would be to see happen would be to make large cities into protectorates maybe like Guam, or Puerto Rico, or Washington DC. Their citizens would not get to vote for national offices (President, Senate, Congress), only local offices.
let the counties vote. if northern MI wants to become Wisconsin, let them assuming Wisconsin wants them. Indiana has paved the way for Illinois counties to splinter off. Iowa and Missouri might want to do the same.
And here in DuPage Cty we continue to be captured by Blue tide. There’s a motion on the Cty Board agenda to remove Henry Hyde’s name from the Cty courthouse, been named for him for about 15 years. Dems control board 12-6 so the name change is a done deal.😭
There are two related areas that require attention:
1. The decennial census that counts (by law) illegal aliens. This census is used to reapportion the House of Representatives. A state can maintain its number of representatives (approximately 770K persons per congressional district), lose representatives, or gain representatives.
When you lose of gain representatives, that state must reapportion congressional districts.
One's kneejerk reaction is to think this favors the blue states (and it does), but it also shifts Congressional Districts to border states like Texas and Florida at the expense of states like New York.
The census is not a complete count; it is a count from which an estimate is then made. It is only done every 10 years, so it has never really been a battleground, but I can assure you there is mischief afoot in how the 2020 census was closed out.
I predict when Musk gets done picking low hanging fruit, he will look at the 2020 census and it will be revealed liberal states should have lost more seats than they reported and, thusly, red states gained seats, but should have gained as many as 10 more.
2. The second thing is the redistricting conducted by states both after the census and in the ordinary course of business.
Herein, there is an odd form of cheating. The Dems make Rep congressional districts more Rep than you would expect. By doing this -- making more "trends Rep" districts -- the Dems can cut down on the number of competitive districts. It is slightly counterintuitive.
It is clear the Dems opened the Southern border to inject a great number of illegals to impact the census, to impact the apportionment of congressional seats, and to influence redistricting.
They are playing the long game as it relates to the eventual voting of these illegals, but in the meantime they will try to make them eligible to vote even without citizenship.
Couple this with Motor Voter laws and automatic voter registration when issued a drivers license and you can see the mischief already in place.
I think the first is moot if the county secedes. It is a nationwide problem but probably not germane here. You'd simply take existing numbers as they are (even though they are flawed)
The second is true. Red districts in Blue states are VERY Red. Depending on the county that secedes, the chips might fall differently.
I don't think we try to control for macro political outcomes. States that are red can become blue and vice versa. The South was Democratic from Reconstruction to about 1972.
There are multiple schools of thought on it which leads to it becoming a very complex issue. For example in the '60s and '70s, growing up in Morton Grove Illinois, I was part of the 10th Congressional District, which saw us do the near impossible when we elected as our Congressman both Donald Rumsfeld and Abner Mikva in the same generation.
I applaud the people on this thread who are trying to think three or four moves ahead and treat it like the chess match which it is, but that's very difficult to do.
Sometimes the best thing to do is to get the hell out of Dodge and sometimes the best thing to do is attempt to bring about change from within, but unfortunately, sometimes it is not known what the correct or right course of action to take will be until it is hindsight.
Thought-provoking article nonetheless Mister Carter 😄👏💪🇺🇲💯
Would totally work. I live in Chisago county in MN and am a few miles from the Sconny border and have much more in common with Polk county WI than Hennepin or Ramsey counties - libtards - 40 miles away.
Where it concerns Illinois, why should anyone be unwillingly and forcibly subjected to the complete idiocy/corruption/scumbaggery of Chicago/Cook County Democrats?
Too many smart people (especially here) are falling for this chimera. An answer to this wet dream is pretty simple. "Oh you want to leave? Terrific! Here is your share of the bills and debts acquired during your tenure in this wonderful state. Pay up then adios.
C'mon folks! These issues need to be settled at the ballot box. Not easy I know, but that's how the system works.
I think it's a great idea but you need to come up with a way of reallocating federal congressional seats when it happens. Waiting until the next 10 year census isn't good enough.
BTW, we NEVER use the word "secession." What New Illinois is pursuing is the legal, constitutional formation of a new state separate from the State of Illinois. It is legally different from secession. Besides, the S-word has connotations that we wouldn't want to be associated with.
New Illinois has been working on this issue for almost 7 years. The underlying cause for a lot of this problem is the 1964 SCOTUS ruling, Reynolds v. Sims. In that ruling, the Warren Court decided it would be a good idea to take away any geographical underpinning to state senate districts. Until then, the state legislatures had modeled their system after the US Congress. At the time, one of Illinois' US senators was Everett Dirksen. He warned that in any state with a sizeable city, this ruling would cause all power of state government would be absorbed into that city and the rural people would lose their voice.
He was right and this is what happened. And this is why you see these movements in several states throughout the country. Considered one of the landmark rulings of the 20th Century, Reynolds v Sims is unlikely to be overturned. Hence, our only hope for a voice in state government is the creation of a separate state.
Illinois is violating the Article IV, Sec 4 of the US Constitution, the Guarantee Clause. Outstate Illinoisans have no meaningful voice.
Oregon may succeed in joining Greater Idaho, but the situation is different here. Oregon doesn't have $200 billion in debt like Illinois. Any counties leaving Illinois would take a proportional share of the debt with them. All of the adjacent states are in much better financial health than we are. Indiana, for instance, runs a $2 billion surplus. G. H. Merritt, Chairman, New Illinois
If it’s some arbitrary county in the farm belt, then it doesn’t seem too consequential.
But whatnot has an army base, a water treatment plant, a power station? What if a major road is involved, who plows, who repairs, who polices? - I think we should make moving citizens from one state to another state more simple, and let the voter flight force the elected officials to rethink policies. It would be much more individualistic, simpler and fair.
We in Illinois are going through this now. 33 out of 102 counties have voted to begin talks among ourselves on how to secede. Right now, the consensus is to try to start a new state. My plan, (which has been well publicized in Southern Illinois, Eastern Missouri, and Western Indiana) is to have counties secede and join border states. We have Indiana, Kentucky, Missouri, Iowa, and even Wisconsin to consider. My preference is that counties join the nearest state, but I would be fine with all of us joining one state.
We know shat the process is, and it's not likely to be easy, but we have the process started. With enough help and enough publicity, it will be much easier, and likely faster.
Go get em!
Don't forget the loss of population causing shifting Congressional representation and Electoral College votes
I’m totally on board with rearranging state borders. Northern MI should be part of WI. What I also like would be to see happen would be to make large cities into protectorates maybe like Guam, or Puerto Rico, or Washington DC. Their citizens would not get to vote for national offices (President, Senate, Congress), only local offices.
let the counties vote. if northern MI wants to become Wisconsin, let them assuming Wisconsin wants them. Indiana has paved the way for Illinois counties to splinter off. Iowa and Missouri might want to do the same.
And here in DuPage Cty we continue to be captured by Blue tide. There’s a motion on the Cty Board agenda to remove Henry Hyde’s name from the Cty courthouse, been named for him for about 15 years. Dems control board 12-6 so the name change is a done deal.😭
There are two related areas that require attention:
1. The decennial census that counts (by law) illegal aliens. This census is used to reapportion the House of Representatives. A state can maintain its number of representatives (approximately 770K persons per congressional district), lose representatives, or gain representatives.
When you lose of gain representatives, that state must reapportion congressional districts.
One's kneejerk reaction is to think this favors the blue states (and it does), but it also shifts Congressional Districts to border states like Texas and Florida at the expense of states like New York.
The census is not a complete count; it is a count from which an estimate is then made. It is only done every 10 years, so it has never really been a battleground, but I can assure you there is mischief afoot in how the 2020 census was closed out.
I predict when Musk gets done picking low hanging fruit, he will look at the 2020 census and it will be revealed liberal states should have lost more seats than they reported and, thusly, red states gained seats, but should have gained as many as 10 more.
2. The second thing is the redistricting conducted by states both after the census and in the ordinary course of business.
Herein, there is an odd form of cheating. The Dems make Rep congressional districts more Rep than you would expect. By doing this -- making more "trends Rep" districts -- the Dems can cut down on the number of competitive districts. It is slightly counterintuitive.
It is clear the Dems opened the Southern border to inject a great number of illegals to impact the census, to impact the apportionment of congressional seats, and to influence redistricting.
They are playing the long game as it relates to the eventual voting of these illegals, but in the meantime they will try to make them eligible to vote even without citizenship.
Couple this with Motor Voter laws and automatic voter registration when issued a drivers license and you can see the mischief already in place.
JLM
www.themusingsofthebigredcar.com
I think the first is moot if the county secedes. It is a nationwide problem but probably not germane here. You'd simply take existing numbers as they are (even though they are flawed)
The second is true. Red districts in Blue states are VERY Red. Depending on the county that secedes, the chips might fall differently.
I don't think we try to control for macro political outcomes. States that are red can become blue and vice versa. The South was Democratic from Reconstruction to about 1972.
There are multiple schools of thought on it which leads to it becoming a very complex issue. For example in the '60s and '70s, growing up in Morton Grove Illinois, I was part of the 10th Congressional District, which saw us do the near impossible when we elected as our Congressman both Donald Rumsfeld and Abner Mikva in the same generation.
I applaud the people on this thread who are trying to think three or four moves ahead and treat it like the chess match which it is, but that's very difficult to do.
Sometimes the best thing to do is to get the hell out of Dodge and sometimes the best thing to do is attempt to bring about change from within, but unfortunately, sometimes it is not known what the correct or right course of action to take will be until it is hindsight.
Thought-provoking article nonetheless Mister Carter 😄👏💪🇺🇲💯
Would totally work. I live in Chisago county in MN and am a few miles from the Sconny border and have much more in common with Polk county WI than Hennepin or Ramsey counties - libtards - 40 miles away.
I love, love, love this!
Where it concerns Illinois, why should anyone be unwillingly and forcibly subjected to the complete idiocy/corruption/scumbaggery of Chicago/Cook County Democrats?
But, Gary Indiana Dems might want to join Cook County no?
Of course. Go for it, Gary!
Too many smart people (especially here) are falling for this chimera. An answer to this wet dream is pretty simple. "Oh you want to leave? Terrific! Here is your share of the bills and debts acquired during your tenure in this wonderful state. Pay up then adios.
C'mon folks! These issues need to be settled at the ballot box. Not easy I know, but that's how the system works.
I think it's a great idea but you need to come up with a way of reallocating federal congressional seats when it happens. Waiting until the next 10 year census isn't good enough.
Looks more like targeted cleansing of metro areas is a good idea.
BTW, we NEVER use the word "secession." What New Illinois is pursuing is the legal, constitutional formation of a new state separate from the State of Illinois. It is legally different from secession. Besides, the S-word has connotations that we wouldn't want to be associated with.
New Illinois has been working on this issue for almost 7 years. The underlying cause for a lot of this problem is the 1964 SCOTUS ruling, Reynolds v. Sims. In that ruling, the Warren Court decided it would be a good idea to take away any geographical underpinning to state senate districts. Until then, the state legislatures had modeled their system after the US Congress. At the time, one of Illinois' US senators was Everett Dirksen. He warned that in any state with a sizeable city, this ruling would cause all power of state government would be absorbed into that city and the rural people would lose their voice.
He was right and this is what happened. And this is why you see these movements in several states throughout the country. Considered one of the landmark rulings of the 20th Century, Reynolds v Sims is unlikely to be overturned. Hence, our only hope for a voice in state government is the creation of a separate state.
Illinois is violating the Article IV, Sec 4 of the US Constitution, the Guarantee Clause. Outstate Illinoisans have no meaningful voice.
Oregon may succeed in joining Greater Idaho, but the situation is different here. Oregon doesn't have $200 billion in debt like Illinois. Any counties leaving Illinois would take a proportional share of the debt with them. All of the adjacent states are in much better financial health than we are. Indiana, for instance, runs a $2 billion surplus. G. H. Merritt, Chairman, New Illinois
It could become a real mess, real fast.
If it’s some arbitrary county in the farm belt, then it doesn’t seem too consequential.
But whatnot has an army base, a water treatment plant, a power station? What if a major road is involved, who plows, who repairs, who polices? - I think we should make moving citizens from one state to another state more simple, and let the voter flight force the elected officials to rethink policies. It would be much more individualistic, simpler and fair.
Self sorting is the most effective way to deal with political division.