Chicago Statehood?

Apparently there’s a proposal to make Chicago the 51st state. I’m not sure what they think this will get them out of, given that the Constitution would apply just as readily to Chicago the state as it does to the city. But perhaps they see the writing on the wall in regards to which way this is going.

Personally, I am against this proposal, because I see no reason to the leaders of that city two Senate seats they can put up for sale, and fill with cronies.

18 Responses to “Chicago Statehood?”

  1. Well, from what I understand, the rest of the state wants to get rid of Chicago. They are tired of being dominated by Chicago politics and politicians. If this happens, we are likely to see 2 pro-gun Senators come from the state of Illinois.

  2. Thirdpower says:

    That’s about the jist of it, yeah.

  3. Knitebane says:

    Wrong way to look at it.

    Chicago currently dominates Illinois politics. Attend: Current Illinois governor Pat Quinn only carried 4 Illinois counties out of 100. He won Cook (Chicago), St. Clair (E. St. Louis), Alexander (Cairo) and Jackson (Carbondale). Bill Brady carried the other 96 counties and lost.

    The state Legislature is similarly controlled by the vast number of representatives from the Chicago area. The people of the rest of the state have no effective voice in the government of the state.

    Likewise, the people of the rest of the state have no effective voice in the U.S Senate.

    Right now Illinois has two Senators that are bought and sold from Chicago ALREADY.

    If Chicago gets booted out Illinois will be able to run its own state government for a net gain of one conservative state governor and a conservative led legislature.

    If Chicago gets booted out Illinois will get to elect its own Senators for a net gain of two conservative U.S. Senators.

    If Chicago gets booted out Illinois will retain its U.S. Representatives and Chicago will retain its U.S. Representatives for a net change of zero.

    How can this be anything but a net gain for the citizens of non-Chicago Illinois?

    • Rob K says:

      I’ve been saying this for years and Knitebane made all the points I was going to make and more. Right now, a huge area of Illinois has practically no say in their own governance. It’s like an ancient city-state. The rest of Illinois would almost certainly go shall-issue immediately if the Chicago area were portioned off. It would be almost like having a second Indiana.

      On another note, I’d like to see states implement something like the electoral college at the county level for governor and senate seats. That might alleviate a little Illinois’ domination by Chicago. I’d certainly like to see it here in Indiana.

  4. BigHayden says:

    Maybe we should consider splitting North Jersey and South Jersey into 2 states. That would certainly solve a lot of my problems with NJ.

    Hey, I can dream, can’t I?

    • DevsAdvocate says:

      Actually, I would just split it between New York and Pennsylvania. PA gets everything West of Bergen County and south of the Raritan River Valley, and New York would get to keep the Northeastern region (Newark, Jersey City, etc.)

  5. mobo says:

    I thought the constitution forbids partitioning an existing state or combining parts of two or more states, no? Then again, there is West Virginia……

    • Right Wing Wacko says:

      >I thought the constitution forbids partitioning an existing state or combining parts of two or more states, no? Then again, there is West Virginia……

      Only without the permission of the states involved.

      IE Congress could not merge North and South Dakota unless Both States agreed, nor could they split DAKOTA into North and South Dakota unless DAKOTA consented.

  6. Right Wing Wacko says:

    When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another,…

  7. alcade says:

    This will never happen because Chicago would loose downstate funding for their public transportation and everything else they can’t afford for themselves.

    It’s a nice idea, but I’ll keep wishing for that earthquake that sends them into the lake.

  8. Charlie Given says:

    The same arguements are made about NYC and the rest of the state. Many Nothern NYer’s or upstaters (basically anyone from north of Westchester County)would love to see the City split from the rest of the state.

  9. Can we offer Chicago the same deal we have with Guam? No votes, and stuck in the middle of the Pacific?

    • Sage Thrasher says:

      In all seriousness, cutting off several of the countries failed megacities (LA comes to mind) from the states around them has a lot to say for it. Unfortunately, the House has long ago passed the point where any effective conversation among its members can take place. Making more states would do the same to the senate, though arguably it already has there, too.

  10. NUGUN says:

    I’m all for it. Make Chicago metro, & NY metro states. The result. The rest d those states would be same as reasonable.

  11. Sage Thrasher says:

    Given its murder rates and total failure to protect its citizens in many parts of the city, Chicago should have been put under marshal law long ago. Making it a state is a terrible idea.

  12. richard stenson says:

    Maybe we could persuade Chicago to take Madison and Milwaukee, too. They could run the half fast train up the metro route west to Beloit, then north. There are a lot of government buildings and real estate there.