MB: I really appreciate that U took the time to share the above info win me. I often get involved in more local areas in the N/W corner of our USA. My fellow farmers down south of me in eastern Oregon are like near in a civil war with their state capital of Salem. OREGON is now a dived state politically. Our fellow farmers in eastern Oregon have been cleared by Idaho Governor Brad Little & the Idaho state legislature to adopt 13 counties in eastern Oregon & bring them into the greater Idaho project. Even over here in the back water states of Oregon & Washington we got our own political battles raging. U shared some links with me so I thought I'd share a link with U!
Join the Greater Idaho movement.
www.greateridaho.org
Yeah, I am hearing a lot of bitching from the left again this year about the
"popular vote vs the electoral vote," thing, and the right doesn't like how big cities determine how entire states go. . . .
So. . . we may eventually see more compromises on this issue.
Because it is written into the US constitution on how electors are appointed, we might see more states doing what Nebraska and Maine do, as passing a constitution amendment that will give more power to more populous states over less is just not in the cards. There are just more states with fewer people in them, than not.
OTH . . . who can say?
AS far as the reality of your separatist movement, it has to be approved by the Feds AND the state governments involved. This is the first rodeo. Folks have wanted to do this for a very long time in my state for far longer. It won't go anywhere, trust me on this.
"A New State — Ontonagon. –The prolific Northwest is apparently about to give birth to another member of the American family of States. We may expect soon to “welcome to the advent of a little stranger” on the borders of our greatest lake. It is promosed, in short, that the portion of Michigan lying west of Lake Michigan, and known as the “Upper Peninsula,” shall be joined with the northern part of Wisconsin, bordering upon Lake Superior, the two to constitute a new State, bearing the title of Ontonagon.
This movement originates in the right quarters. Michigan passed legislative resolves last year recommending the project, and similar resolutions are now about to be adopted by the Legislature of Wisconsin.
The Constitution of the United States provides that “no new State shall be formed or erected within the jurisdiction of any other State, nor any State be formed by the junction of two or more States, or parts of States, without the consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned, as well as of the Congress.” It will in this case only remain to obtain the consent of Congress, that of “the States concerned” being proffered in advance.
Ontonagon is to have for its southern boundary a line drawn from the Menominee River, near its mouth on Green Bay, westerly till such line intersects the western boundary of Wisconsin, near Hudson on the St. Croix River. This line will not be far from the 45th parallel of latitude.
The new State will thus contain 40,000 square miles, nearly equal to the area of New York. It will embrace the entire southern coast of Lake Superior, and include the rich mineral region which stretches along that vast inland sea. There is already a population of 70,000 which is rapidly increasing, in the territory referred to. These people are anxious to have a government of their own, finding themselves cut off by the peculiarity of their location and pursuits from communication with Michigan or Wisconsin. Unless Congress should interpose objections, which cannot reasonably be apprehended, we see no cause why the new “State of Ontonagon” should not speedily take her place as an independent member of the Union."
www.nytimes.com
-The New York Times, April 6, 1858
The upper peninsula of Michigan, and portions of Wisconsin never did become
"Ontonagon." Why? Because Congress did not approve the idea. Adding that as a State back then would have made the free states more powerful than the slave states.
Congress is so corrupt and dysfunctional even at that point, it had too much federalist leaning, that it won't abide any power shift. It doesn't really matter what organizing folks do at the local and state level, the politicians at the federal level . . unless there is some serious horse trading else where to balance a possible power shift? Won't allow it.
. . . and so too, adding Greater Idaho would add more representation to "MAGA," or the right, w/o a similar addition to the progressives. . . to balance things. This is why the politicians in D.C. won't do it unless D.C. or Puerto Rico are given representation. Good luck.