Secession is often commemorated in many countries around the world. This is usually done at national level. Essentially, the issue is whether a region of the country will become an independent state.

But in some parts of America, the debate over state identity has become more heated. Differences in domestic policy are not new. But it could be different.

Lawmakers file bill to abolish Minnesota, expand South Dakota

Minnesota State Representative Jeremy Munson has introduced a provocative bill. Officially it is called HF 2423.

If it succeeds, it will set in motion a potentially radical process. A change that would transform the states of Minnesota and South Dakota as they have been known for decades.

Much of Minnesota’s territory would join South Dakota, leaving behind the eastern and some central parts of the former state. The breeding districts will be primarily rural. For metropolises like Minneapolis, St. Paul, St. Louis and New York, this is a good time to visit. In St. Paul and Duluth, the state bond will be maintained.

Munson cites political polarization as the reason for this movement. Apparently, he feels that the interests of rural Minnesota are no longer being properly represented in the state legislature. Munson was first elected to the Minnesota House of Representatives in the 2018 special election.

Since then he has been re-elected twice. Previously, he was chairman of the Republican Party of Blue Earth County, Minnesota, which includes Mankato.

If the proposed realignment of the two states were to proceed, South Dakota’s population would increase significantly. Based on current statistics, South Dakota’s new population will theoretically more than double.

But the total population would still be less than that of the new Minnesota.

Apart from population decline, there are other concerns in the respective provinces. For example, whether the merged economies will mesh well with each other. And even though at first glance the cultures seem relatively in sync, some collisions are almost certain.

Changes could also occur in South Dakota’s capital city. Traditionally, but not always, capital cities are located at the boundaries of the relative geographic center they serve. The current capital of South Dakota no longer fits this description. It would also be far from some of the metropolitan areas of the new states. But in today’s world, that may no longer be relevant.

State and national approval required

Munson’s result will be meaningless in reality. Minnesota Public Radio news specifically calls it a publicity stunt. Approval by state legislatures and the U.S. Congress is expected.

Apparently the bill has at least one very important supporter in South Dakota, Governor Christie Noem.

She tweeted her clear support. A similar movement could be brewing in Oregon, where some are holding back a selection to join Idaho in limbo, KEVN reports.

Don’t miss our Facebook page!


You May Also Like

Superior Court Judge Grants Defense’s Recusal Motion in Arata Case •

ProsecutorSLO states that the solution sets a dangerous precedent San Luis Obispo…

Tushy Classic review: We tested the popular under-$100 bidet

Bidets are an essential part of many people’s toilet hygiene routine, but…

Sidney Powell argues in new court filing that no reasonable people would believe her election fraud claims

Dominion Voting Systems, an infrastructure company, sued Powell for defamation after he…

British and Irish Lions: South Africa A inflict tourists’ first loss

The British and Irish Lions have been beaten for the first time…