A wonderful, futuristic and visionary article. Regional consolidation would eliminate and streamline our outdated and outmoded services, and enable growth and greater competition in the world economy.
In RI, a relatively small geographic area with a population of under 1 million people, we have 39 cities and towns. Which means 39 city or town councils, 39 police and fire departments, 39 separate school systems, 39 highway departments, and on and on. The redundant cost structure is weighing down growth and productivity, not to mention wasted tax expenditures. This phenomenon is true in every state.
Regional consolidation should be a high national priority and has been overdue for at least the past two generations. For the success of future generations America needs to re-draw our maps and reallocate resources.
In RI, a relatively small geographic area with a population of under 1 million people, we have 39 cities and towns. Which means 39 city or town councils, 39 police and fire departments, 39 separate school systems, 39 highway departments, and on and on. The redundant cost structure is weighing down growth and productivity, not to mention wasted tax expenditures. This phenomenon is true in every state.
Regional consolidation should be a high national priority and has been overdue for at least the past two generations. For the success of future generations America needs to re-draw our maps and reallocate resources.
35
Interesting perspective. Obviously from someone who has no historical stake in the country. Cities will disappear as global warming changes the nature of our arable, and makes villages surrounded by agriculture more practical than urban sinks of other peoples' energy.
13
How is it possible for someone to make such an intelligent argument and still use such an insulting term as "Rust Belt." No other portion of the country has been given such a demeaning and demoralizing appellation. Since it seems like this phrase will never die, I'm suggesting a few new ones. Seattle, San Francisco and L.A. would be the "Quake Belt." What the author refers to as the Sun Corridor is in reality the "Parch Belt." And the Gulf Coast, naturally, the "Zika Belt,"
40
Pure fantasy. When was the last time America build a nuclear power plant or oil pipeline? Every single major infrastructure proposal die a slow death bogged down by lefty student groups and humanities interest groups. After years of delay the multinational telescope project finally broke ground in Hawaii only to be suspended by lawsuit from Native American and lefty students because some pagan god lives on the mountain where the telescope is going to be even though the mountain already hosts a dozen telescope.
22
I have seen reflections of this map in 1984, filed with the DOJ along with the settlenent breakup plan for the Bell System, per a community-of-interest study of theirs. For a more insightful integration of psycho-demographic attributes, along with most salient of political and cultural factors compared to this commercial view, please see @WoodardColin's two books #AmericanCharacter and #AmericanNations published by @VikingBooks.
If the notion here is that the time has come to revamp the US Constitution in order to align the collapsing political state structure upon which we depend to efficaciously address the exigencies of our collective nation, then the political anarchy and economic dislocation arising from a dysfunctional Congress for the past eight years, along with the public upheaval seen throughout the 2016 election cycle, –erase all doubts, whatsoever, that this is, in fact, so disquietly now the case!
If the notion here is that the time has come to revamp the US Constitution in order to align the collapsing political state structure upon which we depend to efficaciously address the exigencies of our collective nation, then the political anarchy and economic dislocation arising from a dysfunctional Congress for the past eight years, along with the public upheaval seen throughout the 2016 election cycle, –erase all doubts, whatsoever, that this is, in fact, so disquietly now the case!
3
"As of 2015, Italy’s most important political players are no longer its dozens of laconic provinces, but 14 “Metropolitan Cities,” like Rome, Turin, Milan and Florence, each of which has been legislatively merged with its surrounding municipalities into larger and more economically viable subregions."
That's not really true. That's the program. But the reality is that the Regions are still the most important players. Provinces (sub-Region units), btw, have never been a particular important administrative unit in Italy; they mostly do roads and some schools' supervision.
That's not really true. That's the program. But the reality is that the Regions are still the most important players. Provinces (sub-Region units), btw, have never been a particular important administrative unit in Italy; they mostly do roads and some schools' supervision.
3
A nice armchair thought experiment, but...
Our states are not just homogeneous swappable pieces of geography. Each state is almost, ALMOST like a separate country with its own history, traditions, laws, cultures. I take no offense, perhaps I would make the same mistake if I were to try to write a similar piece about how the different countries and regions in all Southeast Asia should just agree to work together and do this and that for the sake of efficient business and economics.
Never
Going
to
happen.
Right?
Our states are not just homogeneous swappable pieces of geography. Each state is almost, ALMOST like a separate country with its own history, traditions, laws, cultures. I take no offense, perhaps I would make the same mistake if I were to try to write a similar piece about how the different countries and regions in all Southeast Asia should just agree to work together and do this and that for the sake of efficient business and economics.
Never
Going
to
happen.
Right?
8
Policy and support for education, very small business, and emphasis on community and support of people rather than globalization by car manufactures would work well in these regional hubs.
3
Love this creative thinking. Change in technology and expertise makes many of our states obsolete.
7
States are laboratories of democracy whether you like the outcome of some policies or not. The federal government, more specifically the Supreme Court is there to make sure constitutional rights are not crossed. Certainly ND and SD could be combined. Certainly California could be split into four. Either or, it's not happening. State rights is an issue for some, while others are way too happy further removing state rights and replacing it with a more direct democracy with US Senators also being replaced by more US Representatives (e.g. Bill Maher seems to favor this idea out of the hope a Switzerland styled direct democracy system.) I support a system that perhaps has some more state rights but mostly with a federal government as strong as it is and perhaps a strengthening of representative democracy and moving away from the trends of direct democracy (for example repealing the 17th amendment.) Either or, I gotta agree with others about the symbolism that states give to people and how society in the US is just as much reliant on states as it is of the Presidency. So thankfully this re-mapping is unlikely short of a revolution or civil war.
The high speed train map is kind of cool though, I'll give the author that. I'm all for cross country high speed rails that go as fast as the fastest rail lines in China and Japan.
The high speed train map is kind of cool though, I'll give the author that. I'm all for cross country high speed rails that go as fast as the fastest rail lines in China and Japan.
10
I guess Alaska and Hawaii don't exist in this Brave New World.
It also presupposes that we can roll merrily along with an economic model which views growth as essential to its success. That of course would mean paying no attention to overpopulation and global warming. All in all, it is a recipe for disaster. It might be economically more efficient, but in an uninhabitable or post apocalyptic world, that's not going to matter.
It also presupposes that we can roll merrily along with an economic model which views growth as essential to its success. That of course would mean paying no attention to overpopulation and global warming. All in all, it is a recipe for disaster. It might be economically more efficient, but in an uninhabitable or post apocalyptic world, that's not going to matter.
14
Nice flashback to the geography class I took 15 years ago. Talk of urban regions isn't new. But it doesn't sink in, and not just in politicians. Five minutes after the class was told how cities and suburbs form parts of the same whole, the "real city," people were lamenting about how people went from downtown to suburbs. Seven urban regions may exist, but unless 50 state governors and state legislatures sign on, it's not going to get anywhere.
8
This is a cute conceptualization but...so what? Who should do what differently as a result. The projected needs for infrastructure spending are the same regardless of whether you see geography this way, and the imperatives of political pork barrel don't change either.
8
The issues & attitudes of rural America are vastly different from urban America - things that can't be readily addressed just by changing lines on a map. Rural America wants and needs guns to hunt & fish and defend against animals; Suburban / Urban Americans don't need guns at all. Rural Americans have an ethos of independence and self-sufficiency and need to in order to survive, whereas urban folks look to the government to step in to assist and help. Just jiggering lines won't address the different ways these groups live.
16
It's an interesting map and if one looks closely and thinks about the basic idea, we can see the suggested economic/cultural regions not only cross US state boundaries, they cross international boundaries as well. Why shouldn't new regions be rationalized that not only do away with the inefficiencies of US "state" governments, but also some inefficiencies associated with international borders and other governments? I can think of all kinds of reasons for and against the idea, actually. But happily we already have the general solution to this kind of problem, don't we? The USA is a democratic country, as are Canada and Mexico. Why don't we just let those interested in the idea develop a plan and then put it to a (democratic) referendum where the citizens of the USA, Canada, and Mexico vote?
2
There's a large portion of the population that isn't connected, and never wants to be connected to anything other than their local customs, mores and religion. They consider New York and California the problem. Not North and South Dakota or "the" Carolinas. They're regressive. They resist science, modernity, reason, facts and change.
Our political system gives these areas over sized power in relationship to their populations and economic contribution to the nation. They have a powerful political party to represent their views. The GOP.
Our political system gives these areas over sized power in relationship to their populations and economic contribution to the nation. They have a powerful political party to represent their views. The GOP.
5
Mr. Khanna is correct when he describes our current Congress' neglect of super infrastructure projects like long distance electrical lines capable of carrying electricity from the heartland to both coasts or a coordinated high speed rail system along the lines of the interstate highways. The great political tragedy here is that the Republican party which gave us the Highways and the large support road systems after World War ll, has turned it's back on any form of national investment because "Government is the problem." That silly little Reaganism.
3
Get the businesses on board - the Koch brothers et al and organizations like the NRA. That will grab the attention of congress and especially the GOP. Otherwise forget about it.
1
Another bizarro construction by those who cannot tell Syracuse from Schenectady. Or in this case, Buffalo and Rochester from Syracuse. What earthly excuse is there for the way NYS is carved up? Identifying western, but not central, NYS as "rust belt"? Somehow extracting the intertwined industrial and agricultural interests of this area? Saner is the old-fashioned cultural map that links western NY to New England (all settled by like-minded Yankees with the social consciences that welcomed the likes of the women's movement and Douglass' North Star) vs. commercially-driven NYC, which western New Yorkers constantly pray becomes the problem of New Jersey and Connecticut.
6
OK, I'm going to ignore the blatant disregard for the individual cultures in every different state for now because everyone's already said enough about that.
Instead, I'd like to point out that this new system would still ignore a lot of major cities. I'm not very well-traveled, unfortunately, so I only know of one, but I think it speaks to the underlying inadequacy of this plan. As a native Kansan, I can't help but notice that Wichita, KS isn't on the map. The map doesn't even provide for a high speed rail that stops in Wichita. This is a huge problem because Wichita is a center of the aviation industry; it's literally called the "Air Capital of the World." There is a lot of airplane manufacturing that goes on in Wichita - it's the HQ of Cessna, and other companies like Boeing, Hawker Beechcraft, Learjet, and Spirit AeroSystems have huge manufacturing/production operations located in this city. Not having Wichita connected to other urban areas would be a HUGE mistake; whoever made this map obviously didn't do enough research on industrial cities and their importance.
Instead, I'd like to point out that this new system would still ignore a lot of major cities. I'm not very well-traveled, unfortunately, so I only know of one, but I think it speaks to the underlying inadequacy of this plan. As a native Kansan, I can't help but notice that Wichita, KS isn't on the map. The map doesn't even provide for a high speed rail that stops in Wichita. This is a huge problem because Wichita is a center of the aviation industry; it's literally called the "Air Capital of the World." There is a lot of airplane manufacturing that goes on in Wichita - it's the HQ of Cessna, and other companies like Boeing, Hawker Beechcraft, Learjet, and Spirit AeroSystems have huge manufacturing/production operations located in this city. Not having Wichita connected to other urban areas would be a HUGE mistake; whoever made this map obviously didn't do enough research on industrial cities and their importance.
3
Good thoughtful article. We need to think outside the box. However, our rural tribalism and gerrymandered states would never allow such ideas to be considered seriously.
People are going to argue about our states' history and pride to discourage any such thinking. We need bold thinking and real discussion about how to get over the status quo that we are in about income inequality and global competition and meaningful job creation etc.
People are going to argue about our states' history and pride to discourage any such thinking. We need bold thinking and real discussion about how to get over the status quo that we are in about income inequality and global competition and meaningful job creation etc.
4
The the elephant in the room is astonishingly hidden in this op Ed. None of this is going to matter if the scientists are telling us is coming with climate change. The ports of Tampa are going to be under water as are the ports in Texas, California, Washington, etc. I'm tired of city planners, economists, and politicians padding to the stupid of today. What has happened to Americans when they collectively agree that pouring billions of our tax dollars into doomed infrastructure is a good use of funds?
When will the country start confronting the future that is approaching faster than even the scientists predicted?
When will the country start confronting the future that is approaching faster than even the scientists predicted?
6
State lines never change. However everything else mentioned here from three million populated cities to infrastructural development over time does. Example one... Detroit. Example Two... NAFTA and free trade laws have eroded employment powerhouses like textiles in Pennsylvania and the South. And in reality the comfy bedfellow relationship between the government and business will only make things worse. To me this is reminiscent of the talk years ago toward a North American Union trashing the Constitution and uniting Mexico, canada and the US with a new one. In fact it looks like a basic first step in the creation of a larger oligarchy that further entrenches economic inequality instead of evening out the playing field. Call me cynical but I stopped trusting government with NAFTA, trickle-down economics and the advent of Reagan and the Clinton-Bush dynasties. Leave it alone. Why spoil the whole barrel when there are still some states better to live in than others?
3
This concept is politically impossible under the US Constitution in combination with American society, as long as our current States continue to exist.
And replacing our Constitution with another from of government is so dangerous as to be absurd, if not insane, especially considering the state of current politics in the USA.
In fact, the future trend of American politics and economics is much the opposite of what Parag Khanna has proposed. Over the next 50 years, States will begin to propose if not effect the separation of large, highly populated States into more, less populated smaller States.
Under our Constitution, low-populated States have relatively too much power in both Houses of Congress, and in electing our President via the Electoral Vote. These low-populated States are not about to agree to Amendments that would reduce their power.
To make our federal republic more democratic, and representative, the solution would be for big States, such as NY, California, Texas and Florida. to break up into multiple smaller States.
As an example, NY State and Vermont each have two Senators, although NY has 19.75 million people, while Vermont has 626,562 million. My county, Westchester, has 968,802 people, 50% more than all of Vermont's.
If Westchester seceded from NY State, to become the 51st State, Westchester would have two of its own senators, and one congressional Representative, while the rest of NY State would retain its two Senators, and lose a Representive.
And replacing our Constitution with another from of government is so dangerous as to be absurd, if not insane, especially considering the state of current politics in the USA.
In fact, the future trend of American politics and economics is much the opposite of what Parag Khanna has proposed. Over the next 50 years, States will begin to propose if not effect the separation of large, highly populated States into more, less populated smaller States.
Under our Constitution, low-populated States have relatively too much power in both Houses of Congress, and in electing our President via the Electoral Vote. These low-populated States are not about to agree to Amendments that would reduce their power.
To make our federal republic more democratic, and representative, the solution would be for big States, such as NY, California, Texas and Florida. to break up into multiple smaller States.
As an example, NY State and Vermont each have two Senators, although NY has 19.75 million people, while Vermont has 626,562 million. My county, Westchester, has 968,802 people, 50% more than all of Vermont's.
If Westchester seceded from NY State, to become the 51st State, Westchester would have two of its own senators, and one congressional Representative, while the rest of NY State would retain its two Senators, and lose a Representive.
5
I admire the intellectual daring it took to conceive and publish this radical vision of a new America based on urban connectivity, rather than the parochial interests of 50 individual statehouses. One of the more unfortunate aspects of American culture is the inability to be self-critical. We imagine that innovation is an essentially American phenomenon, and so distrust ideas which arise when outsiders look anew at how we organize our society. The logic of imagining impacts across a larger economic space than a single state, when conceiving massive infrastructure initiatives seems obvious. That is, unless your thinking is mired in a NIMBY, "my state first" mentality.
7
As long as small states have 2 senators nothing will change because of their ability to block anything that doesn't serve their interests. We will need a revolution to change their thinking. Perhaps not give them more money from the feds than they contribute?
8
The idea that anything requiring the US Congress to do something for the good of the country is a possibility shows the total naivete of the author. We can't even get our representatives to vote for funds to maintain the infrastructure that was previously approved. Until we vote in a Congress and a President that put the country ahead of the need to get reelected and reduce taxes on the rich, we are in for more of the same stagnancy we have experienced for the last six years.
9
So let me understand this. A foreign national in a tiny city state in Asia which is known for being basically a dictatorship is recommending how America should realign its political borders? He obviously has no concept of the cultural differences and boundaries that exist in this nation just like a lot of the commenters on this article. This is without a doubt on of the least thought out and most ridiculous idea that I have seen in a long time.
19
If the Northeastern states were allowed to stop sending over $50 billion annually in taxes to the needy states they could afford to build excellent infrastructure that supported their growth while reducing their need for fossil fuels that originate in the "great wastelands" aka the Great Plains. As some others have pointed out, secession of the Confederate States would be as much of a boon to the Northeast as it would have been 151 years ago. If the soon-to-be-flooded southeastern states wanted to be included and would agree to ending their Confederate era politics, I suppose the Great Northeast would be willing to include them too. But seriously who really needs the "Great Plains" ? Give them back to the buffalo !
4
I guess if you are a hammer, everything looks like a nail. I could, based upon the people I know and work with, make an equally persuasive argument for the opposite. This story should be accompanied by one of those maps they used to sell in the souvenir shops on 8th Ave--a New Yorker's View of the World.
The people I know all live in what you would call flyover country, by choice. They often work right from their home office but no matter where they live they find themselves flying to work. Because work is sometimes in NY, but it's just as frequently in Springfield MO.
In my ideal world the country would be made up a small self-sustaining communities with each their own butcher, baker and candlestick maker. These communities would be people-focused and homogeneous. In the 21st Century there is no reason to slog through hours of traffic or train time to sit at a desk in an office for 8 -10 hours. It's expensive and it wastes hours in the day slaughtering productivity.
And politically if the country was more homogeneous everyone could have a job and opportunity because it would be more difficult to isolate the "other". Instead of Walmart we'd have a local market. And a local butcher. There would be jobs a plenty for all. We'd have to figure out a way to make them pay better but there are people who LIKE running markets.
We need less City. Not more. And not everyone does City as well as NY.
The people I know all live in what you would call flyover country, by choice. They often work right from their home office but no matter where they live they find themselves flying to work. Because work is sometimes in NY, but it's just as frequently in Springfield MO.
In my ideal world the country would be made up a small self-sustaining communities with each their own butcher, baker and candlestick maker. These communities would be people-focused and homogeneous. In the 21st Century there is no reason to slog through hours of traffic or train time to sit at a desk in an office for 8 -10 hours. It's expensive and it wastes hours in the day slaughtering productivity.
And politically if the country was more homogeneous everyone could have a job and opportunity because it would be more difficult to isolate the "other". Instead of Walmart we'd have a local market. And a local butcher. There would be jobs a plenty for all. We'd have to figure out a way to make them pay better but there are people who LIKE running markets.
We need less City. Not more. And not everyone does City as well as NY.
14
What a great idea whose time has come! It's very refreshing to read ideas that will take us out of this outdated notion of 50 individual states. Food production is, however, an issue that needs to be included in any big-picture strategy, however. More investment in organic farming and the distribution of healthier food to all parts of the country is a huge issue that needs to he addressed.
6
""Correction: April 15, 2016
An earlier version of this article said that Congress provided support for the construction of the Erie Canal. Rather, the canal was funded by New York State.""
A minor detail to overlook - given that the underlying argument here is that local authorities are somehow less-capable at determining what's in their own best interests compared to Congress.
Basically, the Erie Canal - like the Golden Gate Bridge - is a counter example to the idea that the Federal Government should play a stronger role in regional infrastructure.
The fact is that the Federal Govt is probably the very worst possible body to be involved in the allocation of resources to help nurture regional economic development. Local investment has its own skin in the game; the feds do not. Which is why Federal money inevitably funds boondoggles like the F-35
An earlier version of this article said that Congress provided support for the construction of the Erie Canal. Rather, the canal was funded by New York State.""
A minor detail to overlook - given that the underlying argument here is that local authorities are somehow less-capable at determining what's in their own best interests compared to Congress.
Basically, the Erie Canal - like the Golden Gate Bridge - is a counter example to the idea that the Federal Government should play a stronger role in regional infrastructure.
The fact is that the Federal Govt is probably the very worst possible body to be involved in the allocation of resources to help nurture regional economic development. Local investment has its own skin in the game; the feds do not. Which is why Federal money inevitably funds boondoggles like the F-35
3
The US Senate, run by small-minded people from small states -- people like McConnell and Barasso and Thune -- consistently overrides the will of the great majority of citizens. They are doing it right now with the SC nominee of a president who won rwo huge electoral victories, the last time garnering 66 million votes. Until the Senate is retired as an institution, or made to reflect the popular will, there is no hope of change And they are not going to dissolve themselves. That a reactionary senator from Idaho or Alabama who rejects science and progresshave the power to thwart the urgent needs of a city like NY, or a state like California, is a travesty. A crime, at this point, sanctioned by a deal at the 18th century Constitutional convention that preserved the power of slave-owning states. Also, why do the two Dakotas,with a miniscule population between them, have 4 US senators? Start with getting one Dakota state, combining Vermont and New Hampshire, and making Alaska a territory again.
2
"More than America’s military grand strategy, such an economic master plan would determine if America remained the world’s leading superpower." Very wishful thinking because the author assumes the world is at peace. But as long as countries incur civil wars or they fight each other American military will be the strength that will keep us a superpower. And lets not forget how much our allies and even some enemies depend on out military strength to keep their economies stable.
1
At last some proposals that explore what the US could look like if obsolete state (and national) borders were eliminated! While hearts may prefer the traditional borders of states, heads should be looking at the more natural ways connections occur. From increasingly important watersheds to regional centers of excellence for health care, borders are impediments to progress.
For many aspects of daily life, the state in which one resides restricts in real ways the freedom one enjoys for access to health care, employment, marriage and even bathrooms! The education of children, being able to openly carry guns, investments in high speed transportation are currently affected by state legislatures dominated by rural districts unwilling to understand the needs of urban areas and by urban populations which have no experience with government or private services located hours away.
The water pollution allowed by one state's lax regulations and enforcement flows with the rivers and ground water into surrounding states. The air in one state contains the residue of fires, industrial pollution and factory farming done in neighboring states--and countries. Here along Florida's Gulf coast, our air and water are affected by what is allowed in Mexico, Texas and other oil dependent Gulf coast states where we do not have any political influence.
I hope there will be more articles and attention paid to the negative consequences of using state boundaries for decision-making.
For many aspects of daily life, the state in which one resides restricts in real ways the freedom one enjoys for access to health care, employment, marriage and even bathrooms! The education of children, being able to openly carry guns, investments in high speed transportation are currently affected by state legislatures dominated by rural districts unwilling to understand the needs of urban areas and by urban populations which have no experience with government or private services located hours away.
The water pollution allowed by one state's lax regulations and enforcement flows with the rivers and ground water into surrounding states. The air in one state contains the residue of fires, industrial pollution and factory farming done in neighboring states--and countries. Here along Florida's Gulf coast, our air and water are affected by what is allowed in Mexico, Texas and other oil dependent Gulf coast states where we do not have any political influence.
I hope there will be more articles and attention paid to the negative consequences of using state boundaries for decision-making.
3
Why don't we all just secede, some can rejoin England (oops BRexit makes that problematical) others join Aztecia or Aztlan,
and NYers who are the center of the world (in our own minds) won't notice anyway
and NYers who are the center of the world (in our own minds) won't notice anyway
2
The writer makes an excellent case for government economic planning and growth on a geographical basis, but makes no mention of any political structure to support it. Given our current and longstanding political structure of States, Counties, Cities, Towns, etc. I don't see any road to making this suggestion become a reality.
1
It's interesting how many people assume this essay is advocating to replace states. These commenters see it as impractical for this reason, or rush to defend a staet's uniwque culture. Why are we American's so defensive?
The author clearly stated: "The states aren’t about to go away, but economically and socially, the country is drifting toward looser metropolitan and regional formations, anchored by the great cities and urban archipelagos that already lead global economic circuits."
The author clearly stated: "The states aren’t about to go away, but economically and socially, the country is drifting toward looser metropolitan and regional formations, anchored by the great cities and urban archipelagos that already lead global economic circuits."
2
Worthwhile comments!
1
Disregarding the question of state lines, and looking only at the proposed rail lines, I see a lot of quirks. How does one get form Boston or New York to Chicago? Or from Minneapolis to anywhere west of Minneapolis?
3
Those commenters who express resistance to this idea of economic clusters have been living under a rock. They have no idea what they are talking about.
The regionalization of which the author writes has been advancing for decades. It has been analyzed at length by economists, mayors, planners and business people. As the author points out, it is a world-wide phenomenon. It is both inevitable and unstoppable.
The role of the federal government should be to encourage, expedite and smooth this process, bringing to bear both tax incentives and technical expertise.
In doing so, Washington should give priority to those isolated urban centers that are being left behind, and help them build viable economic clusters of their own.
Economic regionalization – urban clusters – is the future. If you don't like it, go back under your rock.
The regionalization of which the author writes has been advancing for decades. It has been analyzed at length by economists, mayors, planners and business people. As the author points out, it is a world-wide phenomenon. It is both inevitable and unstoppable.
The role of the federal government should be to encourage, expedite and smooth this process, bringing to bear both tax incentives and technical expertise.
In doing so, Washington should give priority to those isolated urban centers that are being left behind, and help them build viable economic clusters of their own.
Economic regionalization – urban clusters – is the future. If you don't like it, go back under your rock.
22
I missed where in the constitution or the Federalist Papers you discovered this "role of the federal government" to macro-manage the nation's economic development from on high like some kind of soviet Gosplan committee
2
The federal government would have to lubricate this financially, politically and vigorously, because the buy-in has to happen in the local regions. Oregon and Washington cannot manage to agree on building a new highway bridge over the Columbia, much less agree to a regional mass transit system to extend light rail service from Portland to Vancouver. All politics is local, as Sen. Dirkson once said.
1
Given that none of the alleged economic or technological benefits is anything more than hooey, Imagine my surprise to see that this wasn't the New Yorker and the author not Andy Borowitz. . .
10
Joel Garreau explored this very idea in 1981 "Nine Nations of America". I read that in college. Wonder how it would reread today.
12
It might read like Colin Woodard's more recent book American Nations, which applies historical and sociological developments to make much more convincing claims about cultural regions across the continent (not just in the U.S.).
A first step (just to try things out and see how it goes...) would be to separate into 2 groups of states. We could call them "The Union" and "The Confederacy".
These neo-countries do not have to be contiguous. There could be a referendum in each state where each state could choose to go Union or Confederate.
The most important thing is that the finances of the Union and the Confederacy must be separate. After a generation or 2 of no longer living off Union subsidy while simultaneously complaining about big government, a thing or 2 might change in the Confederacy. Or not.
The biggest flaw in this plan is that it would touch off an immediate arms race between the Union and the Confederacy. But at least the military-industrial welfare queens on each side would love it.
These neo-countries do not have to be contiguous. There could be a referendum in each state where each state could choose to go Union or Confederate.
The most important thing is that the finances of the Union and the Confederacy must be separate. After a generation or 2 of no longer living off Union subsidy while simultaneously complaining about big government, a thing or 2 might change in the Confederacy. Or not.
The biggest flaw in this plan is that it would touch off an immediate arms race between the Union and the Confederacy. But at least the military-industrial welfare queens on each side would love it.
17
It might be noted that the big, progressive national measures (such as Land-Grant Colleges and the continental railroad) were only taken after the South left Congress and the dead hand of regionalism had been lifted
2
Maybe cabinet level positions and Congressional committees to organize common goals for regions would be good. I don't think the writer really understands how big the country is though. You have to drive ffor days at a time to get someplace a 1000 or 2000 miles away to get a feel of it. The metropolitan area of my hometown Houston is about as big as Belgium.
8
This article doesn't suggest any political upheaval, certainly not abolishing cultural differences between states and regions. All it proposes, reasonably, is a refocusing of infrastructure projects from limited to state borders to economically more viable multi-state ones. It also points out to narrowly political obstacles to such approach, without trying to offer any remedies to overcome them because it would be a subject of an entirely different article.
2
Surprised that Charleston, SC is left off the map. Charleston is a major port in the Southeast and serves BMW, Volvo, General Electric (and other) industrial companies in North and South Carolina. Not to mention Boeing and several prominent tech companies in the Charleston metro.
5
Khanna's daring and breathtaking vision of tectonic shifts in American life confronts us with exhilarating and terrifying options that like all evolutionary disruptions must be met with shared vision and purpose. But we have grotesque dysfunction. Amidst the farce of American electoral processes there is no one with comprehensive, well articulated, reality based feasible plans of action. Promising free college education is not a plan. Building a wall is a farce. No one except futurists like Khanna can articulate the terrifying, overwhelming complexities and realities of constantly accelerating cultural, racial, economic, scientific and technological change. Who will rise to accept this challenge and offer leadership that clearly grasps and communicates the reality of these challenges? Those reality based modes of adaptation are taking place in local communities in which the infusion of daring youth show us the way revolutionizing the South and awakening America to the new social order of celebration of difference and diversity. We need bold vision and creative options. We need more who like Khanna challenge us to embrace the future with energy, creativity, compassion and realistic feasible plans.
6
""But we have grotesque dysfunction.""
Which is actually just your way of admitting, "this is not a one-size-fits-all country", and thank god.
Top down "plans" don't work. The 'Panel of Experts' progressive ideal is a joke. Their works belie their credentials. Imagine people like Jonathan Gruber being in charge of entire swaths of the economy and you might realize that the true dystopia is what you're wishing for.
Which is actually just your way of admitting, "this is not a one-size-fits-all country", and thank god.
Top down "plans" don't work. The 'Panel of Experts' progressive ideal is a joke. Their works belie their credentials. Imagine people like Jonathan Gruber being in charge of entire swaths of the economy and you might realize that the true dystopia is what you're wishing for.
5
A fascinating map but why do we need it? We have Rand McNally road maps,
county and state atlases, databases that source economic and demographic data by zip codes, train maps, maritime maps, airline route maps. We have
social networks, resource maps of the North American continent. We have advanced degree programs and faculty positions in geography, sociology, computer science, mathematics etc. etc.. We have this map thing down.
I know we need to compete in a global economy...but....we are already spending tens of billions or more each year on military intelligence, business intelligence, national and urban planning, corporate planning, infrastructure designs, higher education pertaining to these domains...what else?
county and state atlases, databases that source economic and demographic data by zip codes, train maps, maritime maps, airline route maps. We have
social networks, resource maps of the North American continent. We have advanced degree programs and faculty positions in geography, sociology, computer science, mathematics etc. etc.. We have this map thing down.
I know we need to compete in a global economy...but....we are already spending tens of billions or more each year on military intelligence, business intelligence, national and urban planning, corporate planning, infrastructure designs, higher education pertaining to these domains...what else?
4
Great idea. Well thought out. But nothing along these lines will happen until the regions as described here get their states to sign compacts involving the sharing of federal money based on coordinated planning.
The state legislatures will have to turn control in some ways over to regional authorities, whose boards could have elected representatives as well as appointed ones. Congress is not the only dysfunctional legislature. Many states have the same problem as the federal government, namely the control of the legislatures by rural areas that do not mind doing harm to the urban clusters.
On the federal level, the isolated backwaters have taken over the Republican party and ideologically believe it is their moral duty to paralyze the federal government (except for war and military spending).
North Carolina is an example within a state of a dysfunctional, destructive, rural dominated legislature.. The rural areas support right wing policies that hurt the state's economy. The rural areas have been feeling left out and oppressed by the urbanites and the universities. Now they are getting their revenge, and the urbanites and educated are feeling left out and oppressed.
The state legislatures will have to turn control in some ways over to regional authorities, whose boards could have elected representatives as well as appointed ones. Congress is not the only dysfunctional legislature. Many states have the same problem as the federal government, namely the control of the legislatures by rural areas that do not mind doing harm to the urban clusters.
On the federal level, the isolated backwaters have taken over the Republican party and ideologically believe it is their moral duty to paralyze the federal government (except for war and military spending).
North Carolina is an example within a state of a dysfunctional, destructive, rural dominated legislature.. The rural areas support right wing policies that hurt the state's economy. The rural areas have been feeling left out and oppressed by the urbanites and the universities. Now they are getting their revenge, and the urbanites and educated are feeling left out and oppressed.
16
Our state boundaries are kind of silly and often arbitrary when you get into it.
4
My favorite is the Northern boundary of Delaware, which was determined by the distance a cannon could be fired from the cupola of the courthouse in New Castle. This is why a piece of New Jersey is part of Delaware.
1
The region with MI wins… they have all the fresh water. And that's all that will matter in the future.
7
Hmmm. I see what you've done there with the Gulf Coast and the Pacific Coast. You aren't expecting us around long, are you?
9
Why the gap between DC and Richmond? The density of residents there is MUCH higher than the vast majority of the Front Range.
I do find it gratifying that travel by high speed rail from Minneapolis to Denver no longer requires a trip to Chicago, as Amtrak currently does!
I do find it gratifying that travel by high speed rail from Minneapolis to Denver no longer requires a trip to Chicago, as Amtrak currently does!
4
The problem also exists within the states' borders. Look at California's high speed rail project: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_High-Speed_Rail. The voters approved it years ago and between politics, state / local government inefficiencies, it will take years for this to be up and functional. If you compare this to what is planned and done in China, Singapore, other countries - it is absolutely embarrassing (as a US taxpayer) to see this. Actually it's pathetic! Don't even get me started about something more local and in the center of innovation / high tech - BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit). Sigh...
9
Is the Times just being ironic
In calling Italians 'laconic'?
Few words were just parta
The whole Greek vibe up in Sparta.
A distinction that's not merely phonic.
In calling Italians 'laconic'?
Few words were just parta
The whole Greek vibe up in Sparta.
A distinction that's not merely phonic.
2
grrr !! for example: straight lining from denver to SLC sort of ignores the great and diffuse mountain chain in between, as if our map is flat... considering phoenix-denver-SLC one mega-corridor sort of ignores the very vast distances, natural landscapes, and climate changes... sure, regional development ought to be a no-brainer: consolidating resources and collaborating. but this map is so simplistic in its thinking i'm not sure if it is really based more on (a) an overlay of time zones we already know about and/or (b) an overlay of existing airport hub& spoke routes and/or (c) just straightening out existing interstate highways... hardly much imagination here. commuting for work from Reno to SLC? ridiculous! populating the bonneville flats to do so? well that would be quite ugly. would we drag big pipelines to support whatever it is this supposedly envisions? flatten mountains? pave over rivers and lakes? i don't know the rest of the country as well but ignoring the rocky mountains is a staggering failure of thought, for starters...
12
This map completely ignores the simple fact that the Widely diverse geography of tour country. The population if the great western states is small largely because of vast mountain ranges, desert, and the sheer SIZE of the country. If we concentrate all the power and wealth of the country into urban areas,what does that do to our farms and ranches that provide food for the nation? What does it do to the oil fields? These vital areas of our economy require large amounts of land and therefore sparser populations. The states were created to provide representative government for our vast Republic so that even the sparsely populated areas have a voice. Do not take away the voice of middle America.
1
What a great article about thinking outside the box. Shift the thinking and great things could happen. And it makes me feel vindicated because I have thought for sometime now that California should join the EU. We are much more like France than Iowa!!
All kidding aside, bon idée.
All kidding aside, bon idée.
7
Some of this may make more sense if one remembers the ideas of Thomas Jefferson, that being that the Constitution. should be rewritten in its entirety every ten years or so. The Constitution is a brilliant structure for our government. But maybe the idea of separate states is no longer practical. maybe it's time to think in terms of fewer states that have some political and ideological connections.
6
America does not need “a new map."
Dropping catchy sounding overlays on a map of the US misses the point of where cities and states stand in our economic and political environment.
Any sort of mandated connectives within or across regions is beyond reach when cities and states and their federal connectivity is in such disarray.
Just look at Congress and most State governance when it comes to setting local policy on wages and discrimination.
As for the real world, does anyone think that Albany has a clue about how Greater New York Metro should be governed? The Hudson River rail tunnels lie within the center of a thirty to forty-million person population center. Two governors and their legislative minions have sure messed up that piece of infrastructure.
Greater Metropolitan Washington is interconnected, but its city links to Annapolis and Richmond are hard to see, and the same stands for DC’s links to NYC.
Oh, except for a very crowded I-95 and a dilapidated electric rail line.
The author might think about how Singapore works as a "City-State" and write a new essay on how to apply that model to NYC and DC and LA, et al.
Dropping catchy sounding overlays on a map of the US misses the point of where cities and states stand in our economic and political environment.
Any sort of mandated connectives within or across regions is beyond reach when cities and states and their federal connectivity is in such disarray.
Just look at Congress and most State governance when it comes to setting local policy on wages and discrimination.
As for the real world, does anyone think that Albany has a clue about how Greater New York Metro should be governed? The Hudson River rail tunnels lie within the center of a thirty to forty-million person population center. Two governors and their legislative minions have sure messed up that piece of infrastructure.
Greater Metropolitan Washington is interconnected, but its city links to Annapolis and Richmond are hard to see, and the same stands for DC’s links to NYC.
Oh, except for a very crowded I-95 and a dilapidated electric rail line.
The author might think about how Singapore works as a "City-State" and write a new essay on how to apply that model to NYC and DC and LA, et al.
5
Can someone please direct me to a map that reflects a political structure where my current Blue State tax dollars are not siphoned off to climate-denying, gerrymandered, sexist/racist/homophobic, guns-in-schools/churches loving, and 'un-Christian' Christian Red States?
22
You represent the contradiction between economic liberalism and cultural liberalism. They are really different.
1
Actually, its not your tax-dollars getting siphoned so much as your tax-paying population. 3.4m people have left Cali in the last 2 decade for lower-tax 'red' states.
https://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/great-california-exodus-closer-...
https://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/great-california-exodus-closer-...
4
So you're saying you don't want some of the poorest children in the country to enjoy Medicaid benefits, free lunch and other federally subsidized nutrition programs, and Head Start, because of how many (white) people in those children's states vote? Or you want to deny VAWA grants to organizations in states with high rates of domestic violence, again because of the voting patterns of some of the populace?
Nice.
Yes, I get it: you think those people in Red States--perhaps especially Southern Red States--are just awful people, and it's important for you to express your indignation at and resentment of them. But please--districts, states, whatever-- we are all one country.
Nice.
Yes, I get it: you think those people in Red States--perhaps especially Southern Red States--are just awful people, and it's important for you to express your indignation at and resentment of them. But please--districts, states, whatever-- we are all one country.
6
I think that each region would need to be able to produce the resources neccessary to operate independently of one another, so that they could exist outside of each others economic influence. As such, the West Coast Empire would not survive without the eastern parts of those West Coast States
5
This is an old concept. I was reading about this 25 years ago. Today, of course, with our culturally fragmented society, it is perhaps particularly relevant.
1
In America old ways and traditions are in need of change. There are entrenched Republican groups in power who wallow in their myopic misconceptions of power and greed who resist building a stronger and more efficient America.
Missed opportunities prevail.
Plans to build high-speed rail corridors connecting major metropolises have gone nowhere. The decaying infrastructure across the country which has prevailed for decades is in need of development. America is the only country in the world still using the old imperial system of measures (gallons and yards) while the rest of the world has adopted the metric system of measures (liters and meters). Gun controls are horribly weak and America has the highest rate of deaths by firearms in the world. Other defining examples of a dysfunctional America in the misguided mismanagement of its population are evident in high infant mortality, high incarceration rates, high poverty and poor education.
The establishment of priorities to guide America to be stronger, economically more powerful and equitable to its disadvantaged population is often obstructed by Republican malfeasance and its archaic struggle for power. These are major impediments to build for change and to strengthen the nation. Public policy development is too often in gridlock in DC and the results are imperfect legislations that do not address the problems raised.
Thomas Watson, the founder of IBM, once said:
“…it's very difficult to build and very easy to destroy.”
Missed opportunities prevail.
Plans to build high-speed rail corridors connecting major metropolises have gone nowhere. The decaying infrastructure across the country which has prevailed for decades is in need of development. America is the only country in the world still using the old imperial system of measures (gallons and yards) while the rest of the world has adopted the metric system of measures (liters and meters). Gun controls are horribly weak and America has the highest rate of deaths by firearms in the world. Other defining examples of a dysfunctional America in the misguided mismanagement of its population are evident in high infant mortality, high incarceration rates, high poverty and poor education.
The establishment of priorities to guide America to be stronger, economically more powerful and equitable to its disadvantaged population is often obstructed by Republican malfeasance and its archaic struggle for power. These are major impediments to build for change and to strengthen the nation. Public policy development is too often in gridlock in DC and the results are imperfect legislations that do not address the problems raised.
Thomas Watson, the founder of IBM, once said:
“…it's very difficult to build and very easy to destroy.”
2
"America is the only country in the world still using the old imperial system of measures (gallons and yards) while the rest of the world has adopted the metric system of measures (liters and meters)."
The US will adopt the metric system in exchange for the rest of the world adopting English as the Universal Standard language.
The US will adopt the metric system in exchange for the rest of the world adopting English as the Universal Standard language.
1
Fascinating! Finally someone dares to take a look at the whole country and make some proposals to get the country to do better... improve the infrax, let regions focus on their strengths and connect it all, literally and virtually.
Looking at this from not only the 50 state condition but the 3,143 counties that make up the states one could quickly realize that the level of duplication across all these entities puts the county in a position of gross in-efficiencies. We could probably save 50% or more in the cost of providing the services currently performed by the counties if we combined and reduced the number to 1000 or less, for instance. They all do the same things, roughly... local law enforcement, records, personnel, collect real estate taxes and serve as a conduit between the cities and the state governments. Maybe we don't need them at all? Might be worth a look after 250 years of a system that was "designed" to put a county seat no more than a day's ride on horseback from each other... really!
Looking at this from not only the 50 state condition but the 3,143 counties that make up the states one could quickly realize that the level of duplication across all these entities puts the county in a position of gross in-efficiencies. We could probably save 50% or more in the cost of providing the services currently performed by the counties if we combined and reduced the number to 1000 or less, for instance. They all do the same things, roughly... local law enforcement, records, personnel, collect real estate taxes and serve as a conduit between the cities and the state governments. Maybe we don't need them at all? Might be worth a look after 250 years of a system that was "designed" to put a county seat no more than a day's ride on horseback from each other... really!
3
The ideas have merit but completely ignores our state and federal systems that have given too much representation to sparsely populated areas over more populated areas. The ideas behind the creation of the House of Representatives was to ensure that the little guys weren't ignored but at this point the little guys (meaning less populated areas) are having more to say than they should. Is it possible to achieve a true balance? I can't imagine any representative willingly given up his/her power, so that's why Governors are leading the charge.
1
Many comments verify the author's observations that the US operates with a "sacrosanct" attitude that somehow State cultural and regional differences are immovable objects.
Hmmm, it took an "outsider", probably a Muslim, to point out solutions, that Trump should consider, to "Make America 'Wonderful' Again"
Hmmm, it took an "outsider", probably a Muslim, to point out solutions, that Trump should consider, to "Make America 'Wonderful' Again"
2
All of this is moot if American corporate culture remains focused on short term gains for shareholders.
6
We don't need more globalization and central planning. This is how Parag Khanna makes his living - promoting globalization and elite interests.
Less local control means more decisions placed in the hands of an ever-smaller group of people, a.ka. "rulers".
No thanks. Messy and inefficient as our current structure may be, state and local governments are necessary to democracy and self-determination. How are "the people" to have a voice when government grows ever more distant from the grass roots?
The movement we need is to encourage more people to get involved on the local level, in school and community boards and town meetings. With more citizen involvement on a local level, situations like that in Flint, MI would not occur. Note that a Federal agency, the EPA, was responsible for regulating and overseeing local decisions about water supply and that oversight failed miserably.
Parag Khanna makes his living promoting globalization. Enough said.
Less local control means more decisions placed in the hands of an ever-smaller group of people, a.ka. "rulers".
No thanks. Messy and inefficient as our current structure may be, state and local governments are necessary to democracy and self-determination. How are "the people" to have a voice when government grows ever more distant from the grass roots?
The movement we need is to encourage more people to get involved on the local level, in school and community boards and town meetings. With more citizen involvement on a local level, situations like that in Flint, MI would not occur. Note that a Federal agency, the EPA, was responsible for regulating and overseeing local decisions about water supply and that oversight failed miserably.
Parag Khanna makes his living promoting globalization. Enough said.
11
Meanwhile, there is an active movement to divide California into six separate states. The problem, as many here have pointed out, is that the dynamic parts of our culture and economy are in linked urban areas but the political power is widely dispersed with rural areas and small dying cities able to control much of the national agenda. This power structure is established by the Constitution and would require a revolution to modify.
4
First, I don't think some of the readers in this forum fully comprehend what Khanna is saying here. He is not saying that new states have to be created or the old ones abandoned. The states get to keep their heritage, culture, history or whatever. He literally says, "We don’t have to create these regions; they already exist". All he's saying is something we kind of know already: that relationships among and between cities has become more important than that among the states.
Secondly, much of anxiety this article seems to generate comes from the high speed rail problem. Are people just afraid of major engineering projects? The word "boondoggle" comes up any time someone proposes high speed rail, as if it was some high-spec, conceptual proposition thought up by academics in a think tank instead of a viable option with observable analogs - present RIGHT NOW - in other regions of the world (Japan, Western Europe, and now some locations in China).
What happened to "No Small Plans"? I mean do some readers think that this country has never attempted major innovative projects before. Do they think the highway system was a "boondoggle"? Apparently not, we seem to like that one. Or how about the Apollo Program? Have we just lost any confidence that we are capable of thinking and behaving in scales larger than an election cycle?
Secondly, much of anxiety this article seems to generate comes from the high speed rail problem. Are people just afraid of major engineering projects? The word "boondoggle" comes up any time someone proposes high speed rail, as if it was some high-spec, conceptual proposition thought up by academics in a think tank instead of a viable option with observable analogs - present RIGHT NOW - in other regions of the world (Japan, Western Europe, and now some locations in China).
What happened to "No Small Plans"? I mean do some readers think that this country has never attempted major innovative projects before. Do they think the highway system was a "boondoggle"? Apparently not, we seem to like that one. Or how about the Apollo Program? Have we just lost any confidence that we are capable of thinking and behaving in scales larger than an election cycle?
14
""a viable option with observable analogs - present RIGHT NOW - in other regions of the world ""
High speed rail works in Europe & Japan because they are both places with fewer dense population centers separated by fairly small distances.
The US is nothing like that. We have hundreds of cities separated by thousands of miles, and in-between are lots of smaller regional cities that would need access to the network. The result is that the automobile is a far-more efficient mode of transport. The comparisons w/ Europe or Japan simply don't apply.
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2010/11/why-the-us-will-not-...
""It's no coincidence that the only place we have anything that could even be arguably dubbed High Speed Rail is the one area where four cities are already pretty tightly clustered together. And that doesn't go very fast because it uses existing rights of way, and because the politicians that fund it like to have it make stops in their city. ... Stops are the enemy of speed.""
High speed rail works in Europe & Japan because they are both places with fewer dense population centers separated by fairly small distances.
The US is nothing like that. We have hundreds of cities separated by thousands of miles, and in-between are lots of smaller regional cities that would need access to the network. The result is that the automobile is a far-more efficient mode of transport. The comparisons w/ Europe or Japan simply don't apply.
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2010/11/why-the-us-will-not-...
""It's no coincidence that the only place we have anything that could even be arguably dubbed High Speed Rail is the one area where four cities are already pretty tightly clustered together. And that doesn't go very fast because it uses existing rights of way, and because the politicians that fund it like to have it make stops in their city. ... Stops are the enemy of speed.""
It would require a so far unattainable political will to design, finance, build and maintain such a network of high speed trains. That they would benefit the economy is almost without doubt. But the taxes to pay for it must come from those who have benefited most from the current economic system: a strongly graduated tax on all income has been shown to divert funds to building an infrastructure that is economically/environmentally sustainable for the planet.
I drove across this country twice this year, from DC to SF and back, once on I70 and back on I80. A beautiful drive. I thought I'd be very bored but was actually entranced. There is a reason our current states were created, and I think they work pretty well. Each state has its own distinction, and some regionalism. I've been to most of this proposed map and can't see the vision of it working in the manner of say, grouping SF with Seattle. They're too different. Adopting this kind of map for simple efficiency reminds me of India and China-forced. And a loss of identity and unique indigenous culture. The strength of this country is not how fast we integrate for more information and consumer consumption, but how we adapt to it, where we grew up, our regional values, spirit and economies, both slow and fast contribute greatly. I saw this country up close and its a spectacular place. I don't want to see 100 million population cities, no matter how efficient they might be.
31
Speaking for NH, we'd like less integration with the Great Dumb Down, not more.
8
I think the country should be divided into 12 ... no, 14 ... no ... no, wait ... 13, yes 13, Districts, with one Capitol City located near the geographic center.
4
ah, yes...the US version of the Hunger Games, but based on economic growth. Hmmm. Has possibilities.
2
"The 21st century will not be a competition over territory, but over connectivity..." You might want to discuss that comment with Mr. Putin, Mr. Netanyahu, ISIS/ISIL, China and a host of other nations. Mr. Khanna may be a creative scholar but he does not seem to have a realistic grasp of current events and world leaders.
11
When New Jersey Governor Chris Christie refused to support the construction of a much-needed new rail tunnel linking New Jersey and New York City, he was certainly embracing a narrow, state-based way of thinking that will hurt the regional and national economy in the long-run.
4
The main reason Christie did not support the original tunnel plan was that it made NJ responsible for any cost overruns. I believe that for the Boston "Dig Dig" the overruns amounted to several times the original estimated cost.
2
Do you think this could facilitate the breakup of the United States of America? Strength and superior force would be concentrated.
2
I guess that would all depend on where the military bases were located. The liberal/progressives do not want any military bases, especially nuclear weapons, anywhere near them.
1
Wow! Everything for the industrialized areas, and let the rest of the country fend for itself. A liberal's dream come true.
8
Not at all--there are liberals in small towns, too. I would certainly support increased infrastructure spending...but I am pretty cynical about the prospect of the "city states" remembering to fund rail lines and high speed internet to small towns and rural communities. Money rarely goes to improving service to rural communities.
4
My first reaction to this proposal was to look at the map to find where I live. I was shocked to see a representative dot for Syracuse, one for Buffalo, and none for Rochester, which would seem to be straddling the line between North East and Great Lakes. I was a little put off that our urban center of >1 million was ignored.
But after that I started looking at other areas in the US that I have lived. Really, all of them were represented as islands -- maybe of future prosperity, but cut off from the surroundings that make them unique.
A number of people have made comments about the impracticality of the suggestion and the way it ignores the history and culture of our country -- all good thoughts. However, there is an idea here which rings true to me: that historical borders leave politicians in an unnatural scramble for their state's slice of the pie. The assumption that its a zero-sum game is wrong. Our politics needs an injection of new incentives to ensure that our higher interests are served.
But after that I started looking at other areas in the US that I have lived. Really, all of them were represented as islands -- maybe of future prosperity, but cut off from the surroundings that make them unique.
A number of people have made comments about the impracticality of the suggestion and the way it ignores the history and culture of our country -- all good thoughts. However, there is an idea here which rings true to me: that historical borders leave politicians in an unnatural scramble for their state's slice of the pie. The assumption that its a zero-sum game is wrong. Our politics needs an injection of new incentives to ensure that our higher interests are served.
2
Respectfully, for all of his education, the author fails to understand the US Constitution, which imagined a federal government with limited and enumerated powers over a free people: 10th amendment: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
We were never meant to be a people governed by a singular power. That is what we were trying to escape when our country was founded. The 'next president' does not need to think outside of the box with regards to how the states work, unless frankly, he's suggesting that we ditch what he seems to think is our outdated Constitution.
We were never meant to be a people governed by a singular power. That is what we were trying to escape when our country was founded. The 'next president' does not need to think outside of the box with regards to how the states work, unless frankly, he's suggesting that we ditch what he seems to think is our outdated Constitution.
9
Ditching sounds a bit harsh, but evolving, yes! Think about it: When we talk about individuals in the workforce we continuously preach eternal learning, adjusting career paths etc. Comparing capitalism over communism I would argue the role of greed was overrated. What made the capitalistic model more successfull was that it was less rigid, used trial and error, and rewarded innovation. We were slightly better than the Dinosaur communism, but we can do so much better if we bring competition, flexibility, and innovation to our institutions rather than trying to shrink then until they fit in a bathtub...... This shrinking would include us....
2
Looks like the beginning of Panem but with 7 districts rather than 12.
1
This looks like the Hunger Games map of America.
5
Looks like the map for the Crew.
Interesting read. ~The map reminded me a bit of Panem from 'The Hunger Games', though.
1
Parag Khanna must be applauded for proposing a radical solution to a vexing problem that has arisen from a historical quirk, i.e., how the states were created in the first place over two centuries ago.
However, there is no mention of Joel Garreau's nine-nation map of North America (not just the USA). Almost thiry years back, Professor Garreau saw that there were cultural and political similarities in these nine regions. Professor Khanna has taken it forward and brough it to the twenty-first century. I only wish he had referenced this pioneering work from the past.
For those interested, here are two links to the nine nation proposal:
http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2014/07/03/where-do-borders-need-to...
https://www.google.com/search?q=garreau+nine+nations&espv=2&biw=...
However, there is no mention of Joel Garreau's nine-nation map of North America (not just the USA). Almost thiry years back, Professor Garreau saw that there were cultural and political similarities in these nine regions. Professor Khanna has taken it forward and brough it to the twenty-first century. I only wish he had referenced this pioneering work from the past.
For those interested, here are two links to the nine nation proposal:
http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2014/07/03/where-do-borders-need-to...
https://www.google.com/search?q=garreau+nine+nations&espv=2&biw=...
2
No we don't have to do this. Let's just Gerrymander the Congressional Districts, so only people that agree with US (we're smart) are elected! Ohh! We do that already? Sorry--never mind
Sorry but reading this and all I can think of is the Hunger Games
5
I think the authors need to go and read Colin Woodwards “American Nations: A History of the Eleven Rival Regional Cultures of North America.” Woodard contends that we see the clashes between these "nations" every day - on every kind of issue imaginable. This map here will work (and the ideas behind it) - but only if you take out the historical and cultural elements that make up these 11 nations.........and that ain't gonna happen.
2
Your idea has merit, but remember, we are a nation that can't muster the political will to retire the paper dollar bill. I can't imagine how many political fiefdoms would have to be unseated to make this a reality.
Everyone commenting here is treating this article as though it's the first time any of this was suggested. Re-aligning US states along economic and more modern views of geographic boundaries gets trotted out every so often, and then gets consigned to "good ideas on paper" like the 10 month French Revolutionary calendar. See, for example, The People's Almanac chapter on this discussion from the mid 1970s. Or this: http://www.tjc.com/38states/38states.jpg
2
When you look this far ahead and then try to meld these well thought out concepts with the current political world in which we live, it is all for naught. Once again we are presented with dividing our country by logic and common sense and if ever there was the need for a centralized, functioning Federal Government, this is it.
Regional infrastructure repair would be an absolute necessity just for starters, but thereafter, the benefits would start to kick n and the United States would be a far better place for it.
These are not dreams for our times, but they are welcomed. It is refreshing to look past the Trumps, Cruzes, Clintons and Sanders. So refreshing. Sigh . . .
Regional infrastructure repair would be an absolute necessity just for starters, but thereafter, the benefits would start to kick n and the United States would be a far better place for it.
These are not dreams for our times, but they are welcomed. It is refreshing to look past the Trumps, Cruzes, Clintons and Sanders. So refreshing. Sigh . . .
3
What's missing is the giant wall around NYC....that New Jersey pays for.
2
Why would anyone want to Balkanize the country by making the political subdivisions less diverse?
2
Shouldn't that far Southeastern peninsula be named "Florida" (with the quotes)?
1
Plan will not be complete until the United States finishes invading Canada and Mexico. not only will we not vuild a wall, we're taking over both countries! Territorial war of Manifest Destiny! The only thing we have to fear is fear itself! Time to finish the job the Mexican-american War and the War of 1812 started! Let's take back Cuba while we're at it too!
Maybe we can sell the naming rights of our states to corporations to make up for the tax bills we no longer get from them. West KFC? McIdaho? Walmartabama? Comcasticut? Please feel free to add some more here..
7
Wouldn't it just be easier to ban Republicans from voting?
1
Truly funny and insightful!
I love how Buffalo and Cleveland are dots with no names. Do you even know we exist. Drop dead please.
4
This concept, known as bioregionalism, was popularized by the late Ian McHarg in 1969 when he published Design With Nature. It is a bit surprising that such an article would be published in the Times with no reference whatever to either McHarg specifically or bioregionalism generally. Look, a good idea is always worth examination but let's not reinvent the wheel. Do your homework.
2
What horrible world this map of America lays out.
I am glad the I lived most of my life in the days prior to these overly large cities. I hate cities. I hate the crowds, the public transport, people who can't speak English etc. -- they are truly unpleasant places.
When I retired I selected the most Western Part of Maryland where none of these horrors are present. I enjoy a big lawn and living in a rural area. The only think I really miss is travel by horse and buggy.
I am glad the I lived most of my life in the days prior to these overly large cities. I hate cities. I hate the crowds, the public transport, people who can't speak English etc. -- they are truly unpleasant places.
When I retired I selected the most Western Part of Maryland where none of these horrors are present. I enjoy a big lawn and living in a rural area. The only think I really miss is travel by horse and buggy.
2
The founders were concerned with "tyranny of the majority" but now we are stagnating because of a "tyranny of the minority" which represents all those provincial areas that some call "fly over country." The 2 seat per state model regardless of population has led to this majority rule and can only be cured by changing the structure of the Constitution with a new amendment or new document. If one looks at the last few election cycles, it is a glaring fact that the vast majority of voters did not vote for the majority now controlling the legislative branch of government. This I believe, is the biggest problem facing us in the 21st century.
That's covered by the House of Represenatives. The 2 seat model espouses minority rights, while the House represents majority rules.
2
Nice essay. In it, he freely links US and Canada regions, which is pretty much accepting reality as is right now.
However, he leaves the Tijuana-San Diego corridor out of the "Pacific Coast" region, and the Ciudad Juarez-El Paso area from the whole center corridor.
These two regions, and especially the Tijuana-San Diego one, inject a lot of vitality to North America, and I think that should have been included in this thought experiment.
However, he leaves the Tijuana-San Diego corridor out of the "Pacific Coast" region, and the Ciudad Juarez-El Paso area from the whole center corridor.
These two regions, and especially the Tijuana-San Diego one, inject a lot of vitality to North America, and I think that should have been included in this thought experiment.
2
Obviously the author has never been to the "Front Range, from Salt Lake City to Denver to Albuquerque" That geography doesn't even make sense. A little thing called the Rocky Mountains separates Denver from the rest. Salt Lake is more connected to Las Vegas than Denver. And Albuquerque is closer economically to West Texas than Utah. Try again.
5
At last. Whether these ideas are right or not, the point made is we need a dialogue on planning.
The French present 5 year plans covering demographic shifts and how to provide transportation and infrastructure to cope with changes. We should emulate this practice.
The French present 5 year plans covering demographic shifts and how to provide transportation and infrastructure to cope with changes. We should emulate this practice.
1
I think a better tack would be to reconcile ourselves to the fact the we are an Empire.
Conquered people don't get to decide what happens to the conquerors.
Conquered people don't get to decide what happens to the conquerors.
5
Leave it to the NYT to call our current system of free States 'antiquated' while extolling the virtues of 'city states' as the path to the future. Wasn't the 'city state' the model of Greek, Roman and other empires of long ago? Just sayin'... Make no mistake of the agenda put forth by this soon to be failed 'news' source. An 'American Union' is merely the first step in their ideal of one big, happy world government administered by the United Nations. Thomas Jefferson believed that every 30 years or so, any government would become corrupted enough to warrant revolution. I'd say the United States is waaay overdue judging by the theme of this article.
6
If they already exist and we don't need to create them, then leave them be to become what they will. Sounds like utopian planning with makes sense on paper, and is a disaster in reality. Better to let this spontaneous haphazard local growth, continue on that path and leave our long established political system do the same. Bit by bit, slowly.
3
Now, after weeks of reading about why Trump is not presidential material, we have a worthwhile analysis of how to approach our infrastructure problems. The problem, of course, is that this level of analysis would be lost on a political class whose focus is on regulating bathrooms.
2
Ridiculous.
If indeed rhe author wants to make wholesale changes to maps, I suggest they start in their own backyard by encouraging counties to merge into one.
In Minnesota, the two largest "problem child's" are Ramsey and Hennepin County that house St.Paul and Minneapolis.
If one simply merged these two counties into one, it would make the operational effectiveness of the combined entity more resident focused instead of being politician and bureacracy focused.
The fact these are the two big liberal bastions of the state ought to suggest a merger would be relatively easy to do.
If liberals can be progressive in this type of reform and show how they're not just about BIG GOVERNMENT, perhaps States across the country can begin to consolidate government bureacracy that enables them to be more responsive to the needs of its citizenry.
Us conservative counties would gladly do the same if liberals and progressives would show us the way.
If indeed rhe author wants to make wholesale changes to maps, I suggest they start in their own backyard by encouraging counties to merge into one.
In Minnesota, the two largest "problem child's" are Ramsey and Hennepin County that house St.Paul and Minneapolis.
If one simply merged these two counties into one, it would make the operational effectiveness of the combined entity more resident focused instead of being politician and bureacracy focused.
The fact these are the two big liberal bastions of the state ought to suggest a merger would be relatively easy to do.
If liberals can be progressive in this type of reform and show how they're not just about BIG GOVERNMENT, perhaps States across the country can begin to consolidate government bureacracy that enables them to be more responsive to the needs of its citizenry.
Us conservative counties would gladly do the same if liberals and progressives would show us the way.
2
Did you look at the author?
"Parag Khanna is a senior fellow at the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy in Singapore".
His government has already taken care of that for him. He doesn't seem to have the understanding of how our government runs and that the U.S. was built on Checks and balances purposefully, because we don't trust one enormous central government. ". . . it needs to go farther,even at the risk of upsetting established federal-state political balances" That is a huge deal for Americans.
"Parag Khanna is a senior fellow at the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy in Singapore".
His government has already taken care of that for him. He doesn't seem to have the understanding of how our government runs and that the U.S. was built on Checks and balances purposefully, because we don't trust one enormous central government. ". . . it needs to go farther,even at the risk of upsetting established federal-state political balances" That is a huge deal for Americans.
5
I found this article and map quite thought provoking. I think the author's tone came off as elitist and out of touch with American state pride. However, perhaps that is one reason this article is getting peoples' attention. I think the main benefit of thinking along the lines described in the article is not in creating a new political, "hunger games" system, but rather a strategy for investment in infrastructure projects that cross state lines. This article makes a strong case that we need to think strategically as a collective nation and abandon old ways that are currently holding us back. We need to position ourselves for global competition with countries who could care less about state boundaries. America will not be the wealthiest country forever and could find itself even further behind if we do not think boldly and strategically about how to invest in the future.
53
“how to invest own the future”, requires a willingness to tax and spend on the needs of people. ME. Gov. Paul LePage is NOT in favor of the government aligning with business to spend public money. NO conservatives politicians go this route at this time.
1
Those infernal E-lights! The first draft of the future always seems bizarre; before long, it's conventional wisdom...make ready!
I am amazed that anyone takes this seriously. 334 comments to far, but I guess I'm adding to it.
5
Boy, has your election season gotten long.
Give up Come By Chance, Newfoundland, Quebec City, Montreal. Toronto, Kitchener/Waterloo.
Either we get absolute rights to your Space program or discussions are off.
Give up Come By Chance, Newfoundland, Quebec City, Montreal. Toronto, Kitchener/Waterloo.
Either we get absolute rights to your Space program or discussions are off.
2
This division ignores an important element: watersheds. For example, the SF Bay Area and LA both depend on the Sierra Nevada for water. Putting them into different regions is problematic.
10
Parag Khanna an Indian non-resident immigrant looking at the USA from a typical immigrant lens of "everything is in the coasts and everything else in the middle is useless". I myself being an immigrant have suffered from this odd superiority complex as I first landed in NY and from the Hollywood and cable news exposure abroad, thought that "NY" is all there is to this nation. It wasn't until I moved to a country home on a 17 acre piece of forest in Michigan and started exploring my surroundings through road trips and local interactions did I realize how much richness and unique beauty this country has to offer in the middle states. Whether you go to Park City, UT or go to Chelsea, MI or Pittsburgh, PA or Lexington KY, there is so much culture and unique aesthetic to these places. But of course Parag Khanna the jetsetting immigrant frequent flyer mile collector based in Singapore that he is, writes a quick yet potentially damaging article telling us how the US should be "arranged" so it starts to make more sense to people with mentality similar to his. Great job!
12
Urban differences already divide us. This won't help. But the state system is obsolete and useless. Simple vertical lines like Canada will be plenty fine. 5 regions would be fine for the modern times. FYI Chicago is in the mid-east, not the mid-west. Get a map. NY media raised in schools without maps. Fyi, 13 months of 28 days each makes a day land on the same day of the week each month. New yrs day wouldn't get a day of the week. Just call it new yrs day. Leap day every four yrs would just be called leap day. Simple. Easy.
2
Napoleon had a similar idea, wanted ten months to bring the calendar into line with the metric system. Although the metric system is now universal everywhere but the US his calendar has disappeared.
The state system isn't obsolete. It is what should be doing the major governing of its people, where the people have direct say and can change things they don't like. By lumping all the states into 5 regions you are ever further reducing that oversight.
4
If you're going to go to all of this trouble with the map you might as well add the state of Jefferson. The area in the far North of California and a portion of Southern Oregon that wants to secede from these two states.
2
This reminds me of an article from the Opinionator Blog in 2012 about the Kohr Principle:
http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/06/05/kohr-principles/?
It is a great idea but one that has to pass through many polotical hurdles. Unfortunately, people can't seem to come together. Just the rain links alone would drastically change America, for the better.
http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/06/05/kohr-principles/?
It is a great idea but one that has to pass through many polotical hurdles. Unfortunately, people can't seem to come together. Just the rain links alone would drastically change America, for the better.
1
'disconnected backwaters' Really?
Maybe those hick backwaters should stop sending in their wheat, oops no bread. And stop the corn, beans, and other basics for meat production. Keep in the backwaters. Also cut out the dairy, which means no milk,butter, yogurt, cream, and cheese. No one beyond the backwaters uses diary products, right?
I suppose no barley or rye or hops? So no beer, whiskey, or malt? How many of those vineyards are in the great metro areas? Maybe they can have Flint water with their ummmmm ?
Because I don't see much beef production in Boston, New York or even Seattle. Let's see, no beef, no pork, no mutton and precious little poultry. Maybe Long Island can supply some chickens? Guess the metro dwellers won't be bringing home the bacon.
One thing about the backwaters, often they have fresh water, some fishing, occasional vegetables, and once in a while berries. Yeah no blueberries either.
So this plan is nothing more than 'connected flyover' arrogance. Wonder how those great metro areas will do without wheat, diary, meat, and clean water? MAybe rising oceans can float those items in?
Maybe those hick backwaters should stop sending in their wheat, oops no bread. And stop the corn, beans, and other basics for meat production. Keep in the backwaters. Also cut out the dairy, which means no milk,butter, yogurt, cream, and cheese. No one beyond the backwaters uses diary products, right?
I suppose no barley or rye or hops? So no beer, whiskey, or malt? How many of those vineyards are in the great metro areas? Maybe they can have Flint water with their ummmmm ?
Because I don't see much beef production in Boston, New York or even Seattle. Let's see, no beef, no pork, no mutton and precious little poultry. Maybe Long Island can supply some chickens? Guess the metro dwellers won't be bringing home the bacon.
One thing about the backwaters, often they have fresh water, some fishing, occasional vegetables, and once in a while berries. Yeah no blueberries either.
So this plan is nothing more than 'connected flyover' arrogance. Wonder how those great metro areas will do without wheat, diary, meat, and clean water? MAybe rising oceans can float those items in?
13
A foreigner's perspective, seen through a foreign lens.
10
Sir, sitting there in Singapore, I don't believe realize how fiercely independent Americans are.
People from NH, "live free or die", frown upon the "flatlanders" from Massachusetts. People from Boston hate the Yankees, and people from NY hate the Red Sox.
Traditions run deep, especially in place like New England, where it all started.
This is perhaps the lamest idea I have ever seen. And the objective?
Fix some roads?
People from NH, "live free or die", frown upon the "flatlanders" from Massachusetts. People from Boston hate the Yankees, and people from NY hate the Red Sox.
Traditions run deep, especially in place like New England, where it all started.
This is perhaps the lamest idea I have ever seen. And the objective?
Fix some roads?
5
The silly season is upon us early this year
6
I think that a better idea would be to cut the country in half just following the Mason Dixon line to California, and then a line dipping just south of San Francisco, and there could be three exceptions: the District of Columbia would become a neutral site not in either country, Key West goes to the Northern Country and Staten Island goes to the Southern Country. Each island of Hawaii and Alaska vote on which country to join. Let the $15 hour minimum wage crowd run the North. We'll see which country creates economic growth and which chokes on regulation.
1
Is it the Times' goal to destroy the United States? If so, then there is good reason to publish a piece like this. Otherwise, Mr. Khana, who was educated in the Arab Emirates, should focus his attention on the problems experienced by the populace of those tribal societies. Also, it might be advisable to explain to him the meaning of E Pluribus Unum... Assuming, of course, that the me members of the editorial board know the meaning...
6
the Mega cities of Judge Dread comics.
2
what a great idea with so many details worked out.
Once again, some tools have a lot of time on their hands to produce this rubbish.
3
Wow! Taken from the pages of Hunger Games. The resource rich hinterlands supplying the urban elite with food, energy, materials, technology. All to support the elites' glittering lifestyles and fashion sensibilities.
All that's needed is for each "district" to tribute a boy and a girl to the annual games held in District 1 (aka Washington DC).
The Washington DC metro is now the most affluent area in the nation. Yet it produces nothing but "good governance" imposed on the vast nation of workers and businesses producing goods, food, energy, innovation.
Spoiler Alert for those of you who've not seen Mockingjay Part 2. It does not end well for the for the elites....
All that's needed is for each "district" to tribute a boy and a girl to the annual games held in District 1 (aka Washington DC).
The Washington DC metro is now the most affluent area in the nation. Yet it produces nothing but "good governance" imposed on the vast nation of workers and businesses producing goods, food, energy, innovation.
Spoiler Alert for those of you who've not seen Mockingjay Part 2. It does not end well for the for the elites....
7
William Gibson's Neuromancer is growing more prescient every day. The Sprawl is spawning.
Hey, the West Coast has been ready not just to be a state, but to leave for a long time. Ecotopia!
1
I like it. If you work in water resources or earth science political boundaries are pretty much laughable.
2
Too much greatness in the names. Seems like something Donald Trump would draw up.
1
There are 100 reasons why this won't happen: The Senate.
Guys. It's the hunger games. Literally. Instead of 13 there's 7.
2
This will happen but not in the way the author imagines. As the US collapses and Balkanizes into separate regions, people will flee, not flock to, the cities
4
Mr. Khaana is too late. The US has already been subdivided in critical regions that are based on much more important criteria than his economic proposals. The mega regions include the ACC, Pac 12, Big 10, Big 12, Notre Dame, and-most important of all-the SEC.
There's also the well documented pop vs. soda vs. Coke subdivisions.
There's also the well documented pop vs. soda vs. Coke subdivisions.
6
Quite right, Wts. One thing, though. There is a region you omitted, probably intentionally since it's a relative inconsequential albeit self-important mini subregion: Timesiana. It's the place where lots of odd people meet to discuss their imaginary world...
1
The map is not the territory.
Every system is perfectly designed to produce what it is producing.
If you keep doing what you are doing you'll get more of what you are getting.
All models are wrong; but only some are useful.
Trouble is the mother of change;but change is the mother of trouble.
Every system is perfectly designed to produce what it is producing.
If you keep doing what you are doing you'll get more of what you are getting.
All models are wrong; but only some are useful.
Trouble is the mother of change;but change is the mother of trouble.
One issue; with your every system is perfect belief. Uh...no, that's not actually very true in the US. On small scales yes, Growing citrus in Florida for example is a good idea...the problem is on the larger scale, Florida cant naturally, nor perfectly do it on the actual fresh water naturally available. Same goes with Arizona, their systems - all its urban, suburban and rural systems are for the most part unnaturally sustained by water that is not naturally theirs. So its brought in a tremendous cost, to both the Arizonians, as well as the regions the water comes from.
1
State lines are almost objects of worship in the US. Since few know why they are where they are, many believe God put them where they are.
This is an interesting thought experiment, but in our post-Citizens United society, we need to accept that we'll get better infrastructure when and if our billionaire overlords decide we should get it, regardless of what silly lines we draw on the map.
After all, when you have a private jet, what on earth do you need high-speed rail for?
After all, when you have a private jet, what on earth do you need high-speed rail for?
5
all sunshine: no real winners and loser discussion. No discussion of who get to make the law, aka real power over contracts. Sound like one man/woman one vote might go the way of dodo bird.
You don't need to spend too much time abroad to realize how little planning and foresight the USA has. Up until recently, even cities like New York ignored basic infrastructure upgrades. JFK airport was an utter embarrassment. Foreign tourists couldn't believe that it wasn't possible to take a train from JFK to Manhattan. It is still somewhat convoluted but at least now viable. I'm not ready to ditch the 50 state model but planning amongst states needs to be greatly improved and perhaps encouraged at the federal level. New York and New Jersey's Port Authority is an example of that.
5
I believe that the region between The Great Northeast and The Gulf Coast is actually known as The Hate States everywhere else in the nation...
But, what about Rhode Island? Actually, 7 Regions might be more efficient than the 50 States.
2
I had to check the date of publication because this certainly seems like it should have been published two weeks ago.
This type of social planning is the epitome of virtually every stereotype one could possibly come up with about liberals, progressives, Marxists, and perhaps even the New York Times. If this is non-satire, then you're simply declaring yourself the mortal enemy of neo-Federalism, local governance and control, state sovereignty, the Tea Party, and most of the structures that have made America as solid as it is now... all in the service of technocratic central planning so that we can have a Giant Leap Forward.
Thanks, Mao.
Actually, thank you for real. Now I have a perfect link to give to people who don't think that the left is living in a bubble of their own making.
This type of social planning is the epitome of virtually every stereotype one could possibly come up with about liberals, progressives, Marxists, and perhaps even the New York Times. If this is non-satire, then you're simply declaring yourself the mortal enemy of neo-Federalism, local governance and control, state sovereignty, the Tea Party, and most of the structures that have made America as solid as it is now... all in the service of technocratic central planning so that we can have a Giant Leap Forward.
Thanks, Mao.
Actually, thank you for real. Now I have a perfect link to give to people who don't think that the left is living in a bubble of their own making.
4
Some cooperation, of course, but I cannot see my fellow Canadians willing surrendering their citizenship and rights to elect their own governments so as to merge into America's new map.
This is such a city-biased map-first view. One should remember that the city and country states are like a yin and yang. Where will the city-folk get all of their organic, farm raised food from? What area will be left to settle when fancy cities like New York and SF fail to provide enough housing?
The State system has worked remarkably well up to this point. Can't say anyone was complaining when Obama was winning, but now that we have bad candidates we suddenly need to redo our entire system?
Things aren't so red and blue state when you actually go to these communities. Sure many are adapting, but its fun to remember that the founder of Twitter grew up in a farm in Nebraska.
The State system has worked remarkably well up to this point. Can't say anyone was complaining when Obama was winning, but now that we have bad candidates we suddenly need to redo our entire system?
Things aren't so red and blue state when you actually go to these communities. Sure many are adapting, but its fun to remember that the founder of Twitter grew up in a farm in Nebraska.
2
Looks like a good plan if your goal for a civil society is the Hunger Games. Saying that Sacramento or Augusta are isolated backwaters that should have no power over LA or Atlanta is easy to say, but I believe it would accelerate a move toward more strife and less economic growth, as metro centers turn more into Lima, Beijing, and Istanbul, with rent seeking becoming the dominant activity.
2
It'd still be us versus them where those in the rural areas would continue to get short shrift
2
Yes, we need infrastructure planning - but tens of billions of dollars on high-speed rail lines not enough people will use isn't it.
1
I just finished Upton Sinclair's "It Can't Happen Here" which describes how a three way general election could lead to a populist demagogue bringing fascism to the United States. One of the new regimes first acts is to divide the country into 8 regions very much like these ones.
3
It's already too complicated. This wouldn't simplify anything. We don't need another overlay of regional governance.
1
Great idea. States are redundant.
But, in a country that cannot abolish the penny or adopt the metric system I don't see anything like this ever happening.
But, in a country that cannot abolish the penny or adopt the metric system I don't see anything like this ever happening.
1
"a country that cannot abolish the penny or adopt the metric system "
The US should adopt the metric system in exchange for the rest of the world adopting English as the Galactic Standard Language.
The US should adopt the metric system in exchange for the rest of the world adopting English as the Galactic Standard Language.
2
States aren't redundant. It's where the majority of the governing power lies for the American constitutional structure.
4
I am now suffering from corridor fatigue. The author takes a good idea to silly extremes. Yes, cities are economic engines. It's been true since the Ur Metropolitan Area broke new ground. And regional planning is a good idea. Sometimes state lines cause problems, as when Gov. Christie traded the money for a new Hudson River rail tunnel for repairs to the Pulaski Skyway. But Gov. Cuomo killed rail across the new Tappan Zee Bridge all by himself.
The corridor thing sounds really artificial. The Chicago-Detroit-Toronto corridor? Really? The Arizona Sun Corridor? It's sunny all over Arizona, and Phoenix and Tucson just happen to be two cities -- one quite large -- 116 miles apart. It's not a corridor. It's pretty empty in between.
The corridor thing sounds really artificial. The Chicago-Detroit-Toronto corridor? Really? The Arizona Sun Corridor? It's sunny all over Arizona, and Phoenix and Tucson just happen to be two cities -- one quite large -- 116 miles apart. It's not a corridor. It's pretty empty in between.
5
Calling the 275 miles between Pueblo, Colorado and Santa Fe an "urban corridor" as depicted n the map is really stretching the concept of an urban area to include small towns with big empty spaces between them.
3
I live in Italy and am still trying to figure out what a "laconic province" is. One where people don't talk much? Sounds more like Scandinavia than Rome or Milan.
3
This gives me hope. We did big things once, as a country, for the country.
The big question is how to get back there. We're a long way off, but things can change quickly, especially if more Panama Papers type leaks come out and our politicians are outed, and then outed.
Well done, Parag Khanna. Big thinking on big problems are exactly what we're low on right now.
The big question is how to get back there. We're a long way off, but things can change quickly, especially if more Panama Papers type leaks come out and our politicians are outed, and then outed.
Well done, Parag Khanna. Big thinking on big problems are exactly what we're low on right now.
As we have seen, states are reasserting their power over cities. The opposite of what is proposed is what is happening. Many congress people are fine with this.
1
I disagree with this map. States do have differences in culture. I lived in several states and I know. I find it amazing how two states right next to each other can so different. For example: Georgia and South Carolina, as soon as you cross the Savannah River, one can notice the difference immediately. And Texas is just like a foreign country. Boston and New York City are totally different as well. There is no way they can belong to the same region or culture.
2
It does make sense to have administrative districts correspond to economic districts because administration is largely a matter of infrastructure maintenance.
Why not build a political party and run a presidential candidate on a platform like this? At least, it might influence regions and even national elections.
You got it right! America is an interstate nation, not a collection of states.
The present 50 states are too varied in population, area and attitude to be useful as administrative units.
The present 50 states are too varied in population, area and attitude to be useful as administrative units.
I find this a really interesting concept. As a native West Virginian, I wonder what would happen to that beautiful state?
1
This is an excellent illustration of what we can call imaginative conceptualizations within, alas, obsolete and parochial paradigms - in this case the anachronistic paradigm of the sovereign nation-state. Reminds one of the late medieval theological conceptualizations of the heavens.
The reality upon which we must imagine new spaces and flows of connectivity is NORTH American. This should be obvious to those of us who live in the Southwest, the Northwest, Florida, and New England. Without embracing and imagining the global, let's at least modestly imagine how the northern Western Hemisphere, which includes the Caribbean and Central America, is already connected, and how it ought to look in the decades ahead.
The only thing preventing us from doing so is our own fiercely held, but misplaced sense of American Exceptionalism. Think North America.
The reality upon which we must imagine new spaces and flows of connectivity is NORTH American. This should be obvious to those of us who live in the Southwest, the Northwest, Florida, and New England. Without embracing and imagining the global, let's at least modestly imagine how the northern Western Hemisphere, which includes the Caribbean and Central America, is already connected, and how it ought to look in the decades ahead.
The only thing preventing us from doing so is our own fiercely held, but misplaced sense of American Exceptionalism. Think North America.
1
Why don't we try this kind of thinking on a more local level first. Let's split NJ along the old colonial border. Merge East Jersey with the state of New York and merge West Jersey with Pennsylvania. This will allow the economic potential of the NYC and Philly metro regions to be unlocked by eliminating useless bureaucracy. Imagine a NYC subway map that looks like a full circle, with lines crossing the Hudson. That would eliminate the need for those additional Amtrak tunnels. (And we wouldn't even need to change the flag. Puerto Rico could finally become the new 50th state.)
I am a proud resident of a "disconnected backwater". The region is beautiful, quality of life excellent, the climate near perfect. If only we could prevent Houstonians and Austinites from wanting to move here.
1
There's this thing called the Constitution in the way. We are not one big country - we are a federation of independent States. Heck, we can't even get all 50 to agree on things like medical marijuana or even speed limits. Just try getting a new Constitution that abolishes the States. Do that, I will drink the Hudson River.
3
What power does the individual have in these megastates? How well with they react to the needs of one small county? How responsive will they be to the effects of their policies on individual localities? How would they be governed democratically?
Answer these questions before you start singing hymns to competitiveness.
Answer these questions before you start singing hymns to competitiveness.
3
Wouldn't it be nice to overlay this map of economic metropolitan regions unto the 50 states, so both exist simultaneously? Governors would speak to each other and coordinate infrastructure projects, and the unique histories and customs of each star would be retained? Not thinking of hoary details like how to share costs and what would be located where, just dreaming...
Great idea; even if you're opposed to this suggestion you have to admit it's time to rethink of the USA economically/politically.
The old school economic models I studied in college, and that most of today's politicians/economist base all there theories on, has changed for good.
The old school economic models I studied in college, and that most of today's politicians/economist base all there theories on, has changed for good.
Love the idea. But, I cannot imagine any sort of constitutional convention just now. The Framers of the Constitution were also extraordinarily divided -- but they did not have the "benefits" of instant communication.
There is nothing new in this story. Populated places with high density create more wealth and taxes. Less populated places don't.
Mr Khanna proposes substantial changes that better fit our contemporary needs than the dysfunctional compromises and petty graft of our current system.
During the founding years of this nation, many people disagreed with the political efforts of Adams, Washington, and Jefferson. No doubt these loyalists made many of the same objections raised elsewhere in this comments section.
But bring our founding fathers back to life and I’m sure they would go after Khanna’s ideas like a happy dog after a bone, amending here, frowning there, but in the main convinced that we do need to adjust our politics and re-write their long obsolete constitution.
During the founding years of this nation, many people disagreed with the political efforts of Adams, Washington, and Jefferson. No doubt these loyalists made many of the same objections raised elsewhere in this comments section.
But bring our founding fathers back to life and I’m sure they would go after Khanna’s ideas like a happy dog after a bone, amending here, frowning there, but in the main convinced that we do need to adjust our politics and re-write their long obsolete constitution.
Absolutely not. America was founded on distrust of a centralized singular governing unit. The states keep all of the powers not specifically given to the Federal government as per the 10th Amendmemt. They would not wake up and go against their core beliefs.
3
It is incomprehensible why the country is not connected by high speed rails and more light rail transport systems that connects cities and rural areas. Regionalism and the fear of each other. seem to be a huge deterrent. Instead of a new map for America; we need a better connected map.
3
Short answer to your Mark Thomason. Our ancestors could not believe what they just walked (sailed) into.
Trees, arable land and fish for as long as the eye could see.
The Great Lakes was not so much about heroes as Captains and the crew wanting to avoid the latest European war.
Trees, arable land and fish for as long as the eye could see.
The Great Lakes was not so much about heroes as Captains and the crew wanting to avoid the latest European war.
I'm not sure you should include southern California with northern California. It also seems likely that people living much north of Redding would think of themselves more closely aligned with Oregon. Given the increasing prevalence of fragmentation and 'tribalism' in our politics it seems more likely that dividing the states into more, and smaller, divisions is more likely to be the outcome of any revisions.
1
Hmmm..."connectography" seems a lot like what is studied in "geography". Too bad, most of our elite universities don't deem geography as a discipline worthy of departments at these universities.
The author's public policy perspective also omits consideration of cultural-historical, physical-climatological and other aspects of spatial distribution and focuses only on economic, transportation, and communication aspects.
The author's public policy perspective also omits consideration of cultural-historical, physical-climatological and other aspects of spatial distribution and focuses only on economic, transportation, and communication aspects.
Think of the original 13 states as 13 countries, each jealous of its local prerogatives. As each new state has been added, it too thinks of itself as a country, jealous of its independence.
But in the same time frame, the boundaries of Europe have changed many times, sometimes peacefully, too often not. Is Strassburg French or German? It's a bit of both. Is the northern part of Italy Austrian or Italian. Its been both. Think of the borders of Poland. Its current borders once contained many German speakers, some intermarrying with Polish speakers (like some of my greatgrandparents. Czechoslovakia split in two amicably.
Also think how the unthinkable happened: one could travel from one part of Europe to another without stopping for border crossings.
Changing the map as suggested in this article is going to require another Abraham Lincoln: "As our case is new, so must we think anew."
But in the same time frame, the boundaries of Europe have changed many times, sometimes peacefully, too often not. Is Strassburg French or German? It's a bit of both. Is the northern part of Italy Austrian or Italian. Its been both. Think of the borders of Poland. Its current borders once contained many German speakers, some intermarrying with Polish speakers (like some of my greatgrandparents. Czechoslovakia split in two amicably.
Also think how the unthinkable happened: one could travel from one part of Europe to another without stopping for border crossings.
Changing the map as suggested in this article is going to require another Abraham Lincoln: "As our case is new, so must we think anew."
Unsurprising in many ways that a technocrat from Singapore would come up with this scheme. Too small to have regional differences that matter (it is a City State, after all) and too autocratically governed to understand that citizens might have objections or -- heavens forfend -- voice them.
5
Two nits to pick on the names:
* No one in the "Inland West" would think to name their region "inland." That only makes sense as sub-relationship to the coastal West. They call it Intermountain West.
* Worse, the "Southeast Manufacturing Belt" is offensive, as if the Southeast only exists to make cheap products for the rest of us whose economic roles go unmentioned. If the Lakes, Plains, and Northeast get "Great," so is Great Southeast so hard? Going further, is it the New Yorker perspective that makes the Northeast require Great? How about just Northeast and Southeast? There, I fixed it.
* No one in the "Inland West" would think to name their region "inland." That only makes sense as sub-relationship to the coastal West. They call it Intermountain West.
* Worse, the "Southeast Manufacturing Belt" is offensive, as if the Southeast only exists to make cheap products for the rest of us whose economic roles go unmentioned. If the Lakes, Plains, and Northeast get "Great," so is Great Southeast so hard? Going further, is it the New Yorker perspective that makes the Northeast require Great? How about just Northeast and Southeast? There, I fixed it.
1
The author should have considered the probable effects of global warming on the US coastlines before drawing the map. Given the inability to get even fairly straightforward infrastructure repairs completed, our coasts will be inundated long before such a radical notion as this would have a chance of being implemented.
Good luck moving forward in this creative future with dogmatic, unimaginative, no investment, no collective action, non forward-thinking, no government involvement in anything, spend all our productive wealth on tax cuts for the wealthy, peevish, childish, my way or no way conservative politicians and their hyped up base of backward thinkers.
Unless… we can somehow make it seem like it's all their idea and give them complete credit.
Ya know like the odious brats who everyone hated in elementary school.
If that's what it takes, fine.
As long as we progress.
Unless… we can somehow make it seem like it's all their idea and give them complete credit.
Ya know like the odious brats who everyone hated in elementary school.
If that's what it takes, fine.
As long as we progress.
1
A better division would be for the Old South to secede and become the Republic of Dixie. Sorry, but their ultra-conservatism and total obstructionism has rendered United States in many ways ungovernable. In a very real sense the South did win the Civil War because they seem to be the ones calling the shots in Congress all these many years later.
1
It's strange that no one mentioned the inevitability of this change. The 50 US states haven't been around forever, just longer than any living person. These boundaries will of course become redrawn. For example, what are the current boundaries of the Roman Empire? This change will happen. It's just a question of when.
1
History and our Constitution aside, given the socioeconomic problems of our inner cities and the all too often inept, inadequate and just plain corrupt leadership in those cities, giving them more power would be a disaster for the country as a whole.
Perhaps since Khanna is from India his tolerance for urban blight and government corruption is different from ours. Our non urban corridors serve as a good check and balance on the less desirable aspects of our urban culture.
Perhaps since Khanna is from India his tolerance for urban blight and government corruption is different from ours. Our non urban corridors serve as a good check and balance on the less desirable aspects of our urban culture.
2
The nucleus of this proposal represents enlightened, intelligent, desperately needed thinking... Or to put it another way, this is fodder for the small-minded, self-interested, reactionary people of our country who scream murder each time the present is put upon the operating table to make a better future. Someone save us from ourselves (Long live Obama).
Bring on the vision! I love that this map thinks not only of how we can better balance the political input of regions, but envisions the renewal of high-capacity transit. I think it is hard for most Americans living outside a handful of large cities to understand what reliable, efficient transit is because they've never experienced it. This is exactly the kind of new thinking we need to imagine a different kind of mobility, as the highway/trucking model becomes more unsustainable.
Neat idea in terms of how to allocate funding (to economically-connected regions vs. state capitals) and a beautiful map. Like other commenters, I find fault with the idea of connecting these regions and corridors via high speed rail, however. Instead, lets just spend the money to update + fix our current infrastructure. As the electric car and autonomous driving revolution is coming ever-so-quickly, switching to rail now is a particularly foolish idea. As we've seen in California, too, it is simply untenable politically.
Perhaps the first thing the US needs is a functional federal government and functional state governments. Having an educated electorate would be a good place to start.
The entire country is more interested in topics like bathrooms, fracking and reality TV to ever muster the kind of courage it takes to make forward thinking decisions of social, economic and political import.
The entire country is more interested in topics like bathrooms, fracking and reality TV to ever muster the kind of courage it takes to make forward thinking decisions of social, economic and political import.
Agree with your first paragraph but not the second. Call me a sentimental fool, but I believe many people want our governments to function for the people. Our governments are failing us at most levels. I don't know whether good people are coopted after being elected or whether our candidate selecting systems themselves are corrupt. I think the reality tv, etc. that you mention are a refuge for overwhelmed and defeated people.
1
Development in twenty first century means urbanization - America is about 80% urbanized. The same trend is seen in China and India. In future most of the large countries will be highly urbanized - ~ 90%. This is a new type of society in a globalized world and most efficient urban centers with excellent quality of life will be the winners. The challenge of the state organization and constitution is to find new way to structure their system - new institutions, new political boundaries, new types of leaders, only central planning will not solve the problem. This article can start that dialogue process.
What's most fascinating about this article is the comments section. While the article undoubtedly proposes an economically prioritized and efficient revitalization of a crumbling infrastructure for the entire nation (not picking favorites), the majority of responses here seem to selfishly claim ignorance on the author's part, cultural upheaval, stripped freedoms, political dismay, etc.
In a completely apolitical conversation though, in what way can this conversation genuinely scare anyone that resides here? Recent History shows that people are migrating back to urban zones already. Our once great United States have simply fallen short; we're staid and falling apart in many ways, so what's to defend?
This article does not propose forgetting our history or culture, it intelligently validates a new era for this country that can only exist if people stop being myopic and remember that it's boldness that got us here in the first place. The past decades in this country are a mass of degradation masked by distractions of the internet, laziness, and older generations riding a wave of prosperity.
Truthfully, the naysayers don't even matter here. The fact that we're talking about it at all is a successful step in the right direction. The so-scrutinized younger generations are tired of empty promises and lazy political systems, so perhaps in 25 years there will finally be an intelligible conversation about how to pick up the lethargically broken pieces of our elders.
In a completely apolitical conversation though, in what way can this conversation genuinely scare anyone that resides here? Recent History shows that people are migrating back to urban zones already. Our once great United States have simply fallen short; we're staid and falling apart in many ways, so what's to defend?
This article does not propose forgetting our history or culture, it intelligently validates a new era for this country that can only exist if people stop being myopic and remember that it's boldness that got us here in the first place. The past decades in this country are a mass of degradation masked by distractions of the internet, laziness, and older generations riding a wave of prosperity.
Truthfully, the naysayers don't even matter here. The fact that we're talking about it at all is a successful step in the right direction. The so-scrutinized younger generations are tired of empty promises and lazy political systems, so perhaps in 25 years there will finally be an intelligible conversation about how to pick up the lethargically broken pieces of our elders.
2
a lack of regional planning is just as pervasive at the state and local level, and not just in government. at least in PA, it seems like each county & township has to include every type of zoning, and the results can be destructive of an entire area: who needs major commercial corridors a few miles from one another? and what about the expensive equipment every hospital seems to need -- and find a way to pay for?
What the author does not reveal is that regions are in a constant state of change. 50 years ago a southern manufacturing region barely existed. What are you going to do when change occurs, redraw the borders every few decades. 50 years ago Phoenix and Tucson(in the Arizona Sun Corridor) were relatively small cities. The blessing we have, the blessing that Europe is hoping to create, is that we are one country economically since the ratification of the constitution. Our regions develop and change economically with little regard to state political boundaries and over time, they will continue to do so.
2
It all sounds eminently reasonable. But US politics is anything but reasonable. Fast trains a la European have been advocated for decades without success, most Americans prefer to fly and the Federal government has gone out of the business of ambitious infrastructure projects. Airplane travel has gotten cheaper over the years but also unpleasant, no better than bus travel over short distances. If continues to deteriorate and urban areas become more attractive than suburbs the push for a modern railway system may take off but It is probably still decades away.
This map fascinates me. I've looked at it for electoral issues, and for infrastructure issues.
However, more generally it is helpful to see who and what our country really is. Where we are, and how we really connect. It is a dose of reality, clear truth appearing among the vague generalizations we that usually satisfy us.
It is an excellent start for decision making. It helps understand our political map, and it shows where we have potential for useful investment in infrastructure, but it shows more too. It is the future patterns of growth we can expect, for whatever we are deciding.
I'm going to save this map, and keep it in front of me to contemplate for all it can mean. There is a lot here. We've barely scratched the surface of its potential meanings.
However, more generally it is helpful to see who and what our country really is. Where we are, and how we really connect. It is a dose of reality, clear truth appearing among the vague generalizations we that usually satisfy us.
It is an excellent start for decision making. It helps understand our political map, and it shows where we have potential for useful investment in infrastructure, but it shows more too. It is the future patterns of growth we can expect, for whatever we are deciding.
I'm going to save this map, and keep it in front of me to contemplate for all it can mean. There is a lot here. We've barely scratched the surface of its potential meanings.
An interesting intellectual exercise that seems to be ignorant of history and the surprisingly enduring wisdom of our founders. Ours is probably the largest and most stable republican government since the Roman Republic; this is not something that should be trifled with in order to get better rail transportation. Perhaps 150 years ago, the author would have argued the benefits of the slave-owning, cotton dependent states forming their own confederacy; I wonder how that would have turned out!
5
The US is not a country as this article seems to define it - it is, and was founded as a federation of states. Administration and management were then negotiated so that power could be shared amongst them considering differing populations, resources etc. There was never any expectation that states would be equal (how could they possibly be?) or that should be a goal.
4
Ah. The United States Constitution. Glad someone mentioned that. Maybe more than someone (I read only several of the comments).
By all means let’s follow the author’s roadmap and start all over. As of a date Parag Khanna will give us, maybe in another New York Times Op-Ed, the U. S. Constitution is null and void, of no effect. We will need a new constitution, which means a constitutional convention with Parag Khanna in the role of James Madison, with this constitutional convention held not in Philadelphia but in Singapore, where Parag Khanna is a senior fellow. The dust-up over Senate confirmation of Barack Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court is now moot since maybe the new constitution will not provide for a federal judiciary.
Also, I am probably out of a job. I teach constitutional law—the law of the old constitution that went into effect in about 1788. Won’t be much use for that now.
By all means let’s follow the author’s roadmap and start all over. As of a date Parag Khanna will give us, maybe in another New York Times Op-Ed, the U. S. Constitution is null and void, of no effect. We will need a new constitution, which means a constitutional convention with Parag Khanna in the role of James Madison, with this constitutional convention held not in Philadelphia but in Singapore, where Parag Khanna is a senior fellow. The dust-up over Senate confirmation of Barack Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court is now moot since maybe the new constitution will not provide for a federal judiciary.
Also, I am probably out of a job. I teach constitutional law—the law of the old constitution that went into effect in about 1788. Won’t be much use for that now.
5
This is sheer fantasy. I grew up in New York, went to law school in Ann Arbor, worked in Chicago, and visited Toronto multiple times. I traveled among these cities by car many times.
There is no urban corridor between Detroit-Windsor and Chicagoland. There are 200 miles of rural terrain punctuated by small cities. Similarly, there is no urban corridor from Detroit-Windsor and Toronto, though London ON is much larger than any city between Detroit and Chicago.
So it goes with the expanse of Ohio between Toledo and Cleveland, and the much vaster expanse of Pennsylvania outside of the two major metro areas.
I believe the author needs to compare the population densities of China's megalopolises and provinces.
Guangdong, the size of Missouri, has a population of 110 million. Its Pearl River Delta region, a bit larger than Maryland, has a population of over 65 million people.
The twin cities of Beijing and Tianjin with the surrounding province of Hebei, an area the size of Idaho, contain another 110 million people. Neighboring Shandong, Georgia-sized, has 97 million residents, and Henan, Wisconsin-sized, 94 million.
And England holds 53 million in an area smaller than Louisiana.
The Front Range is a myth, the Raleigh-Birmingham metroplex is nonsense. The US is known for its great wide open spaces because they are real, and they are not found in Europe or much of Asia.
There is no urban corridor between Detroit-Windsor and Chicagoland. There are 200 miles of rural terrain punctuated by small cities. Similarly, there is no urban corridor from Detroit-Windsor and Toronto, though London ON is much larger than any city between Detroit and Chicago.
So it goes with the expanse of Ohio between Toledo and Cleveland, and the much vaster expanse of Pennsylvania outside of the two major metro areas.
I believe the author needs to compare the population densities of China's megalopolises and provinces.
Guangdong, the size of Missouri, has a population of 110 million. Its Pearl River Delta region, a bit larger than Maryland, has a population of over 65 million people.
The twin cities of Beijing and Tianjin with the surrounding province of Hebei, an area the size of Idaho, contain another 110 million people. Neighboring Shandong, Georgia-sized, has 97 million residents, and Henan, Wisconsin-sized, 94 million.
And England holds 53 million in an area smaller than Louisiana.
The Front Range is a myth, the Raleigh-Birmingham metroplex is nonsense. The US is known for its great wide open spaces because they are real, and they are not found in Europe or much of Asia.
8
But by and large, city politics & leadership are highly dysfunctional and states get their jobs done.
I buy the argument that perhaps infrastructure planning and investment should be done on some regional, super-state model, but don''t let the tail wag the dog. Based on performance, we ought to be looking for ways to reduce the political role of cities and shift power toward state capitols which have -- on the whole and of course this is a generalization -- displayed much more professionalism and competence than city governments have.
I buy the argument that perhaps infrastructure planning and investment should be done on some regional, super-state model, but don''t let the tail wag the dog. Based on performance, we ought to be looking for ways to reduce the political role of cities and shift power toward state capitols which have -- on the whole and of course this is a generalization -- displayed much more professionalism and competence than city governments have.
4
Mr.Khanna, a citizen of commerce obsessed Singapore, clearly has no understanding of the complex history of factors underlying the American federal system. His myopic economic lens, limits his awareness. His historical lens is simply inaccurate.The Louisiana purchase was to prevent occupation of American territory by France or England.It occurred only after Napoleons army bound for New Orleans,was wiped out by yellow fever in Haiti. The Interstate Highway system was a defense department iniative during the peak of the "Cold War". The TVA provided cheap electricity to millions in the Tennessee valley, who had been without it. While all these events had beneficial economic consequences, it's wrong to assume that that the original purpose was economic.
5
In governing, there're few things more primitive than the coalescing of regions (states into "city-states") simply and wryly because of GDP. States need more independence, not less; The States need to be so broken up that they fashion tighter connection. That's culture, something that "transcends traditional internal boundaries" for real.
1
Why do "the States need to be so broken up that they fashion tighter connection"? How does that work?
Seriously? Does this person realize the logistical not to mention the political issues emanating from this pie in the sky proposal? As an academic exercise it's not a bad idea and it does give us some insight as to the distinct regional differences within the current makeup. But again that is our strength; we interact on a political and interpersonal level with those whose interests and ideas are at variance with ours. It's called getting along despite your differences. History may not have been so efficient but I think we have done quite well. The author might, just might, benefit by traveling to the US, renting a car and taking a few months traveling throughout the country and talking to people. An old fashioned idea to be sure. But hey what do I know; I just grew up here visited most parts of this great land.
6
Not so fast. Consider the Japanese economic miracle in the 70's, when many Americans said the U.S. needs our own MITI (Japanese government's central industrial planning agency credited with Japan's success). Subsequently, Japan went off the rails. Not necessarily, per se, an argument against central infrastructure/industrial planning (Japan could have de-railed for many possible reasons), but should give us pause before we plunge into central planning. More recently, China might be another cautionary example.
1
To this former professor of Urban and Regional Studies, reconfiguration of the political map is a recurring theme, and this model poses some insightful and thought-provoking innovations.
Still, when many states maintain a system of nearly 100 distinct counties, plus thousands of townships and municipalities, it is unrealistic to expect progress toward streamlining the map. History reveals that governmental entities very seldom allow themselves to be abolished or superceded. It is antithetical to their fundamental purpose.
As put best by the town mayor in Mel Brooks' Blazing Saddles: Gentlemen! We've got to protect our phony-baloney jobs!
Still, when many states maintain a system of nearly 100 distinct counties, plus thousands of townships and municipalities, it is unrealistic to expect progress toward streamlining the map. History reveals that governmental entities very seldom allow themselves to be abolished or superceded. It is antithetical to their fundamental purpose.
As put best by the town mayor in Mel Brooks' Blazing Saddles: Gentlemen! We've got to protect our phony-baloney jobs!
4
I do have a problem with Duluth and Ely being lumped with Wisconsin and St. Paul being pushed West!
Super interesting! Too bad, I think it would be impossible to ever restructure like this though, even if it makes the most sense. The United States has had the priority of protecting states rights and individuality over nationhood, ingrained in its mentality since its founding, and we still cling to this notion today. "Statehood" will always get in the way of advancing national goals.
The author left out The Independent Republic of Texas. I grew up there, and am pretty sure that it would not consent to being an appendage of the Great Plains Region, though it would probably be willing to annex neigboring OK, NM & AR into "Greater Texas "
From both an identity and geological perspective, Texas doesn't fit easily into any other region, and certainly not indo the Great Plains. Perhaps it should consider invoking its unique right to split into five states -- there was a reason its original Republic wanted that provision. Each edge belongs in a different region, and the center is not like any of the edges. Not that Texans actually would ever dilute their identity and power by doing so....
From both an identity and geological perspective, Texas doesn't fit easily into any other region, and certainly not indo the Great Plains. Perhaps it should consider invoking its unique right to split into five states -- there was a reason its original Republic wanted that provision. Each edge belongs in a different region, and the center is not like any of the edges. Not that Texans actually would ever dilute their identity and power by doing so....
A comment to the commenters: While we all like to complain about how Washington is gridlocked, and the rest of us suffer due to this is amusing when one reads an interesting article that could institute real change, and so many people object, essentially saying "well that's not how we were founded," and the like. So really it's the American peoples' refusal to alter their own lives/history that's preventing this county going forward. Not simple Washington Gridlock. A note on history - the constitution and nation was founded under the principle that things would change as need be. We seem unable, (and most of these comments prove) unwilling to implement the change we all so desperately clamor for. But hey, I'm sure the Koch family loves our self-imposed mental idleness.
1
Really? MORE centralization? I don't think so. If the Times was actually interested in the welfare of the nation, it would be writing articles about how we should get back to constitutional principles. Article X of the constitution defines the role of the federal government and reserves the balance of power to the states and the citizens. I literally cannot recall the last time I read anything in the Times that addressed federal overreach. The notion of states as laboratories of democracy is simply brilliant. Dept of Education? Dept of Labor? Dept of Agriculture? I could go on. Easily. And it is all unconstitutional. Federal overreach is largely responsible for the mountain of debt we are burdening our progeny with. It is unacceptable and immoral. Unfortunately President Obama has gone out of his way to pretend the constitution does not even exist. These are issues Americans are familiar with and it is why they are particularly upset with the 'status quo'.
4
A bold idea certainly worth consideration. Unfortunately it could likely not be accomplished all at once. Perhaps starting at a lower jurisdictional level would lead to consolidation up the line. Many states have far too many counties than needed in the modern age. What made sense in horse-and-buggy days no longer does. Consolidating county functions would certainly reduce taxes. Why hasn't that even been suggested?
Believe it not not, not all of us want to live in ever-expanding cities. Perhaps the current map has become out-dated, but promoting more concentration, of people and power, will not serve those who desire at least a bit of the space enjoyed by the founders. As for efficiency, take that far enough, and we will all live in 200 square foot housing lockers.
What happened to the promise of technology and the freedom from forcing millions of people to spend their workdays even more compressed together?
What happened to the promise of technology and the freedom from forcing millions of people to spend their workdays even more compressed together?
3
I was struck by the focus of this map on major regional (and state) cities, and another article in today's NYTimes:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/16/us/southern-cities-move-past-states-on...?
This article on Southern Cities moving past the state on social issues could also indicate where the impetus for this more regional approach could come from. Certainly from a long-term viewpoint such Regionally focussed development and connectivity would be very productive, but would require federal/city cooperation where the individual state could not overrule the City's attempts at regionalism. I know, neva gonna happen, but it just might. Hope springs eternal in my book!
Jim Makris
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/16/us/southern-cities-move-past-states-on...?
This article on Southern Cities moving past the state on social issues could also indicate where the impetus for this more regional approach could come from. Certainly from a long-term viewpoint such Regionally focussed development and connectivity would be very productive, but would require federal/city cooperation where the individual state could not overrule the City's attempts at regionalism. I know, neva gonna happen, but it just might. Hope springs eternal in my book!
Jim Makris
Quotes: "What is needed, in some ways, is a return to this more flexible, broader way of thinking." and " … ..., which aims to link Phoenix, Denver and Salt Lake City with next-generation trains, or industry-driven groups like CG/LA Inc.,"
When will these Think Tanks actually look at the whole picture? The problems of the many instead of the solutions for the few? Think tanks want to increase their own bank accounts by linking Phoenix, Denver and Salt Lake City, yet in Northern Indiana one can't outside these cities Elkhart, Osceola, Mishawaka and South Bend on a bus without several time consuming connections!
The Think Tanks have watched out for themselves on one hand as they put the a huge portion of the country into a hand to mouth existence. Not everyone today can afford to own a car, pay for maintenance, upkeep, gasoline and insurance. They are the mercy of only very local employers and would LOVE to have interconnecting, adequate bus and/or local train services between cities nearby.
What we need is a leader with brains who can see the fault in suggested 'solutions' and the cracks in theories. Someone who recognizes problems and risks and was proven correct. Nearly two-hundred Economists endorsed his plan and him for the Presidency to lead us wisely to reverse damage, and boost the economy. He name is Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont. read his plans, Think Tankers. Look at why he is the best person for thinking.
When will these Think Tanks actually look at the whole picture? The problems of the many instead of the solutions for the few? Think tanks want to increase their own bank accounts by linking Phoenix, Denver and Salt Lake City, yet in Northern Indiana one can't outside these cities Elkhart, Osceola, Mishawaka and South Bend on a bus without several time consuming connections!
The Think Tanks have watched out for themselves on one hand as they put the a huge portion of the country into a hand to mouth existence. Not everyone today can afford to own a car, pay for maintenance, upkeep, gasoline and insurance. They are the mercy of only very local employers and would LOVE to have interconnecting, adequate bus and/or local train services between cities nearby.
What we need is a leader with brains who can see the fault in suggested 'solutions' and the cracks in theories. Someone who recognizes problems and risks and was proven correct. Nearly two-hundred Economists endorsed his plan and him for the Presidency to lead us wisely to reverse damage, and boost the economy. He name is Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont. read his plans, Think Tankers. Look at why he is the best person for thinking.
What is this obsession with irrelevant think tanks? Please explain the connection between them and the idea in this article?
1
I appreciate the writers' thoughts on preserving "little Americas" in the form of distinct states, histories and culture. However, I live in New Jersey. As such, redundancies in services , administration, budgets, manpower, in towns across the state impede appropriate investment, funding , innovation, smart competition/administration, transportation, and education. Did I mention more room for incompetence, waste, unnecessary duplication.
Regardless of nostalgia, we need to take stock, smarten up and heed the advantages of this article's suggestions, needs for 21 rst century development and the requisites of the times. You don't need to kill a state's spirit and history to make positive change. You need guts, vision, a communications, funding and execution strategy and blueprint, assessment of actions and mostly, politicians who see beyond their own insular interests.
Regardless of nostalgia, we need to take stock, smarten up and heed the advantages of this article's suggestions, needs for 21 rst century development and the requisites of the times. You don't need to kill a state's spirit and history to make positive change. You need guts, vision, a communications, funding and execution strategy and blueprint, assessment of actions and mostly, politicians who see beyond their own insular interests.
32
I am encouraged by these types of re-engineering ideas intended to improve society - to look forward and make things better and more equal for all. But wealthy Americans and politicians find "traditional" more comfortable and easier than change. Many fight to keep things the same. they never challenge their biases for what might be improvement or more fairness. The system is rigged so that those with wealth and power keep it. Moving borders is a game changer and a potential loss (think of gerrymandering).
It's hard to imagine such a scale of geo-political bending and compromise when states find gender-neutral bathroom design and/or implementation insurmountable.
It's hard to imagine such a scale of geo-political bending and compromise when states find gender-neutral bathroom design and/or implementation insurmountable.
18
Love that sciencelady. 'It's hard to imagine ... when states find gender-neutral bathroom design and or implementation insurmountable.' It's impossible given the complexities of American society. Yours is by far the best and most realistic of the Comments, sciencelady.
Reading many of the comments I think a lot of readers are taking this article too literally. I don't think the author is suggesting doing away with states or a formal merger of say, states from Minnesota to Texas. He's talking about collaboration across state lines that is designed by commerical affinity-what he called lines of transportaion, supply and communications. I can see a few places where this is happening. For example California, Oregon and tribal governments recently collaborated to remove dams and adjust the river flow of the Klamath River and its tributaries. Since rivers ignore political boundaries there are many examples of state collaboration. The Colorado River Compact, while seriously flawed due to a drying climate, is a good example. It's not perfect but many states come together and argue-I mean-negotiate.
89
As Khanna dances around here, this plan is useless until we bring North America into a true political unity, whether by Diplomacy or by Military Force. Once Hillary "Hawk" Clinton is elected, I say we begin by deposing the Castros and taking over Cuba as the 52nd state (after Puerto Rico.) Next, we proceed on with a blitzkrieg invasion of Canada. We start by taking Quebec, who don't want to be part of Canada anyway, and from there we launch a rearguard action from Alaska, marching down all the way to Vancouver, and finally storm into Toronto and Ottowa across the great Lakes. I trust that we will be greeted as liberators from Canada's crack-smoking governing class. Next, we finish the job of the Mexican-American war, not only not building a wall, but tearing down the entire boondoggle of a Mexican-U.S. border, which is a geopolitical catastrophe which no real government can abide. Mexico does not really have a true State or government anyway, given their obvious inability to stop massive illegal drug cartels and to excercise their monopoly of power, so they will be happy to greet their U.S. Conquerors. Once the hard work of unifying the continent is done, then we can get on with building this high-speed rail and dividing up the Empire into regions. Other states for Hillary the Hun to look into annexing while she's at it: the Philippines, Australia, the United Kingdom, New Zealand, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Haiti, Dominican Republic. The possibilities are endless
2
According to your drawing, Hillary "Hawk" Clinton had to live up to 120 years old.
Great ideas, basically along what I have been thinking for years. The infrastructure exists. There a a lot of small medium and large factories, vacant, defunct, and well, almost ready for about anything.
One key feature this article quite frankly missed. The issue of water, the need for potable water, and the recycling on a grand scale. Even to the point of a water transfer duct, Pipeline if you will. Water will be key to our future, and the ability to transfer by a "crisscross" of pipe lines will work, water transfer when and as needed. Above ground, in cheap plastic pipe made from recycled plastic! Easy to repair, light weight and plentiful material readily available. Hey the Romans did it with their aqua ducts.
Need water to irrigate a hundred thousand hectors of land? Texas does, and if we can transfer oil and gas, hey, water at least does not burn or explode. Okay, put that in your pipes and "smoke it".
One key feature this article quite frankly missed. The issue of water, the need for potable water, and the recycling on a grand scale. Even to the point of a water transfer duct, Pipeline if you will. Water will be key to our future, and the ability to transfer by a "crisscross" of pipe lines will work, water transfer when and as needed. Above ground, in cheap plastic pipe made from recycled plastic! Easy to repair, light weight and plentiful material readily available. Hey the Romans did it with their aqua ducts.
Need water to irrigate a hundred thousand hectors of land? Texas does, and if we can transfer oil and gas, hey, water at least does not burn or explode. Okay, put that in your pipes and "smoke it".
1
This sounds a lot like the Soviet Union's plan to develop the country by removing or abandoning thousands of "irrational" villages. What ended up happening was that rural people were packed like sardines in hastily-built high-rises with shoe-box bedrooms and amenities like toilets being communal (and in short supply). The labor turned out to be unneeded. City services couldn't expand to meet demand. People hated their living conditions. More than anything, it was the decades of frustration with the awful living standards brought on by overcrowding that caused the USSR's collapse.
China is repeating this mistake, but it lacks the coordination of the communist era, so people just sit around in crumbling apartments without jobs or services. Without hope.
Instead of facilitating the natural development of their economies, these and other countries attempted to force growth. This strategy already killed one superpower.
But what about capitalist, democratic societies? Let's take a look at our English cousins. How are they doing? London sucks up political and economic resources, leaving the countryside and lesser urban centers to slowly decay. For what? Centralization has slowed the UK's growth, frustrated the Scots to the point of secession, and made the country less stable.
I believe high speed rail should be used to connect the country, the way California is using it to connect smaller cities to bigger ones, not to break it up.
China is repeating this mistake, but it lacks the coordination of the communist era, so people just sit around in crumbling apartments without jobs or services. Without hope.
Instead of facilitating the natural development of their economies, these and other countries attempted to force growth. This strategy already killed one superpower.
But what about capitalist, democratic societies? Let's take a look at our English cousins. How are they doing? London sucks up political and economic resources, leaving the countryside and lesser urban centers to slowly decay. For what? Centralization has slowed the UK's growth, frustrated the Scots to the point of secession, and made the country less stable.
I believe high speed rail should be used to connect the country, the way California is using it to connect smaller cities to bigger ones, not to break it up.
3
We need to define "infrastructure." Building roads and bridges seems like a great idea, but we need to remember the consequences. The interstate system created the suburbs and American car culture. More roads means more cars. Period. We talk about building rail and public transit while trying to use studies about the economic benefits of roads to justify the expense. These multipliers are suspect. I'm not against improving infrastructure, but we need to make sure this is not just money to a black box. I'm shocked that those most supportive of action against climate change also want to pump money into roads and bridges. We need more depth in this conversation. Rail and public transit need to be targeted (ie, northeast corridor instead of bullet train in CA).
1
This article focuses on organizing regions and infrastructure according to commerce rather than for the people and based on culture and geography. Organizing by states according to geography ensures that the wealth of San Francisco and Los Angeles can be spread by the state to parts of the state which are less fortunate. At the same time, the rural areas supply food to the cities (and in this case to the country) and the state ensures that water can be moved from Northern California to LA and its surrounding urban areas. If the division happened along the lines the author proposes, it is v. likely there would be great opposition to moving water from rural areas in Northern California to LA and possibly even from Hech Hechy to the San Francisco Bay Area.
The article seems to assume that the prosperous areas share culture, geography and infrastructure. Even in a small state such as Massachusetts, infrastructure is unevenly distributed. For example, many towns in Western MA do not have high speed internet and only now is the state making arrangements for it. In an arrangement where the politicians only cared about economic metropolises, infrastructure in what the author calls backward areas will suffer even more.
The author comes from a tiny repressive country - Singapore - and probably does not appreciate the difficulty of taking decisions in a democracy when the voices of millions are heard.
The article seems to assume that the prosperous areas share culture, geography and infrastructure. Even in a small state such as Massachusetts, infrastructure is unevenly distributed. For example, many towns in Western MA do not have high speed internet and only now is the state making arrangements for it. In an arrangement where the politicians only cared about economic metropolises, infrastructure in what the author calls backward areas will suffer even more.
The author comes from a tiny repressive country - Singapore - and probably does not appreciate the difficulty of taking decisions in a democracy when the voices of millions are heard.
5
Great ideas, and thanks for helping me clarify arguments I've been trying to articulate for a while. But we still have a Constitution which ties our hands to a working framework that is state-centric. Unlike Europeans our Federal government can't unilaterally command states to act in a certain way - it is Constitutionally mandated to limited action. Since we don't have the political will to modernize the Constitution to reflect our modern philosophy, Mr. Khanna's suggestions are going to rely on state governments overcoming their fear of losing control by regional cooperation.
1
Your ideas, while sounding "reasonable", leave much to be desired. They (the ideas) fly in the face of "government of the people and by the people".
"Globalism", while seemingly a step "forward", robs individuals and states of their political power. Globalism "takes over" and dictates policy, process and, by extension, result.
If these "regional infrastructure lines and metropolitan clusters" are truly the best way forward, their proponents should be able to show existing states their value and worth. The states could then decide whether or not to participate. That is not the author's suggestion. The author appears to want a total takeover of existing states and then "assign" the existing structures (states) the functions of "managing" the result. In other words, "let us take over and build what we want to build and we will let you manage it".
Furthermore, the political power of existing states would be diminished (which is probably a chief aim of "globalism").
The ideas broached are not new (they have been in the planning for decades). What is new is the bold suggestion that we (in effect) destroy our current "50 state" system. What a "good way" (a sneaky way) for an enemy to capture the United States of America.
"Globalism", while seemingly a step "forward", robs individuals and states of their political power. Globalism "takes over" and dictates policy, process and, by extension, result.
If these "regional infrastructure lines and metropolitan clusters" are truly the best way forward, their proponents should be able to show existing states their value and worth. The states could then decide whether or not to participate. That is not the author's suggestion. The author appears to want a total takeover of existing states and then "assign" the existing structures (states) the functions of "managing" the result. In other words, "let us take over and build what we want to build and we will let you manage it".
Furthermore, the political power of existing states would be diminished (which is probably a chief aim of "globalism").
The ideas broached are not new (they have been in the planning for decades). What is new is the bold suggestion that we (in effect) destroy our current "50 state" system. What a "good way" (a sneaky way) for an enemy to capture the United States of America.
2
What is obvious and strikingly wrong here is the disappearance of rivers, in particular the Mississippi, as features governing culture. I find this surprising and it ignores one of JB Jackson's principles of geography: "the persistence of initial settlement."
Initial forms have memory effects on our geography that I don't think this map addresses. We don't see a century and a half of rail's dominance on culture either. Frankly there is a lot missing here and what looks like reasonable links between urban centers ends up erasing long standing America cultural forms. This map is too focused on hubs and interconnections that mimic Tech thinking. We ignore too much of our history and every urban center will clone into monoculture. We can't risk that and this map looks like it will further the flattening begun by TV and now in full effect via network and vector economics.
Europe is a very inertial culture (thank god!) and the regional rethink there is focused on improving on a very Weberian Iron Cage of bureaucracy. China tossed history out a generation ago during the Cultural Revolution and their new megacities are a tragic and dispiriting result that we should avoid at all costs.
We are somewhere between the two and we have to fight monoculture like hell or risk the very soul of the American Experience: idiosyncrasy. This map destroys the charm of urbanity as surely as a Trump Skyscraper.
Initial forms have memory effects on our geography that I don't think this map addresses. We don't see a century and a half of rail's dominance on culture either. Frankly there is a lot missing here and what looks like reasonable links between urban centers ends up erasing long standing America cultural forms. This map is too focused on hubs and interconnections that mimic Tech thinking. We ignore too much of our history and every urban center will clone into monoculture. We can't risk that and this map looks like it will further the flattening begun by TV and now in full effect via network and vector economics.
Europe is a very inertial culture (thank god!) and the regional rethink there is focused on improving on a very Weberian Iron Cage of bureaucracy. China tossed history out a generation ago during the Cultural Revolution and their new megacities are a tragic and dispiriting result that we should avoid at all costs.
We are somewhere between the two and we have to fight monoculture like hell or risk the very soul of the American Experience: idiosyncrasy. This map destroys the charm of urbanity as surely as a Trump Skyscraper.
1
When I was first starting out half a century ago, planners and public policy experts use those kind of maps to chart where we needed to go to ensure that our country had a brighter future. Even the Republicans were in on it; the Nixon administration (at least the first one) was a heavyweight player. All of that focus on urban and regional development came to a screeching halt the day that Ronald Reagan became president.
After that, it was all about tax cutting and budget slashing, and wherever possible, the evolving public infrastructure programs to the states in the form of block grants, often to states that didn't need them but who were reliable supporters of Republican politicians. I can speak with some authority on that point because I was there when it happened.
It used to be that senators and congressmen with large rural constituencies used to compete with urban areas for federal infrastructure funding, and they would cooperate to ensure that the funding was passed by large majorities.
But not anymore. Now it is all about saving our grandchildren from 'bankruptcy' over the national debt; keeping taxes low for the ultra-rich; and hiding money offshore where it won't be found unless some whistleblower leaks the story to an army of investigative reporters.
We've given up on ourselves and on each other, and that is really sad. In statistics, there is a concept known as Regression Towards the Mean; yes indeed, what we have now is a nation stuck in its own mediocrity.
After that, it was all about tax cutting and budget slashing, and wherever possible, the evolving public infrastructure programs to the states in the form of block grants, often to states that didn't need them but who were reliable supporters of Republican politicians. I can speak with some authority on that point because I was there when it happened.
It used to be that senators and congressmen with large rural constituencies used to compete with urban areas for federal infrastructure funding, and they would cooperate to ensure that the funding was passed by large majorities.
But not anymore. Now it is all about saving our grandchildren from 'bankruptcy' over the national debt; keeping taxes low for the ultra-rich; and hiding money offshore where it won't be found unless some whistleblower leaks the story to an army of investigative reporters.
We've given up on ourselves and on each other, and that is really sad. In statistics, there is a concept known as Regression Towards the Mean; yes indeed, what we have now is a nation stuck in its own mediocrity.
2
Ideas based in solid engineering and economic theories, that are also a political non-starters. The country will survive it's fifty state configuration, far better that Europe seems able to cope with its over-engineered integration. A master plan that often seems to induce more paralysis than progress. In spite of the differences currently highlighted by our raucous politics, the US remains far more integrated that any other large country on earth. There is nothing wrong with our union that time won't heal. Old thinking will fade away, while young ideas gain traction. Technology will continue to play an expanding role keeping us glued together. It is also likely to do so in unimaginable ways. What might your day be like in 2035? You've just asked Uber to send an automated car over to your apartment in Milwaukee. You and some friends hop in, spending the weekend celebrating your birthday in New Orleans. Late Sunday you call up another ride, able to sleep all the way home. We can't really say what the best political configuration for the regions of America will be in thirty to fifty years. Technology and social change are certain to alter current patterns in unpredictable ways. We built railroads and a communications network during a period of civil war. We also engineered roads and power systems on the heels of an economic catastrophe. Don't be fooled by the distractions of a minor political upheaval. The nation will continue on, fifty states, their politicians and all.
2
Yes! I've been talking about a mega-region model for years. The author is wrong however, to focus on borders of economic activity or connectivity. Let's dispense with the high-speed rail for now and concentrate on fundamental infrastructure change. The borders of these mega-regions should be based more on geography, water access, and ideology. For example, the Cascades here in Oregon draw a distinct line between the political leanings of western Oregon and eastern Oregon. Further, the Pacific Northwest would never accept SoCal, give that area to the southwest. With access to the Pacific, this region is now more viable. The south needs to be thought out, actually two of the regions listed could be combined into one. Minnesota and Iowa belong in the Midwest. I could go on... But while we're at, let's amend the constitution to reflect a more modern way of living. Each mega-region would have its own capital city. We keep Washington D.C. for international and military reasons. We do away with the Senate and the House, but we keep the prez. Oh, and finally, the upper plains states are turned into a free roaming buffalo nation. We turn back this part of the country to its original state and allow Native Americans the freedom to exist there.
2
The "urban corridor" shown extending southeast of Seattle is mostly within a mountain range (the Cascades). The one between Sacramento to Reno, ditto (Sierra Nevada). Los Angeles to Las Vegas, a mountainous desert. Some prospect for solar development here, but probably will never be "urban" because there is no water to spare, and little private land. People like to live in Los Angeles, or Las Vegas, but there just isn't much in between, urban-wise.
The Denver-Albuquerque "urban corridor" is fantasy. There is a Fort Collins-Denver-Colorado Springs corridor in front of the Front Ranges, but Albuquerque is sort of isolated--it is in front of a mountain range that faces the other direction. So the route from Albuquerque to Denver in a little roundabout and involves mountains. Any "urban corridor" involving Albuquerque would extend down the Rio Grande to El Paso (a fairly obvious railroad hub of long standing that the mapmaker ignores completely, along with Ciudad Juarez. El Paso/Juarez have a combined population of approximately 2.7 million.)
Salt Lake City to Denver is similar, only more mountainous. A high speed rail link would be a hard sell. Both urban areas are booming, Denver by facing mostly east and Salt Lake by facing mostly west (except the skiing is the other way around). Neither (nor the area in between) would seem to have anything to gain. Unless air and road travel are restricted.
The Denver-Albuquerque "urban corridor" is fantasy. There is a Fort Collins-Denver-Colorado Springs corridor in front of the Front Ranges, but Albuquerque is sort of isolated--it is in front of a mountain range that faces the other direction. So the route from Albuquerque to Denver in a little roundabout and involves mountains. Any "urban corridor" involving Albuquerque would extend down the Rio Grande to El Paso (a fairly obvious railroad hub of long standing that the mapmaker ignores completely, along with Ciudad Juarez. El Paso/Juarez have a combined population of approximately 2.7 million.)
Salt Lake City to Denver is similar, only more mountainous. A high speed rail link would be a hard sell. Both urban areas are booming, Denver by facing mostly east and Salt Lake by facing mostly west (except the skiing is the other way around). Neither (nor the area in between) would seem to have anything to gain. Unless air and road travel are restricted.
1
I wouldn't bet the future on railways, and I don't have access to a Crystal Bowl, however, I believe a political system would eventually collapse if it gets in the way of technological progress. The 50-state system has clearly come from the times when religious and colonial powers and figures where managing divisions of the World: 13 Colonies, subsequent admissions. Whether this system is in the way of America's progress for the 21st century on, I'd say, yes. One can argue it provides randomized options to find the best economical climate for a particular endeavor. True, historical prospective, cultural and climate-emotional divides can't be ignored: we can't seriously think this country would ever become a homogeneous mass of look-alike figures marching in the same direction. Layered political system may also be less susceptible to corruption, as well as it provides opportunity for many to participate in political activities.
But does it have to be 50? States become increasingly fluid, the population structure changes. Unfortunately, current political system is becoming a way for archaically minded minority to keep their say too important - its not democracy, its a "birth right", and we know what happens to those setting their birth rights above democratic movements.
The States system will dissipate. The question is, at what point in the US history: on the rise, or on the fall. I hope we can get to it on the rise, accelerating, but, somehow, I don't keep my hopes high.
But does it have to be 50? States become increasingly fluid, the population structure changes. Unfortunately, current political system is becoming a way for archaically minded minority to keep their say too important - its not democracy, its a "birth right", and we know what happens to those setting their birth rights above democratic movements.
The States system will dissipate. The question is, at what point in the US history: on the rise, or on the fall. I hope we can get to it on the rise, accelerating, but, somehow, I don't keep my hopes high.
2
In a way, this is the internal version of Donald Trump's idea of a wall to keep out poor foreigners.
By concentrating resources and development in narrow areas that are already wealthy and populous, the vast majority of what is now called "fly-over country" will face certain impoverishment, far worse than any modest difference in income they now experience relative to the big cities.
We've already done this once, by confining Native Americans into resource less reservations, condemning them to poverty, alcoholism and dysfunction.
This plan will just repeat that mistake, and do the same to our fellow citizens who live in those glorious open spaces we call America.
By concentrating resources and development in narrow areas that are already wealthy and populous, the vast majority of what is now called "fly-over country" will face certain impoverishment, far worse than any modest difference in income they now experience relative to the big cities.
We've already done this once, by confining Native Americans into resource less reservations, condemning them to poverty, alcoholism and dysfunction.
This plan will just repeat that mistake, and do the same to our fellow citizens who live in those glorious open spaces we call America.
2
The founding fathers created the federal system we have in order to protect minorities from the tyranny of the majority. It was wise and worked well at times for 200 years. In the last few decades, the rich minority (1%ish) has recognized the power of the system and manipulated it such that they are the most protected minority. There has always been a 1% and there always will be. It just that the one that's developed over the last 30 or 40 years is epicly selfish. Even after realizing nearly 100% of the economic gains since the crash, they want more. The conservative mantra "broaden the tax base" means give the rich more and the poor less.
The founding fathers believed that greed could be satiated and once fulfilled would produce wise leaders. Not lately.
The founding fathers believed that greed could be satiated and once fulfilled would produce wise leaders. Not lately.
1
It's an interesting but dangerous idea that is totally out of step with reality, especially the reality of our political system. Rather than go into great detail, I'll simply remind the author that States are sovereign and ours is a federal system and with good reason. The last thing America needs is for Federal-level politicians to start redrawing maps for "our supposed benefit". States are quite capable, if they so desire, of setting up cross-state-border institutions. Florida, Louisiana, and Texas, for instance, could easily work together to set up a cross-border special economic zone, without dismantling America's proven method of Federal Republican Democracy, or creating an even more invasive federal government with even more uber-technocrats.
3
The concept is interesting - and restructuring could probably happen on an economic level (interstate commerce clause of the constitution). People could probably even accept it if it stayed economic and out of politics (and still provided for non-GDP regions). I'd be curious as to the logic of this specific map, but more importantly it seems a lot of the proposal is based on GDP? The trouble is that GDP doesn't account for what supports the GDP - food, resources, tourist attractions. These don't add too much to the GDP directly, sprawl across lots of land, but without them you can't have the strong manufacturing bases, feed the populus in those cities, and start losing the tourist-draw flying through the central airports. This map and proposal seems like it doesn't really value them - and this has been tried before, in many communist countries. In just about every instance people were forcefully moved to or strongly incentivized to move to these major hubs (were all the money was going), the supporting agriculture and mining collapsed, and the economies failed. I'm a city-person, hubs would likely directly benefit me, but I've come from a country that did that.. and it turned out pretty bad.
1
This is a prescription for the Balkanization of America into like-minded entities. Not too many years ago there were Blacks arguing for an independent nation on the Gulf Coast, whites for secession in northern Idaho, Texans for basic dismemberment, etc.
What makes America what it is, what does makes it different, is that we are a geographic, religious, historical, and ethnic amalgamation united not by common history, religion, or ethnicity but by idealistic goals, however limited in attainment, embodied in the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and a couple centuries of struggle toward those goals.
This has to have been written by someone who goes long distances flying over America, not traveling at ground level by car, train, or thumb actually seeing and interacting with America.
The column's proposal claims to be a readjustment to face reality when, instead, it is actually a recipe for the ossification of what is, with a gloss of what the author considers utopia. One of the beauties of the inefficient American system is that it allows nowhere to become somewhere quite quickly, even as somewheres become nowhere.
In a way, I feel sad for Parag Khanna, the author, whose enjoyment and appreciation for our country seems so constrained. Corridors have walls. That's a pretty limited vision for an expansive future, either intellectually, materially, aesthetically, or spiritually.
What makes America what it is, what does makes it different, is that we are a geographic, religious, historical, and ethnic amalgamation united not by common history, religion, or ethnicity but by idealistic goals, however limited in attainment, embodied in the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and a couple centuries of struggle toward those goals.
This has to have been written by someone who goes long distances flying over America, not traveling at ground level by car, train, or thumb actually seeing and interacting with America.
The column's proposal claims to be a readjustment to face reality when, instead, it is actually a recipe for the ossification of what is, with a gloss of what the author considers utopia. One of the beauties of the inefficient American system is that it allows nowhere to become somewhere quite quickly, even as somewheres become nowhere.
In a way, I feel sad for Parag Khanna, the author, whose enjoyment and appreciation for our country seems so constrained. Corridors have walls. That's a pretty limited vision for an expansive future, either intellectually, materially, aesthetically, or spiritually.
5
Gleaming high speed trains and other accoutrements of modern civilization only work to improve the fabric of daily living when the basic foundations of economic justice, fair housing and employment practices, quality education, and innovative and inclusive business models are evident. For much of this country these building blocks are indeed lacking, and in the wake of the financial meltdown, the approaches to resolving these issues has failed miserably. The results - a hollowed out the middle class and extreme burdens on the increasing number of undereducated and poverty stricken citizens, let alone the many young educated people who are having trouble integrating into the work force.
Without solutions for these problems, the context for a new map for America is meaningless, though from a government perspective maybe a mental shake-up of these proportions would assist the political class in truly realizing what's important to having a healthy nation. The decline of our democracy is directly related to the lack of recognition of the true problems by the majority of the government representatives currently in power. That's the "new map" that is needed to stop the reactionary economic violence which has transformed this country over the past 16 years.
Without solutions for these problems, the context for a new map for America is meaningless, though from a government perspective maybe a mental shake-up of these proportions would assist the political class in truly realizing what's important to having a healthy nation. The decline of our democracy is directly related to the lack of recognition of the true problems by the majority of the government representatives currently in power. That's the "new map" that is needed to stop the reactionary economic violence which has transformed this country over the past 16 years.
The 50 separate countries model is infuriating - how is it that as an American citizen my access to health care, a decent education, basic rights differs based on what state I'm stuck in? How is it that some rubes in sparsely populated areas have out sized power to dictate the direction my country is taking? Regions based on urban corridors would at least allow the rest of us to carry on. It would give an opportunity for those stuck in sparsely populated areas to commute to a better opportunity. It would diffuse the power of the tax sucking and ignorant outliers that continue to hamper us. Look recently at what happened when Charlotte, NC - part of an urban corridor - attempted to join the 21st century. It was driven back into submission by its own state.
6
Many comments criticize he author for not having a sufficiently American background with the clear implication that American problems need (must have) American solutions. That's what has put us into many dead ends such as health care insurance, transportation and here regional planning. Yes, we need to retain the the historical contexts of the states, but Europe and the Far East have much deeper historical contexts and they look beyond their own shores, including to the US, for ideas.
At least consider what the author has to say as a presenter of serious, innovative ways of thinking before again blinkering ourselves from "foreign" ideas and putting us on the road to decline
At least consider what the author has to say as a presenter of serious, innovative ways of thinking before again blinkering ourselves from "foreign" ideas and putting us on the road to decline
3
The problem is not a knee jerk rejection of a foreigner with foreign ideas. The problem really is that the author is relatively ignorant of both American geography and American culture. As one example, consider what would be a multi-billion dollar investment of a high speed rail line between Denver and Albuquerque. With the exception of a few small cities (Las Vegas, NM, Trinidad and Pueblo, CO) there is practically no one living in that corridor until one gets to Colorado Springs. The benefit:cost ratio of such a project would be ridiculous and would require government support forever. New Mexico cannot even a sustain a short (and ill-conceived) rail line between Belen and Santa Fe. The author needs to look at fewer maps and spend more time in the U.S. with his feet on the ground talking to people who live in his "idealized regions."
2
Trains equivalent to the EU system are overdue. It should be a national initiative tho the southerners will not want to lose their over sized share of northern tax wealth.
Food should be part of the mapping. Local food production may have a future impact on NY state. The western tier could thrive again if the night trains, those old milk trains, ran again. I still see a covered market as a solution to some of New York's poor fresh food quality. More expansive than the green markets, it would offer a consistent produce source near a train hub where a commuting and walking populace has regular access. Baltimore's covered market was a joy when I lived there.
Food should be part of the mapping. Local food production may have a future impact on NY state. The western tier could thrive again if the night trains, those old milk trains, ran again. I still see a covered market as a solution to some of New York's poor fresh food quality. More expansive than the green markets, it would offer a consistent produce source near a train hub where a commuting and walking populace has regular access. Baltimore's covered market was a joy when I lived there.
1
I think the map is short-circuiting a lot of people's brains, and many of the negative commenters here are completely missing the point: the current system of funneling development funds through state capitols is shortsighted and inefficient. The author is not saying we have to do away with our current states, but rather we need to have a clear map of the economic zones that exist and which can be strengthened with intelligent planning, as opposed to state-capitol-centered planning (with, it need not be added, all the graft and rent-seeking that occur in that system). States should understand that they need not compete with each other in a zero-sum race to the bottom: states with similar economies can join together regionally to create wholes that are much stronger than their parts, if only they stop seeing each other as competitors. The future--indeed the present--is cities and urban corridors. That's where the people, the schools, and the jobs are. They are far more important to the future of our citizens than the rural areas, and they need to be freed from the toxic political grip of their state capitols' mandarins.
125
I gotta say I am a big fan of the logic behind this whole article even though it takes on the kind of Messianic-techie-liberal-futurist-Utopian-vision tone that makes me grind my teeth a little.
Two things make me sad and skeptical about the idea in general:
1. The connective tissue between these American City States is envisioned as high speed rail. This makes a lot of sense pre-2008ish, before the California High-Speed Rail project showed just how utterly fractious such an undertaking proves to be with our current regional division of government, even on a state level. When every county on the proposed route will fight tooth and claw not too have a bullet train blast through their town at 250 mph 20 times a day, the feasibility melts into bitter expensive in-fighting.
Of course, the solution is a powerful central authority that can override NIMBY objectorss for the common good of economic growth and efficiency, but I am not a huge fan of Maoist expediency at the cost of democratic liberties.
What I really love about this article is that it casts the perennial American dilemma in a new light - where is the true seat of power -federal authority or state authority?
Which leads me to the next point of concern...
2. It seems completely impossible under our current political system.
Two things make me sad and skeptical about the idea in general:
1. The connective tissue between these American City States is envisioned as high speed rail. This makes a lot of sense pre-2008ish, before the California High-Speed Rail project showed just how utterly fractious such an undertaking proves to be with our current regional division of government, even on a state level. When every county on the proposed route will fight tooth and claw not too have a bullet train blast through their town at 250 mph 20 times a day, the feasibility melts into bitter expensive in-fighting.
Of course, the solution is a powerful central authority that can override NIMBY objectorss for the common good of economic growth and efficiency, but I am not a huge fan of Maoist expediency at the cost of democratic liberties.
What I really love about this article is that it casts the perennial American dilemma in a new light - where is the true seat of power -federal authority or state authority?
Which leads me to the next point of concern...
2. It seems completely impossible under our current political system.
36
Dan, don't you mean, by "Maoist expediency", really French centralization?
I feel like we are turning into the Mideast. A bunch of imaginary lines drawn on a map around people that could not be more different. While I agree that the strength of America is in our differences, the lines need be redrawn in order to better utilize our limited tax revenue. My city of Seattle has significantly more shared interested with SF in terms of infrastructure spending and job creation that we do with rural towns on the other side of our state. There is nothing wrong with being different but our current structure is so divisive that we are never able to allocate our funds appropriately.
23
Being born in Chicago, having survived there for my first 22 years, I prefer the slow life. I am now 74 years old and have worked and lived in Wyoming for 32 years then 20 years in western Colorado and eastern Tennessee. The rhythm in my body prefers a slower pace thank you....................
3
Nice idea. Not one bit of it will come to pass unless it's structured in a way that restores the role of the middle class in the national economy. The coastal plutocrats, whether at Goldman Sachs or Uber / AirBnB / Facebook / Google, have zero interest in the kind of investment necessary to make these urban corridors work properly.
And the Sanders and Trump voters have had the wool pulled over our eyes by policy wonks far too often to just roll over for this plan. These high speed corridor railways look like an efficient mechanism to continue to loot medium and small sized cities.
And the Sanders and Trump voters have had the wool pulled over our eyes by policy wonks far too often to just roll over for this plan. These high speed corridor railways look like an efficient mechanism to continue to loot medium and small sized cities.
4
The anti-democratic structure of the US Constitutional government has been there from the beginning (as revolutionary as it was at the time), but it is an increasingly dysfunctional obstacle to stability, progress and fairness as the US tries to belong to the modern world.
The US Senate, the "senior" legislative body, was set up to represent federalism, not democracy. The structure was clearly intended to protect the self-interest of local (e.g. state based) post colonial economic elites and, in the name of supposed "state's rights" and "freedom", to facilitate the ignorant support of parts of their preyed upon local voters. Our right wing "libertarians", Tea Partiers and most of the current GOP are the latest in a long line of anti-American "patriots" who who just don't like those "other people" from other parts of their country who outnumber them.
Indeed, the Senate was set up as a direct counter weight to the more democratically based House of Representatives (which now unfortunately, due to supremely corrupt and cynical local legislative gerrymandering, is systemically undemocratic as well).
Perhaps the "Founding Fathers" had a good reason to limit the central government, based on their fear of absolute monarchy like they had recently escaped from. There is no justification for that much de-centralization now.
Convert the Senate to a proportionally representative chamber reflecting national party ideas and eliminate gerrymandering (and the electoral college)!
The US Senate, the "senior" legislative body, was set up to represent federalism, not democracy. The structure was clearly intended to protect the self-interest of local (e.g. state based) post colonial economic elites and, in the name of supposed "state's rights" and "freedom", to facilitate the ignorant support of parts of their preyed upon local voters. Our right wing "libertarians", Tea Partiers and most of the current GOP are the latest in a long line of anti-American "patriots" who who just don't like those "other people" from other parts of their country who outnumber them.
Indeed, the Senate was set up as a direct counter weight to the more democratically based House of Representatives (which now unfortunately, due to supremely corrupt and cynical local legislative gerrymandering, is systemically undemocratic as well).
Perhaps the "Founding Fathers" had a good reason to limit the central government, based on their fear of absolute monarchy like they had recently escaped from. There is no justification for that much de-centralization now.
Convert the Senate to a proportionally representative chamber reflecting national party ideas and eliminate gerrymandering (and the electoral college)!
The author says that the BosWash and Greater LA "city states matter far more than most American states."
Really? Matter to whom?
To the author, who praises the horror that is the Chinese megalopolis system?
What about to real people?
Really? Matter to whom?
To the author, who praises the horror that is the Chinese megalopolis system?
What about to real people?
4
We have all been learning in recent months that Brussels has 19 mayors and at least six police forces, and their is little hope of streamlining because they all fight for their little fiefdoms. How do you think we are ever going to convince Republistanis like Jim Inhofe, Glenn Beck, Mitch McConnell, Sean Hannity, the truly execrable Ann Coulter, and the stupendously pinheaded Rush Limbaugh to go along with this idea?
2
After the reconfiguration we could all go their separate ways and the rest of the world would be the better for it.
1
Please leave the states alone. It took decades upon decades to become fifty states. Each state has its own governing body and subdivisions into districts with free movement of people and goods and services.
Europe is still fighting over territories and people, even though they are supposed to be the older country.
Economic activity is always a messy and difficult business. It is also subject to innovation and demand and supply.
Europe is still fighting over territories and people, even though they are supposed to be the older country.
Economic activity is always a messy and difficult business. It is also subject to innovation and demand and supply.
4
I think the author would do much better dreaming up a better environmental and technological worlds for India, and Asia before cooking up something for the First World. People like Cornelius Vanderbilt built the United States and we need more visionaries like him to take the USA even further. Even a la Donald Trump as a builder has been a global success story. Vanderbilt was a New Yorker too. Let's get to work people.
5
Here in the Great Lakes we get no respect. We're called the 'Rust Belt'. While we don't have oil and we're known for our cold winters I hope the rest of country doesn't forget that the vast majority of North America's fresh water comes from right here in the Great Lakes.
4
Philosophical concerns aside, there are real, practical advantages to regionalizing infrastructure: access to medical care, school resources, public safety, public transportation; the list goes on. To be turned away from the best choice for medical care or closest magnet school, because you live on the wrong side of the state line is frustrating. For businesses to face different codes and regulations on either side of a state boundary is costly. There is a lot to be said for regional development, especially infrastructure development.
1
Agree!
There was a similar idea proposed in "The People's Almanac" by Irving Wallace and his son David Wallechinksy in the 1970s which the U.S. was reconfigured into grand regions along the lines described in this article.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_People%27s_Almanac
While the proposals herein has merit, the U.S. has locked itself into an untenable position in which its institutions are highly resistant to change. Neither the Democratic Party nor the Republican Party (especially the Republican Party) represent the interests of the "common man." Nor will the states budge on holding onto to any crumbs of power that they can grab. Nor will there be periodic constitutional conventions (something that the Founding Fathers should have conceived) to update the foundations of the nation. The Father of the Constitution James Madison himself was highly skeptical of the oblique electoral college.
In an advanced nation, ideas to update efficiency, prosperity, fairness, justice and the joy of living in this country would be addressed. We're not there yet and we in fact be sliding backwards. So many of us just fend for ourselves and don't have any illusions about what the future holds.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_People%27s_Almanac
While the proposals herein has merit, the U.S. has locked itself into an untenable position in which its institutions are highly resistant to change. Neither the Democratic Party nor the Republican Party (especially the Republican Party) represent the interests of the "common man." Nor will the states budge on holding onto to any crumbs of power that they can grab. Nor will there be periodic constitutional conventions (something that the Founding Fathers should have conceived) to update the foundations of the nation. The Father of the Constitution James Madison himself was highly skeptical of the oblique electoral college.
In an advanced nation, ideas to update efficiency, prosperity, fairness, justice and the joy of living in this country would be addressed. We're not there yet and we in fact be sliding backwards. So many of us just fend for ourselves and don't have any illusions about what the future holds.
2
Thanks, but No Thanks.
I do not want to live in a Guangzhou or a Tokyo or a London or New York. I want to breathe and not suffocate in a cluster of 50 million people regional city-state. Efficiency be damned in this case.
There is more to life than productivity and efficiency and pervasive connectivity. I do not want to rush to my high speed line and be packed like sardines to go to work.
I want to ride my bike and go canoeing with my children.
I do not want to live in a Guangzhou or a Tokyo or a London or New York. I want to breathe and not suffocate in a cluster of 50 million people regional city-state. Efficiency be damned in this case.
There is more to life than productivity and efficiency and pervasive connectivity. I do not want to rush to my high speed line and be packed like sardines to go to work.
I want to ride my bike and go canoeing with my children.
4
This has to be written by someone who goes long distances flying over America, not traveling at ground level by car, train, or thumb actually seeing and interacting with America and Americans whose hopes, dreams, values, and lives are played out between the big cities. You can't understand reality if you fly over it, one of the main reasons the politicos and pundits are so surprised by this years electoral politics.
Khanna claims to be creating an readjustment to face reality when, instead, his is a recipe for ossification of what is and/or the utopia he wishes were. One of the beauties of the inefficient American system is that it allows nowhere to become somewhere quite quickly, even as somewheres become nowhere.
In a way, I feel sad for Parag Khanna, whose enjoyment and appreciation for our country seems so limited. Corridors have walls. That's a pretty limited vision for an expansive future, either intellectually, materially, aesthetically, or spiritually.
Khanna claims to be creating an readjustment to face reality when, instead, his is a recipe for ossification of what is and/or the utopia he wishes were. One of the beauties of the inefficient American system is that it allows nowhere to become somewhere quite quickly, even as somewheres become nowhere.
In a way, I feel sad for Parag Khanna, whose enjoyment and appreciation for our country seems so limited. Corridors have walls. That's a pretty limited vision for an expansive future, either intellectually, materially, aesthetically, or spiritually.
31
We don't need a new map. We need a new congress, specifically a new republican caucus, that is willing to invest intelligently in the future of the country. These days the republicans are unwilling to spend money on much of anything except wars and more lavish tax cuts for the rich.
110
Conservatives will NEVER spend money on the social welfare of the country - but to fund the “war machine”, the conservatives’ pockets are deep and fully open.
A people is known by their history and culture; which is reflected in the very many beautiful States within the United States of America.
I have lived in the US since my days as a student at Georgia Tech, and have appreciated the many flavors across the country. I have lived in the South, the North, the Mid-West and am now in the East (NYC). I like the colors and the histories of the many diverse States and would not relegate it to a period's Economics.
The people of this Great nation should be able to cherish and prosper and still be able to retain their history; individual and collective. The history and States thus should be left intact.
This plan by Mr. Khanna looks more like a pitch for dividing a country in the name of economics into Special Economic Zones (as some SEZs exist in China). I do not like this plan at all.
I would rather have my shrimp and grits in Savannah, Georgia and my Philly cheese stake from Philadelphia. I just attended an alumni meet of Georgia Tech and discussed the great history of the State and the School and how we can contribute to make a strong future for both. I would rather stick to that plan.
I have lived in the US since my days as a student at Georgia Tech, and have appreciated the many flavors across the country. I have lived in the South, the North, the Mid-West and am now in the East (NYC). I like the colors and the histories of the many diverse States and would not relegate it to a period's Economics.
The people of this Great nation should be able to cherish and prosper and still be able to retain their history; individual and collective. The history and States thus should be left intact.
This plan by Mr. Khanna looks more like a pitch for dividing a country in the name of economics into Special Economic Zones (as some SEZs exist in China). I do not like this plan at all.
I would rather have my shrimp and grits in Savannah, Georgia and my Philly cheese stake from Philadelphia. I just attended an alumni meet of Georgia Tech and discussed the great history of the State and the School and how we can contribute to make a strong future for both. I would rather stick to that plan.
56
I really like placing Washington, D.C. and its suburbs with the Northeast. Some people from other parts of the country seem to think that Northern Virginia is the home of ham and tobacco. Nope, not at all! To place us with the South is to overemphasize past issues - yes, I do mean the Civil War. And as it happens, Arlington was controlled by the North anyway.
16
Certainly there is some sense in exploring such ideas further. As someone who lived in Davenport, IA for 8 years I am struck by the fact that this idea connects Iowa north and south, but not to Chicago. The folks in eastern Iowa (Davenport, Iowa City, and Des Moines) have long cherished a hope of (and tried to bring to fruition) good passenger rail connections with Chicago. I am also struck by the lack of identity and connection accorded to several great plains states (Dakotas, Wyoming, Montana). It seems to me that any workable plan needs a way to integrate even those sparsely populated regions.
1
The idea of connectivity to promote economic goals though sound on the techno-economic rationale but can't supersede the political rationale embedded into the US constitution's federal principle that gives primacy to the states over the federal government, however powerful the latter might have emerged in the years following the framing of the constitution.
2
Well, it sure would be nice if we all would work together for a common goal, but we'd all rather die apart than live together. (Climate change is dangerous to ignore.)
6
While we cannot ditch the 50-state model without constitutional upheaval, it might make a great deal of sense to make commerce and movement between the states much more frictionless and efficient.
Some parts of the US seem to have already begun this process in some ways--eg, the Northwest, the Northeast--and it seems to be a productive arrangement.
Some areas will balk (the South, of course) and will be left behind; which might be a good incentive for them to reconsider.
Some parts of the US seem to have already begun this process in some ways--eg, the Northwest, the Northeast--and it seems to be a productive arrangement.
Some areas will balk (the South, of course) and will be left behind; which might be a good incentive for them to reconsider.
1
This is a provocative article and is great for inspiring thinking about different ways in which municipalities and states should collaborate. Many commentators point out - "this will never happen", "there is no way we can change" etc. That is not the point - having visions like this, while perhaps not achievable in this form, are an essential starting point for discussion. Then the real work can begin to brainstorm state-to-state collaborations and test specific collaborative programs. The example from Italy is great and we should watch and learn.
2
Honestly, most American's don't really care. As long as their cul-da-sac is quiet, the kids are in good schools, and they can get by financially the average American does not have the time nor do they even want to think about paying for this.
Should they, yes. Mega-Cities are the drivers of the world now. The real question is how do you get the average citizen to think beyond right now and what does it mean for their kids?
Should they, yes. Mega-Cities are the drivers of the world now. The real question is how do you get the average citizen to think beyond right now and what does it mean for their kids?
1
When elements of this idea are put in place, as they surely will be, consideration must be given to the million-plus non-human species of the animal kingdom, their need for northward migration in response to climate change and the establishment of corridors connecting their habitats. The final chapters of E.O Wilson’s most recent book, Half-Earth: Our Planet’s Fight for Life, argues convincingly that this must and can be done. The interfaces between Khanna’s megaregions will be a great place to start.
3
U.S. politics are both unimaginative and corrupt. Antiquated ideas about state sovereignty, none of which are reflected in the Constitution, prevent any serious discussion of cross-state economic cooperation or even an effective national economic strategy. Lobbyists for big corporations and destructive organizations like the NRA set states against each other and many state legislators are simply too poorly informed, too under-educated, and too time-starved to think much about whether the bills they consider make a whole lot of sense. I suppose that a fair number of state legislators simply march to the lobbyists' tune on most economic issues. Congress is, of course, a joke. There are few, if any, serious thinkers there. So we can't expect much effort to improve the country's situation. Regrettably, the only way things get better is if we do a Constitutional convention and get rid of the misguided idea of state sovereignty once and for all. In this country the only sovereign should be the federal government.
4
I notice a lot of push back on the article states that what Khanna describes can't happen in the US for a variety of reasons, ranging from historical, cultural to they way our government was formed or runs. None of the negative reactions appear to realize that what Khanna is describing has already taken place. These economic/urban hubs already exist. I live in Seattle and part of any local discussion about economics is not only center on the city, but much of the time takes into account the area between Vancouver, B.C. and Portland, OR. So "Cascadia" isn't a fiction the author made up, but a reality. What he really seems to be suggesting is acknowledging that these areas exist, then leveraging and strengthening their interdependence to the benefit of all citizens.
18
Bravo. You seem to be one of very few commenters who understand the point of this piece. I live in the NYC suburb of Westchester and our economy and interests intersect much more with those of Fairfield County, CT and Northern NJ than they do with Buffalo, NY and the western region of NYS.
1
Congress can't even pass a budget. Do you think they could possibly tackle this?
10
"China is transcending its traditional internal boundaries to become an empire of 26 megacity clusters with populations of up to 100 million each..."
No thanks.
If America was simply nothing more then it's GDP then this is a brilliant article...but it's not.
No thanks.
If America was simply nothing more then it's GDP then this is a brilliant article...but it's not.
10
It's ironic that in an era when we are all connected so easily by email, Skype, Facebook, etc.people agreeing with the author of this new way of thinking believe that we should break up our country into official regions. The immediacy and ease of our connections with our neighbors on the East Coast make me breathless. We really are not isolated, folks. But we are regionally different, for sure (said the small town woman in Oregon who loves visiting NYC)
5
I hope that this connectedness may make it possible for our diversity to be a resource rather than an obstacle. Your point of view demonstrates an attitude that transcends our current divisions of race, religion, geography, and all the rest.
1
The proposed high speed rail passenger service.
We did this once.
And tore it out when we fell in love with the automobile.
That being said some oversight at the national level for projects having a multi state impact would be nice. Sometime after Democrats and Republicans put the word compromise back in their vocabularies. Until then we're just spinning our wheel.
I don't advocate micro managing and regulation at the federal level. Just some insurance that all parties involved are trying to row in the same direction.
We did this once.
And tore it out when we fell in love with the automobile.
That being said some oversight at the national level for projects having a multi state impact would be nice. Sometime after Democrats and Republicans put the word compromise back in their vocabularies. Until then we're just spinning our wheel.
I don't advocate micro managing and regulation at the federal level. Just some insurance that all parties involved are trying to row in the same direction.
2
How about no. No way. This is good if you want a civil war.
7
We already have civil war. Look at the conservative tyranny unfolding in the south, where the basic assumption of civil rights that are taken for granted in other regions has been so quickly tossed overboard. The country is fractured, and fracturing, along lines mostly defined by a lack of education. If we want a united nation, we need to rejuvenate our educational system so that people can learn to learn, have open minds, and recognize difference and diversity as assets and strength, not as threats.
The map reflects reality on the ground, but it will never reflect political reality. In Spokane, WA our economic connection to the liberal city on the other side of the Cascades is only slightly higher than our connections to Phoenix and Salt Lake City (the former city of Seattle in our state, and the later two cities in our mega-region).
But the politics, of course, will prevent this. It's not just the enormous power of the Senate, which gives outsize representation to smaller states, but our entire political history which has shaped the culture of the region. For example, In my county, a majority voted for legal marijuana. In the state where my wife works, however, less than 10 miles away, marijuana is still a serious crime, and I can't imagine the people who voted for Raul Labrador voting to legalize pot.
Our state identities are part of us. They affect what we learn in school, and what we see as acceptable political discourse.
But the politics, of course, will prevent this. It's not just the enormous power of the Senate, which gives outsize representation to smaller states, but our entire political history which has shaped the culture of the region. For example, In my county, a majority voted for legal marijuana. In the state where my wife works, however, less than 10 miles away, marijuana is still a serious crime, and I can't imagine the people who voted for Raul Labrador voting to legalize pot.
Our state identities are part of us. They affect what we learn in school, and what we see as acceptable political discourse.
37
Perhaps it's time to consider a new frame of government that will be of greater benefit to we the people.
Yes, the US is positively schizoid about equal protection of law.
'Marijuana' (and by that I assume you mean 'possession of small amounts') is not a 'serious crime' ANYWHERE anymore. And thank Dog for THAT small miracle.
And 'States' are basically nonsense/meaningless entities in the world circa 2016. It's time to do away with these arbitrarily-drawn lines in the dirt if you ask me. They may be 'part of us', but it's not a big part anymore for the VAST majority of US citizens, and it really hasn't been for a LONG time.
And 'States' are basically nonsense/meaningless entities in the world circa 2016. It's time to do away with these arbitrarily-drawn lines in the dirt if you ask me. They may be 'part of us', but it's not a big part anymore for the VAST majority of US citizens, and it really hasn't been for a LONG time.
Some things have not changed. Local interests include corruption. National purposes are fought to avoid taxes, using every possible excuse of corruption, grandiosity, and false claims it can be done privately.
As Wikipedia words it:
The case for federally funded internal improvements was such a program could serve both local and national economic interests as well as a critical nation-building role.
One early government-funded project was the Cumberland Road, which Congress approved in 1806. It became the National Road and was the single largest project of the antebellum era, with nearly US$7 million in federal dollars spent between 1806 and 1841.
The federal role in internal improvements was one of the most persistent and contentious issues of American politics in the years after the revolution. George Washington repeatedly pressed his vision of a network of canals and highways.
Federalists defended internal improvements as agents of the "general welfare" or "public good." Republicans denounced such schemes as "corruption", taxing the many to benefit the few. Critics of individual improvement schemes did not have to dig deep to uncover self-interest.
By the end of the 1790s, Republicans regularly assaulted the "monied gentry" and their improvement plans as visionary and extravagant, and gradually eroded public confidence in government action and authority.
The later Whig Party consistently supported internal improvements, to little avail.
As Wikipedia words it:
The case for federally funded internal improvements was such a program could serve both local and national economic interests as well as a critical nation-building role.
One early government-funded project was the Cumberland Road, which Congress approved in 1806. It became the National Road and was the single largest project of the antebellum era, with nearly US$7 million in federal dollars spent between 1806 and 1841.
The federal role in internal improvements was one of the most persistent and contentious issues of American politics in the years after the revolution. George Washington repeatedly pressed his vision of a network of canals and highways.
Federalists defended internal improvements as agents of the "general welfare" or "public good." Republicans denounced such schemes as "corruption", taxing the many to benefit the few. Critics of individual improvement schemes did not have to dig deep to uncover self-interest.
By the end of the 1790s, Republicans regularly assaulted the "monied gentry" and their improvement plans as visionary and extravagant, and gradually eroded public confidence in government action and authority.
The later Whig Party consistently supported internal improvements, to little avail.
4
Although The Erie Canal funded by NY state was interstate & intrastate. It connected the Port of New York City with the rural areas & upstate towns PLUS connection to the growing Middle West in the 1800s. Later Railroads were built gradually with private & state money.
During the Civil War with Southerners not in Congress, the Western Railroad to California from Iowa was designed & substantially funded by the Federal govt. & built primarily by Irish & Chinese immigrants.
During the Civil War with Southerners not in Congress, the Western Railroad to California from Iowa was designed & substantially funded by the Federal govt. & built primarily by Irish & Chinese immigrants.
New England is useless save for MA. I would trade all those states to Canada for Toronto
11
Those of us in New England think otherwise. Better idea would be to trade Buffalo for Toronto. For that matter, what's Pennsylvania but Philadelphia and Pittsburgh separated by 300 miles of Kentucky?
I'm not sure what the point of this exercise is. Atlanta's a fine city but the bubba suburbs a few miles out are part of another world culturally and politically. With cities in the South increasingly at odds with their state governments which are reflective of the hinterlands' hard-right mentality a scheme like this would be impossible to implement effectively.
I'm not sure what the point of this exercise is. Atlanta's a fine city but the bubba suburbs a few miles out are part of another world culturally and politically. With cities in the South increasingly at odds with their state governments which are reflective of the hinterlands' hard-right mentality a scheme like this would be impossible to implement effectively.
Why in the world would we accept? Even if it didn't cost us Toronto?
1
You've apparently never tasted life here in southern Maine, ExPeterC. Of all 11 states/metro areas scattered across the US I've lived in in all my years, Portland vies with my #1 love (Burlington, Vt.) for "best place".
1
The basic idea has an initial appeal.
The problem here is Gerrymandering. Any re-drawing of the electoral map requires judgments. Judgments are informed by assumptions, presumptions, and even the facts of the moment.
They need not be the bad faith manipulations of overt Gerrymandering to be the projection of distortions into our politics.
Add to that the bad faith of partisans, and the practical potential of he idea drops to nil.
The problem here is Gerrymandering. Any re-drawing of the electoral map requires judgments. Judgments are informed by assumptions, presumptions, and even the facts of the moment.
They need not be the bad faith manipulations of overt Gerrymandering to be the projection of distortions into our politics.
Add to that the bad faith of partisans, and the practical potential of he idea drops to nil.
19
> "The problem here is Gerrymandering. Any re-drawing of the electoral map requires judgments. Judgments are informed by assumptions, presumptions, and even the facts of the moment"
This is exactly the wrong mentality. The minute we start using 'judgements' to draw electoral districts, we are engaging in Social-Engineering, and picking winners and losers
The current system gives whichever party happens to have a majority in the State Legislature, the power to allow home-team politicians to choose their own voters, and by effectively disenfranchises the voters from choosing representatives of their choosing, unless we they coincidentally happen to be in alignment with the folks who drew up the boundaries
There is only one solution that makes sense. Every 10 years the Census Bureau should create the districts using a computer program, that starts in a different corner of each state, and draws out boxlike districts based on zipcodes
Currently there are fewer than 5 Congressional Seats that are competitive. Under the plan above, Every district would change every 10 years, and this would give voters the opportunity to have a meaningful chance to pick new representatives if that was their choice
This is exactly the wrong mentality. The minute we start using 'judgements' to draw electoral districts, we are engaging in Social-Engineering, and picking winners and losers
The current system gives whichever party happens to have a majority in the State Legislature, the power to allow home-team politicians to choose their own voters, and by effectively disenfranchises the voters from choosing representatives of their choosing, unless we they coincidentally happen to be in alignment with the folks who drew up the boundaries
There is only one solution that makes sense. Every 10 years the Census Bureau should create the districts using a computer program, that starts in a different corner of each state, and draws out boxlike districts based on zipcodes
Currently there are fewer than 5 Congressional Seats that are competitive. Under the plan above, Every district would change every 10 years, and this would give voters the opportunity to have a meaningful chance to pick new representatives if that was their choice
It's a non-starter, politically, barring collapse of the federal government--and even then, states might try to reconstitute themselves as sovereigns.
In terms of regions, Dallas + Minneapolis seems a non-starter, the prospective State of Jefferson between Portland and San Francisco is not fond of either metropolis, and Tampa Bay (some 4 million people) is rapidly fusing with Orlando (2 million).
In terms of regions, Dallas + Minneapolis seems a non-starter, the prospective State of Jefferson between Portland and San Francisco is not fond of either metropolis, and Tampa Bay (some 4 million people) is rapidly fusing with Orlando (2 million).
22
I've watched attempts in the Rivertowns area of Westchester where there have been suggestions to merge school systems, police, fire, and sanitation departments. The suggestions come to naught because everyone, each person and official involved, is afraid of losing something. If this is what happens on a local level where economies of scale could be of real assistance to all, imagine what would occur on the national level, especially with the way our political system is not functioning.
There are many things that need to be upgraded, improved, or just brought into line with existing standards. However, as long as we continue to believe the mantra that cutting taxes helps us our infrastructure, health care system, social safety net, and other public venues will continue to deteriorate. I remember when I visited Europe in the 80s and 90s: almost every public space was clean, neat, and well tended. People looked much healthier than they did here. They didn't have that fearful look about them, the one that tells you that they know they could lose everything at the turn of a dime or a CEOs whim. People talk about homogeneity in Europe as the reason why they can accomplish so much with their social policies and why we can't. That's a cop out: we don't want to. Nor do we want to change our 50 state system.
There are many things that need to be upgraded, improved, or just brought into line with existing standards. However, as long as we continue to believe the mantra that cutting taxes helps us our infrastructure, health care system, social safety net, and other public venues will continue to deteriorate. I remember when I visited Europe in the 80s and 90s: almost every public space was clean, neat, and well tended. People looked much healthier than they did here. They didn't have that fearful look about them, the one that tells you that they know they could lose everything at the turn of a dime or a CEOs whim. People talk about homogeneity in Europe as the reason why they can accomplish so much with their social policies and why we can't. That's a cop out: we don't want to. Nor do we want to change our 50 state system.
97
Henry you obviously haven't been to Europe recently. It's slowly descending into chaos. Social systems are breaking in every country. Systems of welfare and public spending are being halted and cut drastically. The political and economic union of Europe isn't working. Countries are in as much debt as they were before entering. The centralization of decision making and power by the eu bureaucrats is producing more examples of corruption. The answer to local development is centralized decision making.
1
That anxiety could also be why people are more prone to get overweight in the US.
Gaz, No I haven't been to Europe recently. But from what I hear about the Scandinavian countries, they are doing fairly well. And Europe still does better with its social safety net than we do but we continue, in the face of evidence to the contrary, to insist that everyone can find a job even when it's obvious that they can't. As a college graduate and someone who is 57, when I apply for a minimum wage job I get no response. It's not that I don't want to work: businesses don't want to hire me. Now, if we were serious about putting people to work, every person who wanted a job would have one because we need a public works program in America to rebuild our infrastructure, fix our telecommunications, remake our education system, work on making health care accessible and affordable, provide professional quality child care for working parents and the same sort of care for seniors. America is not committed to those sorts of things and that lack is now making us a less desirable place to live and a very stressful place to survive in.
1
See a lot of negative comments, but, ignoring questions of feasibility due to politicians who would rather die at their mahogany desk than let anyone else have a go at the job, I think this is a wonderful idea.
16
Apparently it's too much to expect someone from a repressive city state like Singapore to understand that top down economic and political planning is not congruent with either the history or the current political economy of the US. The states aren't going anywhere anytime soon. And high speed rail doesn't make sense outside of certain high-density population portions of the US, mainly the Northeast.
A better question might be whether given the increasing political balkanization and inability to agree on what is good it's time for the US to break up.
A better question might be whether given the increasing political balkanization and inability to agree on what is good it's time for the US to break up.
32
Headline- New York Times [circa September 17, 2087]:
"After much blood-letting and lazer pointing, the new Constitution[s] were ratified. The Confederate States of America took the South and parts of what once was Ohio and attached a rider inviting Missouri and Kansas to join at a later date. The Northern part of the Americas has decided to ratify a "fluid" North United States, the Midwest convinced what was New England to invite them in; the District of Columbia and the rest of the DMV struck a deal with New York and New Jersey. The New States of California [ North, South and Central ] will go it alone; Washington, Oregon struck an alliance with Nevada; Arizona will now become part of Mexico with duel citizenship status..."
"After much blood-letting and lazer pointing, the new Constitution[s] were ratified. The Confederate States of America took the South and parts of what once was Ohio and attached a rider inviting Missouri and Kansas to join at a later date. The Northern part of the Americas has decided to ratify a "fluid" North United States, the Midwest convinced what was New England to invite them in; the District of Columbia and the rest of the DMV struck a deal with New York and New Jersey. The New States of California [ North, South and Central ] will go it alone; Washington, Oregon struck an alliance with Nevada; Arizona will now become part of Mexico with duel citizenship status..."
14
Not sure about some parts of the article, but the author is right that we should scrap the states concept. Long since outlived its usefulness.
4
Looks similar to Panem
15
Like the Washington Post article, "Which of the 11 American Nations Do You Live In", published last November, this artcle is misnamed. It should be, more simply, "How to Divde America". It is stereotypical, and in the end, not a very healthy way to look at the nation.
23
Planning at multiple scales: international, national, inter-state regional, state, regional, city, and neighborhood. There are some existing systems in place that are inter-state regional: highways, protected migratory routes, national parks, etc. These things have developed on their own, organically?
Will it help to add another layer of governance, or should we just change our thinking and start working together like reasonable people?
Will it help to add another layer of governance, or should we just change our thinking and start working together like reasonable people?
3
Fun, but rubbish, really.
Here' the best example -- Entire control of the Colorado River, which provides Los Angeles and other 'Pacific Coast' cities with water is given to the 'Inland West' state.
California, Arizona and Nevada were specifically shaped by Congress to give those states access to the Colorado. Giving total control of that to one state over another is a recipe for first, political disaster, and then human tragedy. So much for a more efficient design, right?
More than a glib understand of how the US states go their shapes shows that access to natural resources -- such as the Colorado River -- are reasonable factors in where lines are drawn. The shapes of states are not irrationally and not based entirely on the legacy of slavery politics or based on old or obsolete political notions or economics.
It is interesting that the watersheds are noted on the map, but appear completely ignored in the calculus of 'where to draw the lines.'
Here' the best example -- Entire control of the Colorado River, which provides Los Angeles and other 'Pacific Coast' cities with water is given to the 'Inland West' state.
California, Arizona and Nevada were specifically shaped by Congress to give those states access to the Colorado. Giving total control of that to one state over another is a recipe for first, political disaster, and then human tragedy. So much for a more efficient design, right?
More than a glib understand of how the US states go their shapes shows that access to natural resources -- such as the Colorado River -- are reasonable factors in where lines are drawn. The shapes of states are not irrationally and not based entirely on the legacy of slavery politics or based on old or obsolete political notions or economics.
It is interesting that the watersheds are noted on the map, but appear completely ignored in the calculus of 'where to draw the lines.'
26
Japan took this approach and the effect was to spawn mammoth urban centers that drew ever more people and economic activity into them from rural regions, draining them of youth and economic vitality. While Japanese cities are a marvel of livability (especially considering their size), there has been little to cheer about for all the rural towns that are now little more than a shadow of their former selves. The idea that "disconnected" and "backwater" regions will suddenly prosper due to greater connectivity to cities is not a given.
65
I would consider that a desirable outcome. Let the humans move into socially rich urban areas and leave the countryside to the birds.
And if everyone could get a free, government provided lobotomy, there would be a lot less crime too - even in rural areas!
7
Khanna's argument is a paradigm of soulless technocracy at work. It assumes that the sociopolitical good would be served by abolishing the states and reorganizing subnational government along the lines of metropolitan political and economic power clusters. His model would encourage an even greater concentration of power and jobs in large metropolitan areas than exists now. It would leave so-called "backwaters" such as Southern Illinois even more deprived and destitute than we are already--unless, as Khanna suggests,, we're willing to commute to jobs in Chicago or Memphis, which would leave us no time or energy for community-building where we live and turn our entire region into a gigantic bedroom suburb.
Thanks to precisely the combination of metrocentrism and private-sector-centrism Khanna endorses here, our current governor, by refusing to agree to a state budget, is trying his hardest to kill off the state university system, including Southern Illinois University, our region's only large employer outside the healthcare industry. I shudder to imagine the consequences of this vision implemented on a national level for anyone not lucky enough to live in a SMSA, the larger the better.
Thanks to precisely the combination of metrocentrism and private-sector-centrism Khanna endorses here, our current governor, by refusing to agree to a state budget, is trying his hardest to kill off the state university system, including Southern Illinois University, our region's only large employer outside the healthcare industry. I shudder to imagine the consequences of this vision implemented on a national level for anyone not lucky enough to live in a SMSA, the larger the better.
36
High-speed rail would benefit places like southern Illinois far more than Chicago or Memphis. Technology corridors are popping up in places long considered "backwaters", like western Virginia down to Asheville. The notion that the good people of places like Carbondale wouldn't like some 21st century infrastructure is exactly why expecting many states to do anything on their own is a pipe dream.
1
This same theory applies equally to states. In West Virginia, for example, there are 55 counties for a small state of only about 1.8 million people. Of those counties, 11 have fewer than 10,000 residents. Or, in other words, the total population of 20 percent of West Virginia counties comprise fewer people than attended the average University of Michigan home football game in 2015. And, West Virginia isn't the only example. Georgia, Virginia, Kentucky, and Missouri have 159, 133, 120, and 115 counties respectively. At the county level, only Anchorage, Juneau, Sitka, and Yukatat in Alaska; San Francisco in California; Broomfield and Denver in Colorado; Honolulu in Hawaii; Kansas City in Kansas; Anaconda-Deer Lodge County and Butte-Silver Bow County in Montana have governments legally designated as city-counties. There is so much waste and inefficiency with too many counties in general and too many counties in predominately urban areas. There will probably never be the political will to fix these problems and the short list of city-counties illustrates the point, but we all pay the price in higher taxes and lower services for the resulting inefficiencies.
16
Counties were once easy to make (mine was set up because local residents objected to a ban on Sunday movies. Seriously.) They often serve local interests. Wyoming tradition required every county to have a separate representative in its legislature. An attempt to make Niobrara County share a representative with a neighboring county in the interest of having equal-population districts was, remarkably, turned down by the courts. The county's current population is about 2,800.
10
Indianapolis/ Marion county, too. Doing much better than Cincinnati/ Hamilton County, which is afflicted with multiple entities, based on history, xenophobia, and race.
Add Indianapolis to the list of city\counties.
1
This brings to mind the old New Yorker cover "View of the World From 9th Avenue". Monolithic "flyover" areas with little detail...
39
That was Saul Steinberg's most famous cover. Big New York in the foreground, a bit of Jersey, a few dots, then California on the horizon.
24
Seriously? You are grouping Minnesota with Texas???? Have you ever BEEN to Minnesota? We may be flyover country to you, but we do have SOME sense of dignity and Michelle Bachman to the contrary (bought and paid for by outside money) we are not knuckle dragging, rapture craving climate deniers.
171
I agree with you Maureen. Winters may be cold in Mpls, however it is a strongly held area of LIBERALS. As an East Coast person I am with you and see NO connection between your fine state and Texas. I worked on the East Coast for a an Mpls Co and was inspired by the Liberalism of the people of the State of Mn. Furthermore I can think back to a quote from General William Sheridan right after the Civil War when he was assigned to manage the US in Texas and he said, "If I owned Texas and I owned Hell, I would rent out Texas and live in Hell." How insightful was he over 100 years ago.
Ah, Minnesota Nice in it's true form.
You have us pegged. All 27 million of us. Don't know how you can be so insightful. We all ride horses too. But you probably knew that.
1
The basic reason that we do not focus more attention on infrastructure and metropolises is because our constitution was designed from the beginning to give political power to less populous states. Our federal government by its very structure
19
Reminds me a bit of Colin Woodard's book, American Nations, in which he identifies 11 nations of origin. There is a heavy overlap, but far from a perfect one, between Woodard's 11 and the 7 proposed here. I assume, by the way, that Alaska and Hawaii could be attached to the Pacific Coast and Puerto Rico to the Gulf Coast (thereby fixing a problem without having to go through a tortuous sort of statehood application.
Great theory, but impossible in practice. Sort of reminds me (he said ducking for cover) of the political revolution being proposed by a prominent presidential candidate.
Great theory, but impossible in practice. Sort of reminds me (he said ducking for cover) of the political revolution being proposed by a prominent presidential candidate.
19
Thought of that book also!
I like it. With one exception: Maine becomes a sovereign oasis between Canada’s Atlantic Provinces and U.S. Northeastern Megapolis.
As a sui generis omnipresent kick-starter economic social-democratic DMZ, Maine would serve as a way-station sanctuary for both traditional values and progressive refugees.
Maine is open for the business of passage-making and is the way life should be as a passageway.
Redraw that map!
As a sui generis omnipresent kick-starter economic social-democratic DMZ, Maine would serve as a way-station sanctuary for both traditional values and progressive refugees.
Maine is open for the business of passage-making and is the way life should be as a passageway.
Redraw that map!
10
Wouldn't work. It would round out our Maritime borders nicely to attach Maine to New Brunswick. Shorten the rail and road links between Montreal and Halifax as well. Far, far too tempting should the US Army choose to withdraw.
That and bring back all those expatriate French-Canadians back into the fold.
That and bring back all those expatriate French-Canadians back into the fold.
Social democratic? Look at the governor Maine elected. LePage is as savage a right-winger as exists anywhere. Better, peel off the back country of Maine, add in northern NH and the northeast kingdom of Vermont and there's your backwoods buffer. Let the central and coastal corridor (Waterville to Portland, then down to Kittery and Portsmouth NH) join Massachusetts and call it a day.
Sure - because it worked so well in Africa.
13
Of course Africa was sunk from the start, stuck with borders that never made any economic, political, cultural or geographic sense whatsoever, even when they were first drawn at the Berlin Conference in 1884.
They, at least, had that system imposed on them. What is America's excuse for choosing to retain a system which has developed a very similar set of disadvantages?
They, at least, had that system imposed on them. What is America's excuse for choosing to retain a system which has developed a very similar set of disadvantages?
Heh? Please elaborate. The writer is not referring to breaking up the country, just internal reorganization.
Austin, Baton Rouge, etc. - isolated cities? Hmmm. I guess I missed the horse drawn buggies and wood plank sidewalks the last time I visited these cities. Just shows how useful it is to have someone who lives outside of the US to write a piece that opens my eyes. BTW some of us city slickers like to get out of our bubbles to visit "isolated" burgs. Sometimes you learn things from people who live in those places. Vive la différence.
2
The Great Northeast is shaded as if it is 2 regions. The Northern part which alone was not given a name is not, as drawn, an accurate representation of the nature of the region. It is intimately tied to Boston, Portland and Cape Cod. Those areas are lumped with the urban corridor extending to Washington DC. I am sure that they would also object. The great national parks both in the mountains and on the coast, and its colonial heritage centered in Boston, its education hub extending to New Haven and throughout Western Massachusetts and northward, its wooden ship shipping economy driven by costal Maine and the economic hub of Boston are all part of a historical economic hub that drove the creation of the great economic engine of America. Its cultural and educational depth together as an integrated region stands among the best of mankind ever.
1
Why not a map consisting of one territory and call it "Land Mass"? We can all be the same.
6
I find it hard to understand why so-called conservatives cannot get behind the economic benefits of infrastructure spending especially since the Interstate highway system was built during their supposed "golden-age" of the 1950's and 1960's. (The benefits are both immediate in stimulus spending from the infrastructure projects and long-term in better connections between economic regions ["better connections" == "less friction"].)
The reality is that the conservatives in the U.S. seem to have divorced themselves entirely from reality (witness climate-change denial) and seem to want to return entirely to their preferred golden age.
And the rich (#NotAllRich) also seem not to realize that they are acting more like parasites that are killing their host rather than evolving into symbiotic entities that benefit all of us.
The reality is that the conservatives in the U.S. seem to have divorced themselves entirely from reality (witness climate-change denial) and seem to want to return entirely to their preferred golden age.
And the rich (#NotAllRich) also seem not to realize that they are acting more like parasites that are killing their host rather than evolving into symbiotic entities that benefit all of us.
12
"I find it hard to understand why so-called conservatives cannot get behind the economic benefits of infrastructure spending"
Might it be because the democrats will demand that all infrastructure work be restricted to "prevailing wage" union members who would then kickback most of their union dues to the democrats? The GOP would be foolish to give the democrats this kickback money.
Might it be because the democrats will demand that all infrastructure work be restricted to "prevailing wage" union members who would then kickback most of their union dues to the democrats? The GOP would be foolish to give the democrats this kickback money.
3
Your last paragraph explains it all. The one percent would rather see the rest of us suffer than see their own children prosper.
love this concept - i wish!
2
Where to begin with all the things wrong with this idea...
Our fifty state system decentralizes power away from one area of the country calling all of the shots. Whether you disagree with how my statement plays out in reality is beside the point. It would be much worse for everyone if certain pockets of the country ruled the roost. It would be a cultural oligarchy of the geographic kind. This would be the Liberal version of Republican gerrymandering: on steroids. And what Republicans have done since the last census with congressional districts is appalling. No thanks to this.
American Democracy is almost by definition made to be slow, deliberate, and localized (with limits).
Our fifty state system decentralizes power away from one area of the country calling all of the shots. Whether you disagree with how my statement plays out in reality is beside the point. It would be much worse for everyone if certain pockets of the country ruled the roost. It would be a cultural oligarchy of the geographic kind. This would be the Liberal version of Republican gerrymandering: on steroids. And what Republicans have done since the last census with congressional districts is appalling. No thanks to this.
American Democracy is almost by definition made to be slow, deliberate, and localized (with limits).
10
Woops. Sea level rise will reshape that map VERY soon!
9
Lincoln should have freed the slaves, then let the south go it's separate way. They can have their low mortality rates, low-paying jobs, corporate welfare, confederate flag, guns, arguments over whether or not the Bible will be the 'official state book,' low education rates, no health care, and all the rest, and stop being a drag on the rest of the country.
32
You do realize that the South's "drag on the economy" is caused by a very deliberate genocidal campaign that has gone from "Sherman" to "hipster" but remains at it's core the artifact of a hatred of a different culture.
1
Wow A lecture from someone at a Lee Kuan Yu "scholarly center," named after a oligarch that smashed freedoms in Singapore "for the common good." His blind "let's build a hipster Nirvana" is tripe. Big Brother, 30 years on.
See what would happen if he proposed merging Singapore with Malaysia. He'd be sued and bankrupted in a second.
See what would happen if he proposed merging Singapore with Malaysia. He'd be sued and bankrupted in a second.
20
As a 41 year old I only hope I live long enough to see this entire network implemented. It would be a great thing for our country!!
2
It's interesting as a central planning thought experiment but politically unlikely that small states with considerable power relative to their power would willingly accept being absorbed into a larger government entities. Also, since it's based on economic function, it would have to have a built-in ability to change as the economy changes. And finally, I'm laughing at the lack of marketing forethought. Does he really think that the Southeast will call the Northeast "Great" while this region of the country gets relegated to "manufacturing"? Never mind that there isn't all that much manufacturing going on, it makes it sound pretty undesirable!
2
I believe this was the plan for after the Soviet invasion.
17
The Inland West is really called the Intermountain West.
4
A people is known by their history and culture; which is reflected in the very many beautiful States within the United States of America.
I have lived in the US since my days as a student at Georgia Tech, and have appreciated the many flavors across the country. I have lived in the South, the North, the Mid-West and am now in the East (NYC). I like the colors and the histories of the many diverse States and would not relegate it to a period's Economics.
The people of this Great nation should be able to cherish and prosper and still be able to retain their history; individual and collective. The history and States thus should be left intact.
This plan by Mr. Khanna looks more like a pitch for dividing a country in the name of economics into Special Economic Zones (as some SEZs exist in China). I do not like this plan at all.
I would rather have my shrimp and grits in Savannah, Georgia and my Philly cheese stake from Philadelphia. I just attended an alumni meet of Georgia Tech and discussed the great history of the State and the School and how we can contribute to make a strong future for both. I would rather stick to that plan.
I have lived in the US since my days as a student at Georgia Tech, and have appreciated the many flavors across the country. I have lived in the South, the North, the Mid-West and am now in the East (NYC). I like the colors and the histories of the many diverse States and would not relegate it to a period's Economics.
The people of this Great nation should be able to cherish and prosper and still be able to retain their history; individual and collective. The history and States thus should be left intact.
This plan by Mr. Khanna looks more like a pitch for dividing a country in the name of economics into Special Economic Zones (as some SEZs exist in China). I do not like this plan at all.
I would rather have my shrimp and grits in Savannah, Georgia and my Philly cheese stake from Philadelphia. I just attended an alumni meet of Georgia Tech and discussed the great history of the State and the School and how we can contribute to make a strong future for both. I would rather stick to that plan.
13
So, you think that the lines in the sand we call 'states' ... directly dictate the 'culture' of a given geographical region? Like, they'd just stop serving 'Cheese Steaks' in Philadelphia if the whole of the Northwest was merged into a single geopolitical New England 'Region'? Ya think they only have Philly Cheese Steaks BECAUSE they name of the 'state' they're famously served in ... is called "Pennsylvania", and if THAT changed, the entire local culinary tradition would have to disappear with it?
The author points out a weakness in our political system, that is it's ability to think and act regionally to solve transportation and other infrastructure problems. He certainly has a point when you look at the mess the Port Authority Of New York and New Jersey has created and at the difficulties in getting a new Amtrak tunnel built. Indeed, we have a dreadful record of infrastructure planning investment nationwide.
However, the solution isn't a complete political restructuring of our country, it's political leadership from mayors, governors, our congress and our president. We've seen it before in our history, just not recently.
However, the solution isn't a complete political restructuring of our country, it's political leadership from mayors, governors, our congress and our president. We've seen it before in our history, just not recently.
15
I liked reading this because it showed how Americans are aligning themselves economically and socially. As a blueprint for change, however, it's useless. This is the kind of thing college freshmen could be expected to cook up during a free association exercise in an introductory political science course.
The author should have used his considerable smarts to think of ways for different levels of government to work *within* the existing system. It's not going anywhere.
The author should have used his considerable smarts to think of ways for different levels of government to work *within* the existing system. It's not going anywhere.
11
Raleigh-to-Birmingham rail?
The NC Research Triangle is already connected by regular Amtrak service to Washington, DC, and the Northeast. Elsewhere on the nytimes.com is a article explaining the growing affinity and similarity among cities like Raleigh and cities like Washington, New York and Boston.
Any 'new map for America' should express this truth. There is a real thing that is Atlantic Coast America, and it is not connected to the cities of the Deep South.
Sure, it's a quibble over a line on an imaginary map -- the latest in a series from the evil dreamers of the Confederacy to Hasbro's Risk to Harry Turtledove's fiction -- but it's about lines, isn't it.
Raleigh-to-Birmingham? -- At least there would be plenty of available seats -- No serious commerce travels that corridor, and prospect of more is slim.
The NC Research Triangle is already connected by regular Amtrak service to Washington, DC, and the Northeast. Elsewhere on the nytimes.com is a article explaining the growing affinity and similarity among cities like Raleigh and cities like Washington, New York and Boston.
Any 'new map for America' should express this truth. There is a real thing that is Atlantic Coast America, and it is not connected to the cities of the Deep South.
Sure, it's a quibble over a line on an imaginary map -- the latest in a series from the evil dreamers of the Confederacy to Hasbro's Risk to Harry Turtledove's fiction -- but it's about lines, isn't it.
Raleigh-to-Birmingham? -- At least there would be plenty of available seats -- No serious commerce travels that corridor, and prospect of more is slim.
9
Oh the conspiracy theorists would love this!
Cascadia should also include costal BC.
"Ah, but a man's reach should exceed his grasp, Or what's a heaven for?"
Robert Browning, "Andrea del Sarto"
Robert Browning, "Andrea del Sarto"
"The Great Northeast." Seriously? Reminds me of The New Yorker cover of how Manhattan views the rest of the country.
5
This being the New York Times, isn't there a way we can inject race, gender, or sexual preference into this story?
13
Yeah, because race, gender and sexual preference are such unimportant having no relevance to our future, right?
1
Please, a new map for the U.S, not America. You are so self centered and that certainly gest you in trouble with the rest
3
Am I the only one who came to this article hoping to see the map but instead found only text? Because that's super annoying. You can't promise a map and then only describe the map.
SHOW ME THE MAP
SHOW ME THE MAP
That map is a mix between the board games Risk and Ticket to Ride.
4
While quite an international city, Vancouver, B.C., is still very Canadian.
2
"Vancouver, B.C., is still very Canadian.'
That could easily be corrected with a US takeover of Canada and possibly creating another region or two.
That could easily be corrected with a US takeover of Canada and possibly creating another region or two.
2
There are already well defined cultural differences across these regions. NJ is similar to NY and Georgia is similar to South Carolina, much more than they are similar to each other. There really is a limited "American identity" and in fact, much of the Northeast US is similar to Eastern Canada, more similar than they are to the South. North Dakota is more similar to Alberta than it is to Florida.
This would be a good idea, but I don't think the states would go for it.
This would be a good idea, but I don't think the states would go for it.
1
The Cascadia belt appears to run from Vancouver to Eugene, not to Seattle.
Sorry, but no thanks. Yes the U.S. needs to fix its infrastructure, but the division into states has nothing to do with it. Individual states are fine and they were created as a guard against centralized federal power. I'm not advocating a return to the pre-civil war era, but I think the way things are now is just fine as far as organization and government structure. One thing state government does is give people local government voices with respect to their LOCAL concerns. Sometimes its messy but the benefits outweigh the negatives. I note the author is based in Singapore that probably influences his thinking.
16
In a word. Genius. Yes, we need to rethink how we're organized. Many of our state, county and community borders date to the 16th century. Today they are useless and incredibly expensive.
Along with the seven mega regions, within we should merge county and municipal jurisdictions within designated market areas - eliminating a layer of government (counties where appropriate) and expensive duplication in town administration, municipal services and school districts France has recently combined regions. Italy has recently done something similar with their "Metropolitan Cities" initiative. We can draw examples domestically, western states have larger counties and municipalities than in the east.
Let's not forget our bordering friends either who have much to contribute and leverage with us. Toronto, Ottawa and Montreal should be part of the Great Northeast - Vancouver and Tijuana part of the Pacific Coast. Arizona and Texas border cities are huge.
We can't leave culture off the table. I'd like to propose special "principality" status for Dade and Broward Counties in Florida. They likely have more in common with the Great Northeast than the Gulf Coast or Southern Industrial zone. Let's also organize our Caribbean possessions with others to create scale and opportunity. Puerto Rico together with the Dominican Republic and Cuba. The Virgin Islands with other English speaking territories.
Lots to do - much of it easy over a 20 year period.
Along with the seven mega regions, within we should merge county and municipal jurisdictions within designated market areas - eliminating a layer of government (counties where appropriate) and expensive duplication in town administration, municipal services and school districts France has recently combined regions. Italy has recently done something similar with their "Metropolitan Cities" initiative. We can draw examples domestically, western states have larger counties and municipalities than in the east.
Let's not forget our bordering friends either who have much to contribute and leverage with us. Toronto, Ottawa and Montreal should be part of the Great Northeast - Vancouver and Tijuana part of the Pacific Coast. Arizona and Texas border cities are huge.
We can't leave culture off the table. I'd like to propose special "principality" status for Dade and Broward Counties in Florida. They likely have more in common with the Great Northeast than the Gulf Coast or Southern Industrial zone. Let's also organize our Caribbean possessions with others to create scale and opportunity. Puerto Rico together with the Dominican Republic and Cuba. The Virgin Islands with other English speaking territories.
Lots to do - much of it easy over a 20 year period.
4
First thought: "Oh, New York Times, you really should get out more."
Second thought: As others note, this has been done before and similarly.
Third thought: There is a near-metro hub between Minneapolis and Seattle. Guess what that is?
Second thought: As others note, this has been done before and similarly.
Third thought: There is a near-metro hub between Minneapolis and Seattle. Guess what that is?
1
Boise region? Spokane/CDA? Calgary? Where?
This is utterly fascinating. I have been fascinated by maps since childhood. I can get lost in them, if that's not contradictory. Of course, this is not a new way of looking at the US, and it does create "regions" that contain a multiplicity of outliers. I spent many years, for example, living in various places up and down the "Front Range," including Greeley, CO, Colorado Springs, CO, and Watrous, NM. Watrous doesn't share much with Denver. But as a way of thinking about the Continental US, this is wonderful. Very exciting. Of course, the politicians whose livelihoods depend on the traditional state designations are not likely to want to change that. Lovely to contemplate, though. Thanks.
1
Politicians never willingly cede power.
It makes more sense for the people to move to create the best economic solution for themselves.
It makes more sense for the people to move to create the best economic solution for themselves.
2
Our nation was formed by convincing the states to give up some of their powers to the national govt. It was not an easy battle. Huge compromises were built in, one of which was giving each state two U.S. senators for unequal, basically undemocratic representation in the Senate. So, we have a system where cows in Montana have much more representation that people in the more populous states. We say we are a democracy, but we cling to old and antiquated ways.
The Senate does, indeed, act as a brake on popular passions, but it also acts as a blocking force to progress. We need to ask ourselves how long this can continue. Can we be a highly technological, industrialized and financially agile nation controlled, in large part, by the values and needs of rural areas and, importantly, by the backward looking ways of the old slave states?
New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Maryland currently compete to set up casinos following Pennsylvania's sweet deal to get 50% of the take within their borders. Instead, why not cooperate, manage well and share the rewards? The same for luring in new businesses: the states rush to steal from each other, often making deals that benefit the corporations while cheating citizens out of the taxes.
Change will not happen until states realize there is no other choice, until they see they must cooperate or fade away. Otherwise, it will come after massive convulsions brought on by sticking with what doesn't work well any more.
Doug Terry
3
Why does "A New Map for America" not contain Alaska and Hawaii?
5
How is it that the one million plus MSA of El Paso, TX did not make the map?
2
Excellent article. A very similar theme was explored a few years back in
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Nine_Nations_of_North_America
which took a look at how the regions of the US are so distinct culturally, economically and politically they are really distinct nations.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Nine_Nations_of_North_America
which took a look at how the regions of the US are so distinct culturally, economically and politically they are really distinct nations.
Finally someone is saying what so many people have thought for so long. But ... dream on. Efficiency and common sense are not what 50% of this country believes. Look at Governor Scott Walker's veto of a very logical and necessary high speed rail link connecting Chicago, Milwaukee, Madison, and the twin cities. Now if somehow you could figure out how to incorporate football into the picture ...
2
Isn't this the same idea as the Districts in the Hunger Games? And what about Alaska and Hawaii? Last time I checked they were states in America too?
8
A solution in i search of a problem
9
Mr. Khanna's map reminds me of the map when Louisiana just got purchased back in 1803.
2
stupid idea
7
I drive a car and I live in Georgia.
You can't make me take the train and I don't wanna live in Piedmont Atlantic or Rainbowland or whatever you call it.
This is America!
PS apologies to the (great) writers of The Candidate.
You can't make me take the train and I don't wanna live in Piedmont Atlantic or Rainbowland or whatever you call it.
This is America!
PS apologies to the (great) writers of The Candidate.
3
Brilliant !! But as "doable" as Bernie Sanders platform and realistic as Donald Trump's hair.
3
Map? Where's the map? Maybe it's just me but for an article about a map I'd like to see a map. Crazy?
Fat chance.
2
How nice to see Vancouver, British Columbia and Windsor, Ontario, and Toronto, Ontario mentioned as if Canadians really want to be part of America.
Do you really think that New York, Washington, and Atlanta give a flying fig about Appalachia? I'm reminded of hearing of low unemployment rates on the West Coast, as if that means that unemployed young people in the Ozarks--who are missed in the statistics because they couldn't find a job in the first place--should have no trouble finding a job. Imagine how much worse it would be to track unemployment, low education, and poor health in isolated rural areas under the proposed system! At least now Arkansans feel like they have some voice.
6
This is a very cool analysis. For me, however, the suggestion of the high speed rail network is actually critical. The airlines, while their revenues are growing, are stifling travel in the U.S. When's the last time you thought traveling by airline was an enjoyable experience. Maybe flying first class in the '70s or earlier. Traveling by rail in Europe, especially first class, but not necessarily, is really fun. The high speed trains are wonderful. America is simply too big and spread out to travel by rail unless it is truly high speed. Then, it could be fun and a great experience. What a fine idea to boost the economy by building the system.
15
Even high speed rail (even 100 or 120 mph, versus say 500 mph for a plane) could still mean 1 - 3 days on the train...I'm rather skeptical that many people, especially with little vacation or who love the airlines for a weekend hop, would be willing to engage in the time involved. Don't get me wrong, I love the train experience too, but the reality is our nation is so large that it is not practical for long distances unless people have sufficient time.
Basically, this idea is exactly that the founders *didn't* want to see happen: Urban areas running roughshod over the rural areas of the country.
In short, just a plain bad, literally un-American idea.
In short, just a plain bad, literally un-American idea.
39
So, what you are writing is that rather than NYC integrating into the future United Staes, the future United States should integrate into NYC (and other city states of the NWO).
Personally, I think your 5 (or so) national Burroughs are gross generalizations of great disservice to a diverse and interesting nation somewhere between NYC and LA.
Personally, I think your 5 (or so) national Burroughs are gross generalizations of great disservice to a diverse and interesting nation somewhere between NYC and LA.
5
As mentioned by others, this type of map has been done better many times before.
It seems that the author has very little idea about different regions in the US, economically, politically, culturally or geographically. Seattle, or for that matter, San Francisco, has little in common with Los Angeles. Minneapolis has nothing in common with Dallas and Fort Worth. Miami has nothing in common with Houston. I could go on and on. This is simply not good enough to feature in the NY Times. Actually, it's pathetic.
It seems that the author has very little idea about different regions in the US, economically, politically, culturally or geographically. Seattle, or for that matter, San Francisco, has little in common with Los Angeles. Minneapolis has nothing in common with Dallas and Fort Worth. Miami has nothing in common with Houston. I could go on and on. This is simply not good enough to feature in the NY Times. Actually, it's pathetic.
7
Tell us how you really think. Seattle, San Francisco and Los Angeles have one thing in common, they are all on the Pacific Coast as the author so accurately points out and they would all benefit from investment in regional transportation, especially high speed rail between cities.. I would take it one step further and have the Federal Government invest in basic research to develop Elon Musk's hyper loop form of travel.
Kill all the lawyers first, as Shakespeare advised, and you'll see a political renaissance in this country. Then maybe we'd get out of the obstructionist rut we're in and start moving again and redesign this creaky old country on so many levels including the one suggested in this fine wake-up piece.
5
You know Shakespeare was saying that if you want to destroy law and its protections, kill all the lawyers, right? As the surest way to tyranny and unlawfulness?
1
"Kill all the lawyers first"
NO, first kill all of the useless, parasitic, self-serving bureaucrats that infest all levels of government.
NO, first kill all of the useless, parasitic, self-serving bureaucrats that infest all levels of government.
1
"The Southeast Manufacturing Belt?"
Interesting name. I think this would be disastrous for our country in terms of geo-politically. There is simply too much tug and pull with this type of map mash up. I'd say break up the south region and make North Carolina, Virginia, Maryland, West V.A. it's own region. I mean, that's how FEMA draws it up already, actually the zone I just described is FEMA Zone 3. I feel that having all the southern states bundled up like that would be a night mare for minorities. This would not end very well.
Interesting name. I think this would be disastrous for our country in terms of geo-politically. There is simply too much tug and pull with this type of map mash up. I'd say break up the south region and make North Carolina, Virginia, Maryland, West V.A. it's own region. I mean, that's how FEMA draws it up already, actually the zone I just described is FEMA Zone 3. I feel that having all the southern states bundled up like that would be a night mare for minorities. This would not end very well.
In my work each Metropolitan Statistical Area is for all intents a separate country. The national unemployment rate means little or nothing. The unemployment rate in Chicago means a lot if your business is in Chicago. Less if it is in San Diego.
2
This will be on the table at the next Constitutional Convention.
1
So, never.
Seems like only the Great Lakes have a true claim to being 'great'. As for the rest, why not the Great Pacific Coast, or the Great West?
1
This is just fantasy.
Urban Corridor to Vegas? Ever drive that?
Urban Corridor to Vegas? Ever drive that?
10
High speed rail in America? In my lifetime I have seen a depressing regression in thinking. We used to think big: interstate highways, space program, internet. Now we can’t even get people interested in paying to maintain the infrastructure we have, much less install advanced systems. The gas tax has been stuck at 1993 level with no inflation. With gas selling at a15 year low, no one even mentions increased tax to fix the woeful infrastructure – which continually gets the same D grade.
I don’t know what happened in this country. In the 80’s people were told “greed is good” and boy did they buy into that. They turned inward, selfishly amassing personal wealth and toys. Students stopped going into the STEM areas, the best and the brightest became lawyers and financial “engineers” – both of which have little value add to our country as a whole. We underfund public education.
We abandoned hi speed rail in the 90’s – now China has some incredible Maglev trains going 200+ MPH. We have pretty much abandoned our space program. I know many care little about this, but for a tiny fraction of the Iraq war cost, we could have built a missile defense system by now – to protect us from approaching asteroids. Low probability, but wouldn’t it be a shame if we suffer the same fate as the dinosaurs, when we had the capability to prevent it? Same can be said about taking climate change very seriously – NOW. But you have to be able to think BIG. We don’t.
I don’t know what happened in this country. In the 80’s people were told “greed is good” and boy did they buy into that. They turned inward, selfishly amassing personal wealth and toys. Students stopped going into the STEM areas, the best and the brightest became lawyers and financial “engineers” – both of which have little value add to our country as a whole. We underfund public education.
We abandoned hi speed rail in the 90’s – now China has some incredible Maglev trains going 200+ MPH. We have pretty much abandoned our space program. I know many care little about this, but for a tiny fraction of the Iraq war cost, we could have built a missile defense system by now – to protect us from approaching asteroids. Low probability, but wouldn’t it be a shame if we suffer the same fate as the dinosaurs, when we had the capability to prevent it? Same can be said about taking climate change very seriously – NOW. But you have to be able to think BIG. We don’t.
19
Is it possible that such a reconfiguration could erase the heritage of racism that is so deeply ingrained in certain sections of the country?
2
Variation on a stream of old ideas . . . not to say they aren't interesting -- as thought experiments.
Has the author read "The Nine Nations of North America" by Joel Garreau (1981), or "American Nations" by Colin Woodard (2011). Of course, we Americans can do anything (right?). Wrong. The historical, cultural, religious, economic, and political hurdles to condensing our nation from 50 states to <50 would simply be insurmountable.
Has the author read "The Nine Nations of North America" by Joel Garreau (1981), or "American Nations" by Colin Woodard (2011). Of course, we Americans can do anything (right?). Wrong. The historical, cultural, religious, economic, and political hurdles to condensing our nation from 50 states to <50 would simply be insurmountable.
5
Just guessing here, but my money says the author is from out of state.
10
More like from another country perhaps.
6
An American with an Indian sounding name living in Singapore. Too tough to imagine? Just build the rail lines. Forget the politics. Pure genius thanks mr khanna. We ignore at our own peril.
The degree of entrenched current-geopolitical-based resistance to this rational approach is illustrated by Gov Rick Scott's (R-FL) refusal of Federal funding to build a high-speed railway between Orlando and Tampa, a proposed rail line indicated on this map. As user "sfdphd" indicated, it would require a new US constitution to make this approach feasible.
1
I quit reading when the author defined the Front Range between Salt Lake City and Denver, though perhaps that in itself is an argument for breaking up the country.
2
I live in Colorado, Janet, and you couldn't be more right. My first thought seeing this was the author was totally ignorant not only of geography but also of culture. Furthermore, considering Colorado south of Pueblo to Albuquerque to be somehow an urban connected region is nonsense. I'm also not sure the author took into account migration within the US with some focus on Colorado and a few other states.. Today's Denver Post has a long article about this topic and also earlier an article about where from and where to folks are moving bu county. I didn't see much in the this NYT article about the consequences of disparities in natural resources. Water is critical to the real Front Range of Colorado and will limit development, energy production and quality of life. Food production in California that uses 80% of that state's water is another situation.
3
I'm not sure what you are talking about. The map shows a "Front Range" urban corridor linking Denver, Colorado Springs and Albuquerque. Salt Lake City is a separate, standalone urban corridor. I also don't think the urban corridors are intended to be political entities in this scheme, but rather reflect linkages between cities that exist today.
Interestingly, I just noticed that many of the urban corridors cross regional boundaries, which seems contradictory to what the author is intending to accomplish. Why put Denver in the Great Plains if it is not linked to any other city in that region?
Interestingly, I just noticed that many of the urban corridors cross regional boundaries, which seems contradictory to what the author is intending to accomplish. Why put Denver in the Great Plains if it is not linked to any other city in that region?
This makes sense. That's why it'll never happen. Not in the United States of But We've Always Done It This Way, at least. We as a people tend to view adaptation to current realities as a sign of moral failure for some reason.
3
This might make eminent sense, but the threat to existing political power structures is almost nuclear.
2
1. I suggest shutting down Washington DC and dispersing the government agencies and departments across all these new zones. Share the power. Gain and share the creativity, knowledge and capacities of all regions, which is considerable. Washington isn't working out okay anyway.
New York is already unbecoming the financial capital of everywhere, and that is also a healthy turn of events.
Given more effort in both of these directions, I can support the new map too.
New York is already unbecoming the financial capital of everywhere, and that is also a healthy turn of events.
Given more effort in both of these directions, I can support the new map too.
1
No need for all this. Just wire the entire country with high-speed Internet and sprinkle generously with wifi hotspots. Add fenced zones for drugs, guns, abortion, unisex bathrooms, places of worship, assisted suicides, heroin ODs, homeless shelters, coal power etc. Problem solved.
5
"The problem is that while the economic reality goes one way, the 50-state model means that federal and state resources are concentrated in a state capital — often a small, isolated city itself — and allocated with little sense of the larger whole."
Spoken like a true centralized-planning communist.
Spoken like a true centralized-planning communist.
7
As a first step we could combine the area in the northern third of the blue and salmon zones into the great state of fliovaland with the appropriately apportioned two senators. A giant leap for democracy.
3
This will eventually happen not because it's right or makes sense but because economics will force it to happen - as it forces all changes in the USA. The biggest obstacle in the meantime is our outdated "city on a hill" mythology and the dreamers who cling to it.
2
Almost anything is better than the fake United States of America setup. In fact let some states leave the union and figure it out for themselves or let them go regional outside the union. Why we pay taxes for politicians that have no interest in the progress of the majority of the country - also known as urban America - makes no sense. Let them go their own backward ways.
12
Very interesting read.
I know it will not happen, because a lot of politicians will block it, or else they will find themselves out of a job.
But this reflects more the country as it stands right now, than the current map.
Would be nice to see it happen.
I know it will not happen, because a lot of politicians will block it, or else they will find themselves out of a job.
But this reflects more the country as it stands right now, than the current map.
Would be nice to see it happen.
3
This is actually quite beautiful! And the high-speed rail aspect is most welcome. It is already possible to travel via HSR across distances as far as Boston to D.C. in a shorter total travel time than by airplane, and at a tiny fraction of the environmental impact and overall headache factor. Considering the success of HSR in Japan, it is a wonder it hasn't been implemented to a greater extent here.
The political restructuring could be nice as well, though we shall see.
The political restructuring could be nice as well, though we shall see.
4
Nice idea, but don't expect Wyoming, Nevada, and other large-but-empty states to ratify the change.
They like having 10 times the influence in the Senate and Electoral College that their populations justify.
They like having 10 times the influence in the Senate and Electoral College that their populations justify.
39
All states have exactly the same influence in the Senate - two per state.
2
At that, of course, is the point.
- California, with 38 million people, has two Senators.
- Wyoming, with 600,000, also has two Senators.
All Americans are equal, but folks in Wyoming are much more equal.
- California, with 38 million people, has two Senators.
- Wyoming, with 600,000, also has two Senators.
All Americans are equal, but folks in Wyoming are much more equal.
Compare Wyoming to California: Wyoming has well less than two per cent of the population of California. Wyoming doesn't have to like the change. Offer them a merger with one or two adjacent empty states to bolster their population as an alternative.
The major challenge here, of course, is that arrogant big-city ivory tower types are deliberately ignorant about the cultures they're trying to destroy. Appalachia is split in three,
Much better would be to banish the east and west coast, and continue with a country in the middle that represents the voters instead of big money interests.
Much better would be to banish the east and west coast, and continue with a country in the middle that represents the voters instead of big money interests.
11
John, As in ANY nation in the history of the world, the "middle" as you call it represents rural states, and even in America post-FDR (Rural Electrification, Interstate Hwys, etc) even in America the rural states put together will be a third world economy. It is not a reflection on the people of those states, it is just the nature of rural vs industrial/urban. Period. You can see this all the way back to the Egyptian and Mesopotamian civilizations.
There is a popular fallacy one often sees on Foxnews of how great America will be if the two coasts would just fall off or float away. If that happened, they will be first world nations leaving behind a third world land with first world infrastructure it can never support.
There is a popular fallacy one often sees on Foxnews of how great America will be if the two coasts would just fall off or float away. If that happened, they will be first world nations leaving behind a third world land with first world infrastructure it can never support.
Are you including banishing your neighborhood of Sacramento?
I have been waiting for an article like this to appear in the New York Times. At long last an objective look at the reality of America today. I would take this a step further,however, and argue for a federation of semi-independent regions along the lines of the map shown. And this federation would look somewhat like Canada. All regions would share a common currency and contribute to a national military force. There would be free and open borders among the regions. However each region would independently establish its own budget and policy priorities. For example the north east and the Pacific coast might be at last free to pursue a more aggressive approach to climate change or to more quickly address economic injustice. I think there should be more discussion about this idea. It would be revolutionary but a bloodless recognition of the economic and cultural differences that are precariously united today and at the root of our political dysfunction.
1
Curious advice from a foreigner who has apparently read much about the United States in books. But, no thanks. Big cities are the wellsprings of political corruption in America. The last thing we want to do is give their politicians more power.
13
Curious statement, coming from someone from Silicon Valley, not exactly a rural area itself. Actually, rural areas have plenty of corruption. It's just that big city misdeeds get more ink.
This plan is to political economy what Esperanto is to language. Mr. Khanna's take on political organization all but ignores history and vested interests, treating politics as a problem of rational planning. Worse, it ignores what will happen after the cat of redrawing boundaries (and the Constitution, by the way) is let out of the bag.
26
If nothing else I'd love to see all of those "proposed high speed rail" lines built.
What are the chances of at least that actually happening?
What are the chances of at least that actually happening?
15
Yes, something like 75% of all flights are 200 miles or less, connecting small cities to airline hubs. Imagine reducing airline (and highway) traffic by downtown-to-downtown rail.
2
The division into regions makes absolute sense. Are the lighter shaded areas subregions more connected and/or prosperous than the unshaded portions of each of the 7 regions?
I'm wondering if these subregions are the geographies in which the overwhelmingly powerful decision makers live and work.
I believe county level data exists to calculate absolute numbers (not percentages) of top 1% and top 0.1% income households. The hypothesis to test is whether or not after adding these absolute numbers the percentage of total top income represents a very disproportionate percentage of US total. This concentration may explain why voters outside of this demographic feel so powerless and are voting for Trump. Doesthe data back this up?
I'm wondering if these subregions are the geographies in which the overwhelmingly powerful decision makers live and work.
I believe county level data exists to calculate absolute numbers (not percentages) of top 1% and top 0.1% income households. The hypothesis to test is whether or not after adding these absolute numbers the percentage of total top income represents a very disproportionate percentage of US total. This concentration may explain why voters outside of this demographic feel so powerless and are voting for Trump. Doesthe data back this up?
1
I like especially how you've annexed Vancouver, Montreal...how about Mexico City?
Conservatives (real conservatives, not the single-issue subgroups within the Republican party) assume that existing institutions exist for a reason, that people care about them, and that getting rid of them will have serious unintended consequences. The results of having created artificial countries out of European colonies in the Middle East and Africa illustrates this point.
Finally, where on your map is the boundary between the 1% and the 99%, or doesn't that matter in your view of economics?
Conservatives (real conservatives, not the single-issue subgroups within the Republican party) assume that existing institutions exist for a reason, that people care about them, and that getting rid of them will have serious unintended consequences. The results of having created artificial countries out of European colonies in the Middle East and Africa illustrates this point.
Finally, where on your map is the boundary between the 1% and the 99%, or doesn't that matter in your view of economics?
3
I'm sure the author knows that Vancouver, BC is in Canada. If you study the map and read the article, it is clear that the urban corridors are not intended to be political entities, but rather indicate connections between cities that the author believes exist today. Many of the urban corridors cross the proposed regional boundaries.
Fascinating and very smart, but far above the thought processes of Senators or Congress people who are intent on winning the largess of their local constituents.
Our country is largely based on a model of capitalist competition between states, individuals, countries and corporations. The idea of working together is in this country called a socialist one opposed by so many and to them a dirty word even if it supports their best interests.
So while this is very forward thinking, the forces arrayed against it are huge. But this does not mean that we should not work toward forging deeper regional ties that support our best interests.
Our country is largely based on a model of capitalist competition between states, individuals, countries and corporations. The idea of working together is in this country called a socialist one opposed by so many and to them a dirty word even if it supports their best interests.
So while this is very forward thinking, the forces arrayed against it are huge. But this does not mean that we should not work toward forging deeper regional ties that support our best interests.
1
This new map is premised on the fallacy that society should be organized on economic principles alone. There is much more to a properly functioning and livable society than economic connectivity. We are, after all, human beings and to ignore our affiliative, relational, and cultural needs, or to reduce them to economic calculations, will lead to dysfunction on a massive scale.
5
Finally! Someone actually stating what's been obvious to this observer who lived many years in Europe and who recently returned: America has become a largely urban society, with urgent urban infrastructure needs. But the Ruralists (as I call them) are kicking back, forming the Tea Party (and other reactionary groups), determined to maintain some sort of agrarian idyll as they seek to deny cities their due. Maybe they can live without good roads or safe bridges or trains, but we can't. Can someone please notify the government about this? Thanks.
3
There was a time, not so long ago, when the Great Cities - Rome, Athens, London, Paris, Berlin, Madrid, Constantinople, Antioch, Jerusalem, Cairo, Carthage, Genoa, Venice, etc. - were the main centers of economic and cultural activity in the West. Similar was the case in the East, though my understanding of that region is not sufficient for me to name them properly.
I think that what modern analysts (except your folks) have missed is that, with the re-urbanization of the world, we are going back to the days when the great beacons of the important cities will once again rule the world economically and politically.
I look forward (not as far forward as I would like, sadly, - I am almost 80 years old) to the days when Amsterdam and Barcelona are great centers of power, and influence the regions around them with their glory.
It is all a great breathing in and breathing out.
I think that what modern analysts (except your folks) have missed is that, with the re-urbanization of the world, we are going back to the days when the great beacons of the important cities will once again rule the world economically and politically.
I look forward (not as far forward as I would like, sadly, - I am almost 80 years old) to the days when Amsterdam and Barcelona are great centers of power, and influence the regions around them with their glory.
It is all a great breathing in and breathing out.
There is a fundamental problem with the present system which would still hold with the redrawing of the map. Some vital tasks of government are, such as ensuring the education of future generations, are the responsibility or units of government which do not control their own currency, and can thus run out of money. Given the present political climate, in which taxes are cut in good times but not raised in bad times, such units of government will almost always be short of money. (The Federal government, by contrast, since it controls the money supply can never run out.) Hence vital responsibilities of government are chronically underfunded (our children not sufficiently well-educated, and so on).
The example of the Eurozone might suffice to convince one that the unit of government which controls the currency must also be the one on which the major responsibilities of government devolve. A reform of the way the USA is divided into sub-Federal units might make the situation of this country, in this respect, worse rather than better.
The example of the Eurozone might suffice to convince one that the unit of government which controls the currency must also be the one on which the major responsibilities of government devolve. A reform of the way the USA is divided into sub-Federal units might make the situation of this country, in this respect, worse rather than better.
1
What you are advocating is a form of Federalism. We already have a lower House (of Representatives) which represents regions (but granted, within states.)
But our Founders wanted to balance this lower house with a regional house, the Senate. Thus we have a congressional combination of Federalism and confederacy. The regions that are represented in the Senate definitely represent areas of common interest.
The only way to shift interest away from the rural South and conservative West would be to encourage the South to secede again, taking with it Texas, Oklahoma, the Great Plains states, Arizona, etc. This would create the kind of urbanism you suggest, but would be a definite shift toward Democrats (I approve) and away from Conservatism.
But our Founders wanted to balance this lower house with a regional house, the Senate. Thus we have a congressional combination of Federalism and confederacy. The regions that are represented in the Senate definitely represent areas of common interest.
The only way to shift interest away from the rural South and conservative West would be to encourage the South to secede again, taking with it Texas, Oklahoma, the Great Plains states, Arizona, etc. This would create the kind of urbanism you suggest, but would be a definite shift toward Democrats (I approve) and away from Conservatism.
3
I wholeheartedly agree . You guys can disarm , go total homo bathrooms and coexist to your hearts content ! We will just hang out clinging to bibles and guns and stuff .
1
Agree with high-speed railways connecting America's major metropolises. Disagree with everything else.
This embraces economics but ignores ecology, geology, and geography. It also ignores history, but I'm going ignore history in my critique, as well. My critique is based simply on the fact that you can't just carve out the urban wealth centers and leave the rest to their own devices, as though all that rural and semi-rural land and the urban centers are not interdependent for the way of life we have today.
I do think major cities ought to absorb more of the suburbs around them. Having separate city governments and all types of regional authorities and special districts act as independent government units is inefficient, and just allows for the wealthy to create little enclaves where their property taxes benefit them and only them, rather than the greater good of the cities that enabled them to make their fortunes.
However, breaking up the states by the authors recommendations smells of a dystopia of Judge Dredd, Hunger Games, and Snowpiercer rolled into one.
This embraces economics but ignores ecology, geology, and geography. It also ignores history, but I'm going ignore history in my critique, as well. My critique is based simply on the fact that you can't just carve out the urban wealth centers and leave the rest to their own devices, as though all that rural and semi-rural land and the urban centers are not interdependent for the way of life we have today.
I do think major cities ought to absorb more of the suburbs around them. Having separate city governments and all types of regional authorities and special districts act as independent government units is inefficient, and just allows for the wealthy to create little enclaves where their property taxes benefit them and only them, rather than the greater good of the cities that enabled them to make their fortunes.
However, breaking up the states by the authors recommendations smells of a dystopia of Judge Dredd, Hunger Games, and Snowpiercer rolled into one.
2
OK. This kind of thinking as been presented previously. But dividing the nation into broader regions, rather than individual states, isn't going to make them cooperate more, or more effectively. It would make sense for towns in small states to share resources - snow plowing, grading, law enforcement, fire fighting - but it happens only in rare instances. I just can't see this happening on a broader scale, as proposed by Dr. Khanna. Don't get me wrong; I think it's a great idea, but I just don't see it happening.
No thanks. Guess what - there are people who don't like cities. They like the country. They like nature. They like wide open spaces. They like to hunt, to fish, to ski...the list is endless. Diversity is a good thing. Choices are a good thing. Cities can expand or contract organically depending on the choices of citizens on where to live. They don't need incentives one way or another. Putting incentives in place to create large city complexes makes as much sense as putting incentives in place to make the USA more rural and less urban. Don't do either one.
4
No question about the importance of high speed rail. Big question is whether we will go for the very safe TGV model of France or more expensive less safe ones. We don't necessarily choose the best when we make these decisions because of politics.
Perhaps if we look back to the Pennsylvania Railroad, once a model for the world and think of its excellences instead of its bankruptcy, we could make an intelligent decision about the new model.
Perhaps if we look back to the Pennsylvania Railroad, once a model for the world and think of its excellences instead of its bankruptcy, we could make an intelligent decision about the new model.
1
Despite the umbrage taken by some commentators, Mr. Khanna is on to something. All the GDP growth in the U.S. since the 2009 has been concentrated in a handful of metro areas. The same metros that are connected in his corridors (http://www.citylab.com/work/2015/11/where-us-metro-economies-are-growing....
The economic theory is that there are increasing returns to concentration and that we should see this trend accelerate. The major political, social and investment decisions facing the U.S. are what to do about the vast and poorly connected regions of the country that are falling behind?
The economic theory is that there are increasing returns to concentration and that we should see this trend accelerate. The major political, social and investment decisions facing the U.S. are what to do about the vast and poorly connected regions of the country that are falling behind?
2
We don't need to toss away the sovereignty of the states for a "new map" or for an ever larger federal government. If we would actually have a real leader in the White House (not of the "I won" philosophy who wants to "punish" his "enemies") and a Congress that would stop knee jerking against anything the president proposes and also rein in the mess it has created with an out of control and unaccountable bureaucracy, perhaps then we could actually work together once again and accomplish these things as we did in the past.
2
What an insightful perspective. Although many commenters have decried centralization of power, that is the reality of today's economy and demography. There is a reason places in the Midwest, Great Plains, and Ozarks are losing their populations to places like the Pacific Coast, the Mid-Atlantic Seaboard, and the Texas triangle: opportunity. The former locations lack resources due to being cut off from the true centers of commerce in this country.
Even in my native New York, the capital of Albany has little if any true demographic or economic influence, while New York City continues to "expand" via connections with New Jersey and Connecticut. While downstate legislators try to make access to the city as a hub easier, upstate ones drag their feet and hold up progress for a more connected tri-state area.
I understand the need for these backwater locales to have their say. Too often, foreign writers like Khanna downplay their importance to the full picture of what "America" is. Yet, reality deems that cities and metropolitan hubs are what will drive our economy, especially as we continue our precipitous fall from a country of manufacturing and military might into an ascent as a country of information and technology services.
Even in my native New York, the capital of Albany has little if any true demographic or economic influence, while New York City continues to "expand" via connections with New Jersey and Connecticut. While downstate legislators try to make access to the city as a hub easier, upstate ones drag their feet and hold up progress for a more connected tri-state area.
I understand the need for these backwater locales to have their say. Too often, foreign writers like Khanna downplay their importance to the full picture of what "America" is. Yet, reality deems that cities and metropolitan hubs are what will drive our economy, especially as we continue our precipitous fall from a country of manufacturing and military might into an ascent as a country of information and technology services.
1
"There is a reason places in the Midwest, Great Plains, and Ozarks are losing their populations to places like the Pacific Coast, the Mid-Atlantic Seaboard, and the Texas triangle: opportunity."
Incorrect. The real answer: deregulation.
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/11/cities-economic-fate...
"But the language currently used to describe inequality doesn’t capture the way it is manifesting geographically. Growing inequality between and among regions and metro areas is obvious. But it is almost completely absent from the current political conversation. This absence would have been unfathomable to earlier generations of Americans; for most of this country’s history, equalizing opportunity among different parts of the country was at the center of politics. The resulting policies led to the greatest mass prosperity in human history. Yet somehow, about 30 years ago, America forgot its own history."
Incorrect. The real answer: deregulation.
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/11/cities-economic-fate...
"But the language currently used to describe inequality doesn’t capture the way it is manifesting geographically. Growing inequality between and among regions and metro areas is obvious. But it is almost completely absent from the current political conversation. This absence would have been unfathomable to earlier generations of Americans; for most of this country’s history, equalizing opportunity among different parts of the country was at the center of politics. The resulting policies led to the greatest mass prosperity in human history. Yet somehow, about 30 years ago, America forgot its own history."
It makes so much sense! I guess that's why leading politicians won't dare touch it. Too many parochial interests depend on maintaining the status quo. I would draw the lines differently but the concept is sound and a great starting point for a long-overdue discussion.
1
An interesting intellectual idea with an identification of some current, real economic trends in this country, but not an iota of political possibility. An idea developed in a bubble or in an ivory tower. It is far more likely we will colonize the moon or Mars before we enact the scenario that Khanna suggests.
6
"Prime Minister David Cameron driving investment toward a new corridor stretching from Leeds to Liverpool known as the “Northern Powerhouse” that can become an additional economic anchor beyond London and Scotland."
Hasn't this "new...economic anchor" always existed? Isn't this region the home of the industrial revolution? I thought it was generally called the Midlands, but the Sheffield/Leeds/Manchester/Liverpool corridor has historically played a significant part in anchoring the British economy.
I think it's a bit of a mistake to say that Corpus Christi's fate is more tied to Tampa's than it is to Austin. In the proposed map, the California Central Valley lies on the border between the coastal and inland divisions...while ports in Oakland and Long Beach ship goods from this region across the world. Surely the ports in Texas serve multiple businesses deep within the state.
I'm more interested in what this sort of reformulation means for American and local politics. Looking at the map, it looks much like a map of political divisions as well, with urban corridors (if drawn narrowly enough) tending to be more blue than red.
Hasn't this "new...economic anchor" always existed? Isn't this region the home of the industrial revolution? I thought it was generally called the Midlands, but the Sheffield/Leeds/Manchester/Liverpool corridor has historically played a significant part in anchoring the British economy.
I think it's a bit of a mistake to say that Corpus Christi's fate is more tied to Tampa's than it is to Austin. In the proposed map, the California Central Valley lies on the border between the coastal and inland divisions...while ports in Oakland and Long Beach ship goods from this region across the world. Surely the ports in Texas serve multiple businesses deep within the state.
I'm more interested in what this sort of reformulation means for American and local politics. Looking at the map, it looks much like a map of political divisions as well, with urban corridors (if drawn narrowly enough) tending to be more blue than red.
Connectivity is definitely needed in the US. It was tried a few decades ago in Greater Hartford and has had little success.
Democracy seems only make big changes in a crisis. Eisenhower was able to scare us into believing an Interstate Highway System was needed to move military vehicles in case of an invasion.
Hopefully a new president will lead and unify the US to fund connectivity and ensure the US remains the #1 superpower.
Democracy seems only make big changes in a crisis. Eisenhower was able to scare us into believing an Interstate Highway System was needed to move military vehicles in case of an invasion.
Hopefully a new president will lead and unify the US to fund connectivity and ensure the US remains the #1 superpower.
1
I do believe it is time for the US to start making some changes in its constitutional setup, which would have been unthinkable in the 20th century but might start to make sense now in the 21st century. However, to ignore the historicity of the existing 50 states is not only not practical but also probably not even doable. However, I am in general agreement with the concept of going to a regional alignment. What if the US were made into the 10 regions as designated by the US Bureau of Economic Analysis (see List of regions of the United States in Wikipedia). One could imagine even having the Mideast region consisting of NY, NJ and PA joining with New England to reduce the total number to 9.
Just think of reducing the number of legislators needed to govern each region compared to the existing number. Why, we might even be able to reduce the number going to the US congress and really save some money and maybe even get some things done for a change.
Just think of reducing the number of legislators needed to govern each region compared to the existing number. Why, we might even be able to reduce the number going to the US congress and really save some money and maybe even get some things done for a change.
4
George Friedman commented, regarding the Scottish vote to leave great Britain, that if Scotland can sucede, anything can happen. Yeah. Evidently people sit around and create reasons to break up Nation States.
Two observations...1. The map, as shown at the top of the article exactly resembles commercial airline routes. Business IS conducted according to the realities of the map. 2. Reinventing government through restructure is not the solution to commercial and social inefficiency. Voting for elected officials that discuss and debate and implement the issues and problems outlined in this article, not their hand size, is the solution to the problems discussed.
Two observations...1. The map, as shown at the top of the article exactly resembles commercial airline routes. Business IS conducted according to the realities of the map. 2. Reinventing government through restructure is not the solution to commercial and social inefficiency. Voting for elected officials that discuss and debate and implement the issues and problems outlined in this article, not their hand size, is the solution to the problems discussed.
2
Good luck convincing the smaller states and their federal government-dependent budgets to remake the political map. Good luck convincing them to give up their disproportionate representation in the Senate and the Electoral College. Good luck getting states to surrender their varied and sometimes quirky laws on matters from marriage to elections to sentencing. None of this will happen without outright secession and that didn't work so well before.
4
While this is an interesting hypothetical discussion, it ignores a basic reality:
In the US Constitution, each state is guaranteed a republican form of government and a separate state constitution of its own. The reason for this is that our government was originally conceived as a consortium of smaller countries (hence, "states") that existed both separately and symbiotically. The Federal government was originally meant to act as both both bridge and referee among the states.
The phrase "United States" itself implies separation of the smaller entities into a larger confederation that has agreed to an umbrella government to maintain and facilitate relationships and resolve conflicts.
The implication in this article is that the United States (plural) is a single political entity (singular), which is clearly not the case. Just look at the various ways in which states choose their electors in the presidential race; if this were truly "one country," there would be one way of doing things. But, each state has its own way, which is as the founders intended.
Not to mention, we have states that aren't even states. I believe there are four commonwealths that are members of the United States. While there is no significant political distinction between a state and a commonwealth as used in the US, the fact hat such a distinction exists at all is telling.
The author implies that the United States should become something it's not and never has been; his argument fails out of hand.
In the US Constitution, each state is guaranteed a republican form of government and a separate state constitution of its own. The reason for this is that our government was originally conceived as a consortium of smaller countries (hence, "states") that existed both separately and symbiotically. The Federal government was originally meant to act as both both bridge and referee among the states.
The phrase "United States" itself implies separation of the smaller entities into a larger confederation that has agreed to an umbrella government to maintain and facilitate relationships and resolve conflicts.
The implication in this article is that the United States (plural) is a single political entity (singular), which is clearly not the case. Just look at the various ways in which states choose their electors in the presidential race; if this were truly "one country," there would be one way of doing things. But, each state has its own way, which is as the founders intended.
Not to mention, we have states that aren't even states. I believe there are four commonwealths that are members of the United States. While there is no significant political distinction between a state and a commonwealth as used in the US, the fact hat such a distinction exists at all is telling.
The author implies that the United States should become something it's not and never has been; his argument fails out of hand.
158
Isn't the whole essence of the United States meant to be about evolving as the times dictate it to what is the best for the country and it's citizens?
This article does a great job in pointing out how antiquated our current borders are and a relic of the times when each state was created. We are living in a world where borderlines are becoming increasingly obsolete, and that applies to how the United States' 50 state-system is inefficient and wasteful with our resources.
And this can be done without ceding all power to the federal government, as the equivalent of local, 'state' power would be ceded to the city-state regions that these areas constituents consist of. All so that each state/region can still do their own thing that align most with the values of the locals.
But just my two cents..... Bottom line, article points out how obsolete how our current geographic-political entities in this country are.
This article does a great job in pointing out how antiquated our current borders are and a relic of the times when each state was created. We are living in a world where borderlines are becoming increasingly obsolete, and that applies to how the United States' 50 state-system is inefficient and wasteful with our resources.
And this can be done without ceding all power to the federal government, as the equivalent of local, 'state' power would be ceded to the city-state regions that these areas constituents consist of. All so that each state/region can still do their own thing that align most with the values of the locals.
But just my two cents..... Bottom line, article points out how obsolete how our current geographic-political entities in this country are.
2
Yes, we need to recognize the historical legacy of our federal system as set up under the Constitution, and to respect that legal framework (or work within that framework to modify it). But the article describes regional, national, and international realities which HAVE CHANGED--in most cases RADICALLY--since that system was created. So let's not dismiss re-thinking how to better solve current economic and social problems simply because "it wasn't set up that way before."
While there are surely many valid critiques of the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of, say, the Port Authority of NY and the MTA in the tri-state NY metro region, regional coordination around a central hub has already been applied at least somewhat successfully for decades. Expanding this regional approach as the author suggests might profoundly help our nation adapt, revive, and thrive in 21st century-reality--and also to compete with those other advanced countries he cites which are already taking this approach.
(And to the degree this approach might not fit with the Constitution's federal framework, then perhaps our citizens and leaders need to work on amendments and/or legislation which allows for our country to evolve and adapt to present day realities. Traditions are fine and to be respected and honored, but not at the expense of rational, thoughtful attempts at progress at least in practical matters of the economy.)
While there are surely many valid critiques of the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of, say, the Port Authority of NY and the MTA in the tri-state NY metro region, regional coordination around a central hub has already been applied at least somewhat successfully for decades. Expanding this regional approach as the author suggests might profoundly help our nation adapt, revive, and thrive in 21st century-reality--and also to compete with those other advanced countries he cites which are already taking this approach.
(And to the degree this approach might not fit with the Constitution's federal framework, then perhaps our citizens and leaders need to work on amendments and/or legislation which allows for our country to evolve and adapt to present day realities. Traditions are fine and to be respected and honored, but not at the expense of rational, thoughtful attempts at progress at least in practical matters of the economy.)
1
As a matter of historical fact, you are correct, but that is hardly the author's point. He contemplates a different way of thinking about the US -- one that I find very interesting and even compelling in natural affinities it promotes and the efficiencies that could result.
1
A problem with this analysis is its ignorance of the role and power of the small communities and big individuals in our country’s operation.
To revisit old terrain, the senate was structured to provide protection to the states from the will of the people. The states are actual sovereigns whose legislatures once elected the individuals who would serve as their respective senators until a change in the constitution gave the people of a state the right to elect a state’s senators. But the states still enjoy a weighty hegemony that this article ignores.
Another problem: it misunderstands who the prime movers were of the infrastructure accomplishments. For instance, while congress had to pass the laws and appropriate and spend the money for the interstate transportation system, it was President Eisenhower, not anyone in congress, who articulated and pushed for the system and all of the laws and money for it. Another example: Louisiana Purchase was President Jefferson’s dream and doing, not that of congress; moreover, its purchase promptly reduced the value of the land of many, many landowners and immediately became unpopular – not to mention that white workers and some slaves were willing to leave their masters and head West to find freedom and work because of the new expanse of the country, free land and new opportunities; it was not something the congress liked.
Last, the problem examples are of cities and not states. Why do we need a new map?
To revisit old terrain, the senate was structured to provide protection to the states from the will of the people. The states are actual sovereigns whose legislatures once elected the individuals who would serve as their respective senators until a change in the constitution gave the people of a state the right to elect a state’s senators. But the states still enjoy a weighty hegemony that this article ignores.
Another problem: it misunderstands who the prime movers were of the infrastructure accomplishments. For instance, while congress had to pass the laws and appropriate and spend the money for the interstate transportation system, it was President Eisenhower, not anyone in congress, who articulated and pushed for the system and all of the laws and money for it. Another example: Louisiana Purchase was President Jefferson’s dream and doing, not that of congress; moreover, its purchase promptly reduced the value of the land of many, many landowners and immediately became unpopular – not to mention that white workers and some slaves were willing to leave their masters and head West to find freedom and work because of the new expanse of the country, free land and new opportunities; it was not something the congress liked.
Last, the problem examples are of cities and not states. Why do we need a new map?
75
Autobahn-envy built the US interstate system.
I agree with the author that the country is strucurally different and that it is more divided by urban clusters vs. rural, however I feel like there is little connection to the conclusions drawn from this fact.
Is high speed rail really that important? How many commuters like to use train to travel? You're not going to change the American cultural love of the automobile. If the goal of upgraded infrastructure is to be an economically driven issue (i.e. commuting), I'd suggest infrastructure that invests funds high speed rail around urban clusters - not between them. Air travel isn't going anywhere and by expanding the commute region by decreasing commute times, you can help alleviate overly expensive urban housing issues.
Is high speed rail really that important? How many commuters like to use train to travel? You're not going to change the American cultural love of the automobile. If the goal of upgraded infrastructure is to be an economically driven issue (i.e. commuting), I'd suggest infrastructure that invests funds high speed rail around urban clusters - not between them. Air travel isn't going anywhere and by expanding the commute region by decreasing commute times, you can help alleviate overly expensive urban housing issues.
1
What a great idea !
But, there are a lot of ossified minds in individual states who just want to protect their turf and would be un-able to consider change.
But, there are a lot of ossified minds in individual states who just want to protect their turf and would be un-able to consider change.
2
Any sort of formal change such as this is politically impossible. It is also unnecessary. Our forefathers left us with a system that is very flexible and certainly capable of improving our infrastructure as needed to improve our overall quality of life. What is missing is the political leadership and congressional oversight to accomplish it. We are very poorly served by the people that we have elected. It is the voters responsibility and they have put into office a group of backward thinking, relatively stupid people who have hatred in their past and in their hearts.
They are totally dysfunctional and in a different era would by in an insane asylum instead of collecting a public salary. The voters of this country have to reject the current political class and do their job. Kick the bums out. Vote in November.
They are totally dysfunctional and in a different era would by in an insane asylum instead of collecting a public salary. The voters of this country have to reject the current political class and do their job. Kick the bums out. Vote in November.
15
Kill all the lawyers first, as Shakespeare advised, and you'll see a political renaissance in this country. Then maybe we'd get out of the obstructionist rut we're in and start moving forward again as a country. Sure, design is everything; why not redesign the good ol' USA?
1
This is a good idea, bur hardly new. See "The Nine Nations of North America" circa 1981. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Nine_Nations_of_North_America
3
A bare nod to agriculture (who grows and ships the food your urban district restaurants serve?) and none whatever to weather. Tampa will soon be 'neath the waves and Corpus Christie likely to follow soon thereafter~ a little redundancy in infrastructure is a pretty good idea when it comes to coping with regional catastrophes.
I lived in Montana for 25 years and came to know its history fairly well. At one point in the early 20th century, in a great burst of populism,"county busting" was the order of the day, bringing the edifice of government within a day's travel when cars were few and roads dicey. A relative handful of counties soon became 52, each with its requisite government and services. In the ensuing years, population dwindled in many of the largely rural areas to the point where fewer than 1,000 inhabitants occupied relatively large areas.
Those governments still exist, but dwindling numbers also affected school districts and those were forced to close or 'unify' one or more into a central point. That's been the only nod to condensing that occurred.
This idea may be good for the nonce, but it is inevitably temporal. Empires fade, new technology replaces old (still holding those shares of Amalgamated Buggy Whip?), investment follows invention, and in a vastly more developed world than ever before, migration of people is relatively easy and does not necessarily mean hardship.
Adding layers of bureaucracy serves only to defeat efficiency.
I lived in Montana for 25 years and came to know its history fairly well. At one point in the early 20th century, in a great burst of populism,"county busting" was the order of the day, bringing the edifice of government within a day's travel when cars were few and roads dicey. A relative handful of counties soon became 52, each with its requisite government and services. In the ensuing years, population dwindled in many of the largely rural areas to the point where fewer than 1,000 inhabitants occupied relatively large areas.
Those governments still exist, but dwindling numbers also affected school districts and those were forced to close or 'unify' one or more into a central point. That's been the only nod to condensing that occurred.
This idea may be good for the nonce, but it is inevitably temporal. Empires fade, new technology replaces old (still holding those shares of Amalgamated Buggy Whip?), investment follows invention, and in a vastly more developed world than ever before, migration of people is relatively easy and does not necessarily mean hardship.
Adding layers of bureaucracy serves only to defeat efficiency.
8
Sorry Alaska and Aloha state
10
I know this isn't the point of this article. But I've seen several of these maps and they always fail to connect El Paso, Texas. It's a city that is larger than nearly half the connected cities on this map, and also the main point of entry and exit for goods from our number 3 trading partner. I don't know why it always gets left off, but the people who think about these things need to start thinking of it as a major port city.
6
Lame click bait. There is no actual map in this version of the story, despite the picture in the teaser/link. Hate.
4
Very interesting! We in Europe tend to see the US of as ONE country, and don't realise how strong and diverse the individual states really are. I suppose, the same way you may look at Europe. This regional thinking is wht we see here as well, regions that transcends national boundaries. The regions proposed in this article would really be super-megaregions!
3
Fascinating and thoughtful vision for our future. One additional route should be from Seattle to Spokane, Missoula, Billings and follow I-94 to Minneapolis or I-90 to Des Moines. This would facilitate moving agricultural products to market (coal and oil companies would, no doubt, want it as well) and connect a vast area that, as the climate changes, may become increasingly important.
Would that the vision of our obstructive legislators extend beyond their noses and wallets.
Would that the vision of our obstructive legislators extend beyond their noses and wallets.
4
I've been quietly thinking along the same lines as Mr. Khanna for years. This concept makes far more sense than our mad patchwork of states that range from the tiny to the enormous.
Should such a federal economic structure be adopted, it will eventually lead to a constitutional crisis, because the States will simply cease to have any real independent function. And should that happen the two-senators-per-state-regardless-of-size thing would go out the window as well. Seven (or eight, or five) broad economic regions equally represented in both houses of Congress makes far more sense than what we have now.
Of course, I can't see Wyoming (population roughly equivalent to the Upper East Side and Harlem combined), going down with out a fight.
Should such a federal economic structure be adopted, it will eventually lead to a constitutional crisis, because the States will simply cease to have any real independent function. And should that happen the two-senators-per-state-regardless-of-size thing would go out the window as well. Seven (or eight, or five) broad economic regions equally represented in both houses of Congress makes far more sense than what we have now.
Of course, I can't see Wyoming (population roughly equivalent to the Upper East Side and Harlem combined), going down with out a fight.
22
This is not new. See The Nine Nations of North America by Joel Garreau from 1981.
49
Thanks for the tip to see "The Nine Nations of North America," by Joel Garreau. Here's a NYT link: http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2014/07/03/where-do-borders-need-to...
Interesting thought exercise, but basically a pointless idea.
Fifty states means fifty Governors, fifty State Legislations, fifty Supreme Courts.
None of these groups will give up power without a fight to the death.
Fifty states means fifty Governors, fifty State Legislations, fifty Supreme Courts.
None of these groups will give up power without a fight to the death.
192
No, not pointless; it does make a lot of economic sense. But you're right, the politics of federalism are a weighty obstacle.
How rare: I studied the map briefly, read the article, and came away feeling optimistic. What a concrete, non-divisive, common-sense approach to envisioning progress in our country' future!
I wish our elected representative in Congress thought in this visionary, problem-solving way.
I wish our elected representative in Congress thought in this visionary, problem-solving way.
104
The Ozarks are not part of the Great Plains and the Ouachitas are not part of the Piedmont Atlantic. And while the urban corridor of Northwest Arkansas is not contiguous with Kansas City, much less Tulsa/Oklahoma City it does exist, and ties into both, as well as Little Rock and St. Louis. Parag Khanna clearly has no clue when it comes to flyover country.
22
What are you saying, Vanessa? That if someone asks, "How about doing this?", and the suggestion doesn't jibe with your own opinion of what constitutes "reality," then it is, therefore, worthless?
1
1. Mountains in general have not been taken into account when it comes to infrasturcture.
2. Seven regions aren't enough.
3. Do you know how much freight etc moves in and out of Wal Mart HQ? People?
4. I did not comment on the validity of the idea, simply that the the individual who came up with the seven regions and their outlines is clearly clueless when it comes to reality. (I'm not the only one who has noticed.)
5. The word "worthless" is entirely yours. Please don't try and put words in my mouth. I do just fine all by own self.
p.s. St. Louis is not part of the Great Lakes
2. Seven regions aren't enough.
3. Do you know how much freight etc moves in and out of Wal Mart HQ? People?
4. I did not comment on the validity of the idea, simply that the the individual who came up with the seven regions and their outlines is clearly clueless when it comes to reality. (I'm not the only one who has noticed.)
5. The word "worthless" is entirely yours. Please don't try and put words in my mouth. I do just fine all by own self.
p.s. St. Louis is not part of the Great Lakes
2
This is so sensible and intelligent. It makes me sad to realize that it will never happen here. Unfortunately, every one of the inefficiencies this article identifies profits someone in power.
21
No its not sensible its madness.
3
One observation of this map is a few states have the good fortune of entirely containing one or more major urban corridors. Their boundaries are aligned with their corridors. This seems the case for western and mountain states, and Texas. My state California in particular has not 1, but 2 urban clusters. So if the state government can just not mess things up (and so far they're not messing things up), California already has a leg up.
Reminds me of the book "The Nine Nations of North America" by Joel Garreau, which came out in 1981. For example, the green strip along the Pacific coast is roughly Garreau's "Ecotopia".
2
You have to love a dreamer, very amusing story. This is not China...for better or worse, we vote on things around here. Good luck.
13
Some of these proposed high-speed corridors are mind-boggling in their silliness. The writer, perhaps because he lives on a small island, doesn't seem to understand what "mountains" are. That link from Seattle to Denver would take a century to build all the needed tunnels and bridges. Same with San Diego-Phoenix-Albuquerque and Reno-Salt Lake City. The only place he acknowledges that mountains even exist is the Los Angeles-San Francisco connection cutting through the Central Valley (as planned but a long, long way from completion).
An interesting grad-school project, maybe. In truth, it reminds me of the adage: "You should learn from your professors, but don't listen to them."
An interesting grad-school project, maybe. In truth, it reminds me of the adage: "You should learn from your professors, but don't listen to them."
55
I have driven between Denver and Seattle, and encountered no tunnels, and bridges only over rivers. Also between San Diego and Albuquerque, and there are precious few mountains of any consequence. Western Utah and most all of Nevada is flat and dry. The Interstate Highway system has already been designed and built to avoid the expensive construction such as you suggest.
2
I'm actually writing from San Diego. I can send you pictures of the mountains I'm referring to from where I'm sitting.
Rail simply can't go over mountains the way roads can -- the weight of the engines, among other things, requires a flatter gradient. This is why rail lines either go around mountains or hug the edges of them, or are tunneled through. Building the Interstate Highway System (which took about 40 years, by the way) was easier because engineers could basically blow away mountains and carve paths. A classic example is here, where the Coaster rail line (and freight) has to depart from the coast and travel several miles inland before curving back, taking a comparatively steep and curvy grade nonetheless. Interstate 5, which the line parallels most of the rest of the route, takes two dramatic downhill/uphills and covers the same route. But any train larger than "light rail" couldn't do that. Another example would be the ridiculously long tunnels under the Alps in France/Switzerland/Italy. To complete a route such as Denver to Seattle would require a dozen of those tunnels.
It's possible, but would require an enormous expenditure in money and time. Feasibility matters -- learn from professors, but don't listen.
Rail simply can't go over mountains the way roads can -- the weight of the engines, among other things, requires a flatter gradient. This is why rail lines either go around mountains or hug the edges of them, or are tunneled through. Building the Interstate Highway System (which took about 40 years, by the way) was easier because engineers could basically blow away mountains and carve paths. A classic example is here, where the Coaster rail line (and freight) has to depart from the coast and travel several miles inland before curving back, taking a comparatively steep and curvy grade nonetheless. Interstate 5, which the line parallels most of the rest of the route, takes two dramatic downhill/uphills and covers the same route. But any train larger than "light rail" couldn't do that. Another example would be the ridiculously long tunnels under the Alps in France/Switzerland/Italy. To complete a route such as Denver to Seattle would require a dozen of those tunnels.
It's possible, but would require an enormous expenditure in money and time. Feasibility matters -- learn from professors, but don't listen.
2
"These city-states matter far more than most American states"
Until people in the megacities need food, or energy, or concrete, or lumber, or metal, or ... ad nauseam. Wait, the author did see potential in "backwaters" from New York (State, let's be clear, not NYC) to Alabama; they are good for vineyards and eco-tourism. I guess that's what America looks like to some after several raised wine glasses in a megalopolis.
Until people in the megacities need food, or energy, or concrete, or lumber, or metal, or ... ad nauseam. Wait, the author did see potential in "backwaters" from New York (State, let's be clear, not NYC) to Alabama; they are good for vineyards and eco-tourism. I guess that's what America looks like to some after several raised wine glasses in a megalopolis.
26
Where's Alaska and Hawaii? Admittedly, they would not fit into this proposal well, particularly Hawaii, but why not include them? Or did I miss something?
3
Hawaii and Alaska are literally islands to themselves. Alaska might benefit with a closer alliances with Canada to make things easier but since the border areas lack a metropolis it may not matter. Hawaii, on the other hand, will consider to leave the United States at some point. One of the reasons why the cost of living there is so high is because Hawaii cannot directly import anything from Asia because of The Jones Act from 1920 (this act also affects Alaska, Guam and Puerto Rico). All foreign goods must first go to ports in the US mainland then get shipped off on US based vessels to Hawaii or other affected destinations which costs time and money.
Absent their own categories, Pacific Coast.
They'd be in the "Far Away From Anywhere" region.
2
The Erie Canal was funded by the New York State Legislature, not the federal government.
15
This is pretty ambiguous without some sort of legend. Please clarify what is signified by the paler subregions and the different fonts for area names. Are these separate "states" or some other political subdivisions?
4
I too agree with the realignment. But why stop there? How about making all of our armed forces one big military. No Navy, Army, Marines, Air Force, Coast Guard, etc. No different uniforms, ranks. Just one big happy (unhappy?) family.
11
Also a single national (not state) sales tax, national election rules and voter registration, national school system, national motor-vehicle registration, and (of course) national medical insurance?
Nick, you're a prime example of why we need to bring back the draft and, a la Switzerland and Israel, put the entire population through military training. That way, we won't have people with a complete lack of understanding of what the purpose of the military is making asinine comments suggesting, even as a joke, that the military be freed of military discipline and run like a civilian organization.
I don't know what it's like, today, but, when I was in the Army in the '50's and '60's, a common refrain among soldiers was, "I *hate* civilians!" And that was at a time when *far* more men had experienced at least eighteen months of "Universal Military Training" than have so much as laid eyes on an Army post or on a Navy, Marine, or Air Force, these days.
I don't know what it's like, today, but, when I was in the Army in the '50's and '60's, a common refrain among soldiers was, "I *hate* civilians!" And that was at a time when *far* more men had experienced at least eighteen months of "Universal Military Training" than have so much as laid eyes on an Army post or on a Navy, Marine, or Air Force, these days.
1
I'm reconsidering. Rename the Piedmont Atlantic area "The Confederacy" and you got a deal.
43
They both seem to be based on cheap labor, yes?
Joel Garreau called it Dixie.
Unfortunately we are stuck with the 50 states, many of which now seem like historical accidents. Why shouldn't New England be one state? Does Wyoming make sense with its population of under 600,000 residents stretched over vast distances, with its capital and largest city, Cheyenne, coming closer to being a Front Range suburb of Denver? Why are there two Dakotas and two Carolinas and two Virginias? (Accidents of history, as I said.)
Millions of Americans cross state lines for short commutes to work (I used to live on the Upper West Side and work in Rockland County, both in New York, yet my commute took me mostly through New Jersey). We need more regional authorities, yet the recent problems of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey don't give me confidence: which governor is in charge? the one who appoints the chairman or the executive director?
States squabble and offer wasteful incentives for companies to move across the border. The legislature and executive and supreme court and state bureaucracies will continue to be in out-of-the-way places like Sacramento and Tallahassee and Jefferson City and Helena and Juneau.
The plans in this article make sense in terms of the reality of our lives, but political inertia is more powerful. I fear these ideas will never come to fruition given our troubles making even our unified federal government in Washington, DC, work.
Millions of Americans cross state lines for short commutes to work (I used to live on the Upper West Side and work in Rockland County, both in New York, yet my commute took me mostly through New Jersey). We need more regional authorities, yet the recent problems of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey don't give me confidence: which governor is in charge? the one who appoints the chairman or the executive director?
States squabble and offer wasteful incentives for companies to move across the border. The legislature and executive and supreme court and state bureaucracies will continue to be in out-of-the-way places like Sacramento and Tallahassee and Jefferson City and Helena and Juneau.
The plans in this article make sense in terms of the reality of our lives, but political inertia is more powerful. I fear these ideas will never come to fruition given our troubles making even our unified federal government in Washington, DC, work.
437
I understand a lot of your arguments, but the one about capitals is silly as this is just a general thing for many political entities. Canberra and Washington DC are 2 excellent examples of capitals placed as a compromise between powerful political players within each respective country.
And Sacramento is actually pretty strategically located on the Sacramento river just down stream of the where much of the gold rush activity was. Unlike the aforementioned capitals, it was already a prospering city in it's own right. (Monterey was certainly not a bad choice for the Spanish, though, as they were a naval power) Even today, it's easy to get to from San Francisco by train.
And Sacramento is actually pretty strategically located on the Sacramento river just down stream of the where much of the gold rush activity was. Unlike the aforementioned capitals, it was already a prospering city in it's own right. (Monterey was certainly not a bad choice for the Spanish, though, as they were a naval power) Even today, it's easy to get to from San Francisco by train.
1
Sacramento is less of a backwater today than it was in Earl Warren's day (read Joan Didion, who grew up there back in the day), and it's certainly a lot closer to the Bay Area than the other capitals are to their state's major cities (well, Wyoming doesn't really have cities).
But does California really make sense as a state anymore, either? Every couple of years we see these initiatives to divide the state into two or more other states. Although everyone says the big difference is between Northern CA and Southern CA, by which they often mean San Francisco vs. Los Angeles, Khanna's map gets it right: Coastal and Inland California are really two different regions and don't belong together. In that sense, Sacramento is in the middle. (To me, as the map shows, it's mostly a drive-by on the way to Reno, where I have family.)
But does California really make sense as a state anymore, either? Every couple of years we see these initiatives to divide the state into two or more other states. Although everyone says the big difference is between Northern CA and Southern CA, by which they often mean San Francisco vs. Los Angeles, Khanna's map gets it right: Coastal and Inland California are really two different regions and don't belong together. In that sense, Sacramento is in the middle. (To me, as the map shows, it's mostly a drive-by on the way to Reno, where I have family.)
New England shouldn't be one state because it consists of individual states that are VERY different in terms of traditions, political viewpoints, and ideas about state government (NH and MA are almost polar opposites). The current division allows each population to live the way they like. That thee divisions exist but are unnoticed by someone who lives at a distance is not surprising. Look closer and you'll see it.
This is the type of thinking that America desperately needs if it wants to keep being relevant and a positive force of change in the world. Following the Democratic primaries it becomes evident that America right now is afraid of change, it's paralyzed... This country is stuck between those who think radical ideas are just good prose and nothing more than wishful thinking and a new generation of Americans that desperately want to shape a new reality, one that works for all of us. I think this sense of urgency has been brilliantly captured by Bernie Sanders campaign and is the reason why he is getting more than 70% of the youth vote (people under 30).
America needs to dream big. We need to see articles and ideas like this. Life is now and it's ours.
America needs to dream big. We need to see articles and ideas like this. Life is now and it's ours.
469
Nothing like good old fashioned Utopian thinking which would require an unimaginably catastrophic and stupendous social and political conflagration to come into being.
Lunacy of the first order.
Lunacy of the first order.
4
Dream on. No line on a map will make that change.
2
I think there's another reason Bernie is capturing 70% of the youth vote, it's called the naivety of youth. You're right about the country being stuck between those who thing radical ideas are good prose but not necessarily the best in reality, and a new generation that desperately wants to shape a new reality. The problem is that that THIS young generation of millennials is completely full of itself, and doesn't know anything yet. Still, somehow they've been misidentified by aging baby boomers as a genius generation, simply because they can log into face book. Worse still, they've been fed the line about how special they are so much, that they believe the hype, and grow increasingly bold in their pronouncements about what America needs. What America needs is for Millennials to say less about what they think about how stupid and rigged everything is and do more to study why our country, political system, and market operate the way that they do.
1
No mention of California's high speed rail? The first leg of this plan is already being implemented, but where we don't have to cross state lines.
We need to learn how to work as a nation again, and not a pack of individuals resting on our laurels.
We need to learn how to work as a nation again, and not a pack of individuals resting on our laurels.
1
What a good idea! So many things, and ways of thinking, are antiquated in America--take Daylight Savings Time, for example, which was probably never intended to benefit farmers or for safety but merely to make people want to go out and shop more before darkness fell. bUTW hy stop with 7 mega-regions? Divide the country into two countries: one side with a social safety net, smaller dwellings, health care, unions, etc, and the other with an irrationally exuberant free market and lots of reality TV shows and no regulations of any kind.
3
This is nothing but a self-serving piece by a big-city newspaper wanting more money for big cities. No, we don't want to be like Europeans or Asians crammed into little boxes living in big cities. We want our space and our peace and quiet. This op-ed also claims that spending billions on big cites will produce some kind of trickle down to rural areas. Is this the same paper that claimed that trickle down economics did not work in the 1980's but will work now? Or, is this a plan to wrest control of the Senate by eliminating rural states? As someone who is stuck in a red part of a Democratic cesspool called Illinois, this will never fly with me.
11
I'm with you on 95% of what you say here. As far as the cesspool is concerned, though, don't forget that the Illinois State Penitentary system is an equal-opportunity employer. We've had Republican as well as Democratic ex-governors make our license plates.
2
The article reminds me of "The Nine Nations of North America," a book written in 1981 by Joel Garreau. He included Canada and Mexico, of course, since national boundaries do not necessarily delimit geography or culture. The book is still in print, and available online.
What would do the same thing would be to simply reform the Senate along the lines of 100 districts each electing one senator and all the districts having roughly the same population. This would be more in keeping with the one-man, one-vote doctrine as well as concentrating voting power where population was greatest. Districts would by necessity cross state lines but could still represent specific regions of the country effectively. As things currently stand, American democracy is being subverted by small state rural values that don't represent most Americans.
5
Quite a few years ago, someone (can't remember who) proposed that political boundaries should follow those of the watersheds of major rivers. This new plan may be more in tune with global economics, but I wonder about its impact on the environment.
5
This map reflects the businesses I work with every day. How many people realize Carlisle PA's importance to the trucking and warehousing industry? It's like two days drive to 30% of the US population, and there are thousands of tractor trailers. One of the country's largest supermarket chains named Ahold USA, a European Subsidiary is headquartered there. Regional businesses get so little support - but they sure get to file all the different tax documents for all the different states they do business. These distinctions are not just business related, just look at the Jersey shore. South Jersey pulls tourists from Philly and North Jersey from NY. Very few people who vacation in Point Pleasant have ever been south to Wildwood and vice versa. Imagine one small state with so little interaction between north and south. These socioeconomic forces define our country and yet so few US citizens understand the parochial nature of its government structures -- fix this one thing and we'd have a point or more of economic growth extra each year. That's like $170 billion!
9
Are some of the "current railways" in this map freight lines? A map focused on passenger rail, combining Amtrak and state and regional commuter lines, ould sadly have far fewer lines.
1
Amtrak can probably use any of these line by paying for the rights to use them from the company that owns them. If you are on an Amtrak train on almost any route and your train comes to a stop for an hour, you can be sure that a company like CSX just gave you the finger.
2
"America is increasingly divided not between red states and blue states, but between connected hubs and disconnected backwaters."
You might wish to remember that the "disconnected backwaters" are where food is grown, the remnants of our country's biodiversity can be found, the natural areas upon which we ultimately depend are located, and, not least, where millions of people who (shudder!) do not wish to live in cities happily reside.
In all of what really matters, an ecoregional mapping makes more sense, rather than planning that lionizes an archipelago of mega-metropolises and condescends to the rest, where convenient.
You might wish to remember that the "disconnected backwaters" are where food is grown, the remnants of our country's biodiversity can be found, the natural areas upon which we ultimately depend are located, and, not least, where millions of people who (shudder!) do not wish to live in cities happily reside.
In all of what really matters, an ecoregional mapping makes more sense, rather than planning that lionizes an archipelago of mega-metropolises and condescends to the rest, where convenient.
17
The author's thinking is interesting, creative and exciting. I can agree with most of what he proposes, with one caveat.
There is a reason why state capitals are often located in small, out-of-the-way towns, and not in major cities. That is because most people in the state do not want to be dictated to by the major city. Given the chance, the urban giants would steamroll over the wishes of the "backwaters" as the author tellingly calls them.
People who choose to live in less populous areas already do without the many advantages of life in the large population centers, and we willingly accept that. But we don't want to give up all semblance of self-governance in favor of being bossed by city-folk.
There is a reason why state capitals are often located in small, out-of-the-way towns, and not in major cities. That is because most people in the state do not want to be dictated to by the major city. Given the chance, the urban giants would steamroll over the wishes of the "backwaters" as the author tellingly calls them.
People who choose to live in less populous areas already do without the many advantages of life in the large population centers, and we willingly accept that. But we don't want to give up all semblance of self-governance in favor of being bossed by city-folk.
8
Wrong. State capitals are where they are -- in small, out-of-the-way towns, as she says -- because they're usually in the middle of the state. They were put there a century ago, because roads were bad and travel distances long, making centralized locations more reachable by all citizens of the states. (In the Midwest, think Lansing, Des Moines, Columbus, Springfield, etc.) Big cities, by contrast, were usually located on water (the Great Lakes, the Mississippi) because this water was key to their economic development. This water also usually marked the natural boundary of a state (again, the Lakes, the Mississippi). All this made sense in the mid-19th century, even though it guaranteed that the capitals were cited far from where the action was. It makes no sense at all today and is the reason why state governments so often are hostile to the major cities that are the prime source of the states' GDP (and taxes.) This 19th-century geographical imperative is also why we have counties and county seats which, like most states and their capitals, have long since become useless relics.
5
Rail is the answer. Inexpensive proper rail. Period.
5
And repair and use existing rail. It was once the link from one small town to another and some of it is still there.
Add Alaska. Add Hawaii + islands (PR, AS, Guam...). Split from SLO south, including LA, SD, Phoenix, Las Vegas, and Burky to form the Southwest. Move Denver to the Inland West. Along the northern edge of Oklahoma, down through Texas, there is an Old West. North of that is the Great Plains, but it should extend to the Illinois/Indiana border and include the UP. East of that is a Rust Belt that should include Rochester and Syracuse. The South can be split East/West along the Alabama/Georgia border. New England should be separated from the Mid-Atlantic. With these changes there are 13 "Colonies" that are even more coherent.
That number is much more likely to gain traction on a national level. There's still a mountain of issues that would need to be worked out, but if they were, this would benefit the country greatly. I'm in support of re-thinking the map, but this map provided just the first step. My revisions would take it a step further.
That number is much more likely to gain traction on a national level. There's still a mountain of issues that would need to be worked out, but if they were, this would benefit the country greatly. I'm in support of re-thinking the map, but this map provided just the first step. My revisions would take it a step further.
2
Actually not a bad revision at all, though I'd add that splitting up central Alabama and Georgia runs into the same sort of problems of artificiality this map is trying to solve; a surprising number of people live/work in central/western Alabama and work/live Atlanta/east of Atlanta, and the integration is growing quite fast. Of course, you have to put borders somewhere.
Some cool ideas in here. I still like 50 states, but I would personally like to see Mexico and the Canadian provinces become additional US states, so we are just one giant supercountry. It would be awesome.
But yes, the infrastructure bank should certainly not consider state boundaries to be the stopping point of project funding.
For example, here in Boston the MBTA is trying to expand its commuter rail services into Rhode Island, New Hampshire, Maine and Connecticut but is experiencing legislative issues.
But yes, the infrastructure bank should certainly not consider state boundaries to be the stopping point of project funding.
For example, here in Boston the MBTA is trying to expand its commuter rail services into Rhode Island, New Hampshire, Maine and Connecticut but is experiencing legislative issues.
1
"I would personally like to see Mexico and the Canadian provinces become additional US states"
Um, as a Canadian, I would have a little bit of a problem with that.
Um, as a Canadian, I would have a little bit of a problem with that.
9
Re: The second bridge between Detroit and Windsor who pays for it. No one is bickering. Canada is prepared to build and get the cost repaid through tolls. It is one gentleman ( and his family ) who are trying to slow its progress because they want to hold onto their monopoly. They own the first bridge.
4
As others have said, both fascinating and meaningful. As an historian, I would like to see the same done at 50-year intervals in the history of the country, starting around 1790. It would be a terrific learning tool for all ages. For example, we know that one of the reasons the Confederacy struggled so in the Civil War was its lack of railroad development -- especially the problem of short, different gauges of rail line. Mapping this, along with other concentrations of people and resources, would tell us a lot of historical dynamics in a glance.
8
Enlightened planning. Very informative.
6
While our GOP-majority Congress and Senate continue to obsess about personal sexual orientation, abortion, repealing healthcare and obstructing the black President, the private sector has inexorably taken hold of government policy in a way that is preventing our great country from investing in its own future. For example, our country's electrical grid consists largely of vintage 1930s technology controlled by dozens of self-serving utility companies who act as monopolies within their territories, who are incentivized to protect their status quo at the expense of what makes sense for future generations of Americans. The Federal government needs to reassert infrastructure policy in the same way it did when it built the Interstate Highway System in the mid-20th century.
15
Singapore? why is this character from a semi-fascist statelet redrawing America's maps? for one thing, he has to redo California because the rest of the country hates us, and we're in the Top Ten World Economies. as for the rest, does it matter?
17
According to his bio, Dr. Khanna was born in India, and grew up in the United Arab Emirates -- and went to school in the UK (London School of Economics).
Clearly he has no connection to the US, and his own LONG bio on his own website does not even say if he is a US citizen today. He has no feeling for what the states or regions of the US mean to AMERICANS.
Note that he has clustered the wealthiest areas TOGETHER....more so than they are even today....meaning dominant power clusters of money, finance, big business, corporate headquarters and oh yeah -- politics and rich white people. If anybody else was interested in this idea (and yeah, it was brought up 35 years ago and dismissed then), they would have spoken up by now. Trust me, it's all political. This would concentrate POWER in the hands of lefty liberal blue areas (the Northeastern corridor and the West Coast corridor) and cut everyone else out entirely. So....no thanks, doc.
I can't be the only one -- can I? -- who sees this is scarily similar to The Hunger Games novels, where a future dystopia creates 13 "Districts", with the capitol being enormously wealthy & powerful....but the other unfortunates being degrees of poor, even starving.
Clearly he has no connection to the US, and his own LONG bio on his own website does not even say if he is a US citizen today. He has no feeling for what the states or regions of the US mean to AMERICANS.
Note that he has clustered the wealthiest areas TOGETHER....more so than they are even today....meaning dominant power clusters of money, finance, big business, corporate headquarters and oh yeah -- politics and rich white people. If anybody else was interested in this idea (and yeah, it was brought up 35 years ago and dismissed then), they would have spoken up by now. Trust me, it's all political. This would concentrate POWER in the hands of lefty liberal blue areas (the Northeastern corridor and the West Coast corridor) and cut everyone else out entirely. So....no thanks, doc.
I can't be the only one -- can I? -- who sees this is scarily similar to The Hunger Games novels, where a future dystopia creates 13 "Districts", with the capitol being enormously wealthy & powerful....but the other unfortunates being degrees of poor, even starving.
270
So, no one outside of the people of the US can have constructive ideas about how to organize our infrastructure? And, infrastructure is all we are talking about here. I can read it again but I don't think he is calling for a reallocation of voting rights. This is an exercise in planning not political revolution.
4
Don't worry Concerned Citizen. With all the anti-science folks in congress and the GOP, the chances of this, let alone any other change coming to America are somewhere between zero and absolute zero... Really good new ideas never go anywhere in this country... so relax.
3
You sound like the Faux News anchor who questioned a Muslim man's knowledge of christianity when said Muslim held multiple Ph.D's in the studies of religion and specifically Christianity
3
This is one of the most intelligent concepts I've seen in a long time. This type of thinking is also essential if we are ever going to modernize our aging power grid. The multiplicity of localities and governmental units that exists now makes big projects nearly impossible -- all it takes is NIMBY's in one township to block development that would aid an entire region. Truthfully, Republicans should champion such a strategy since it would aid business and eventually provide a blueprint for shrinking government by eliminating duplication of function among numerous small local entities. In an era of mass transit, mass communications, and global trade, is there really a reason for so many townships, districts, small counties, and local authorities to exist, except to provide patronage jobs?
298
There is one supremely important reason for small. It's called local control. It's called choice. And it provides an indispensable measure of self-determination. I didn't carefully select the place where I live with a view to being eventually homogenized, and governed by distant authorities who haven't a clue about who I am, what my town is like, and what my neighbors and I want our place on this planet to be. My county has already been roped into subservience to a number of "district" authorities of this-and-that, reigned over by unelected bureaucrats who strive to drive us all toward the lowest common denominator. No thank you. Ever.
Nimby;s are important as they keep developer from ruining are rural landscape.
Two things
1. Republicans are the party of limiting the FEDERAL government and promoting STATES' rights. I'm not sure they're going to pick up this idea.
2. I'm not saying this article isn't interesting, it's just bad advice, from someone who as far as I can tell does not have the requisite knowledge about this subject to have published such an interesting but ridiculous map. Just so you can see what other types of advice this gentleman has for America, you should go to his website. There's a great piece on infrastructure and on how the US should follow the infrastructure building models of China and Spain, two countries whose government-run approaches to infrastructure created massive bubbles and huge recessions.
1. Republicans are the party of limiting the FEDERAL government and promoting STATES' rights. I'm not sure they're going to pick up this idea.
2. I'm not saying this article isn't interesting, it's just bad advice, from someone who as far as I can tell does not have the requisite knowledge about this subject to have published such an interesting but ridiculous map. Just so you can see what other types of advice this gentleman has for America, you should go to his website. There's a great piece on infrastructure and on how the US should follow the infrastructure building models of China and Spain, two countries whose government-run approaches to infrastructure created massive bubbles and huge recessions.
1
This essay takes a purely technological and economic perspective, but many US states have distinctive histories and cultures that aren't captured in such terms (think of New Mexico or Louisiana). Regional pride and identity still matter. And I, for one, find the Chinese approach—stamp out all history and warehouse human resources in skyscrapers—utterly horrifying.
334
I don't see why this would stamp out local and regional identities—not if it's combined with protections for the natural environment that is the ultimate source of those identities. New Orleans is what it is because of the way geography and history developed hand in hand there. That doesn't go away. This alignment recognizes for instance existing cultural connections between Houston and New Orleans, while also placing Houston in the "Texas Triangle" of great cities.
Nobody said anything about "stamping out all history" in some Maoist purge. Just creating large and meaningful administrative regions to get things done, to advance shared economic goals and infrastructure. (And I'm puzzled by your reference to skyscrapers, which already exist in the U.S., and existed before "the Chinese approach, as efficient ways to use urban space.)
Nobody said anything about "stamping out all history" in some Maoist purge. Just creating large and meaningful administrative regions to get things done, to advance shared economic goals and infrastructure. (And I'm puzzled by your reference to skyscrapers, which already exist in the U.S., and existed before "the Chinese approach, as efficient ways to use urban space.)
4
The author and those of similar mind, are not advocating abolishing states or erasing their distinctive histories and cultures. He is merely arguing that infrastructure planning that takes account of regional connections will achieve far better results than planning that remains captive to state histories and cultures.
Coloring outside the lines, in this case state borders, sometimes produces a far better picture.
Coloring outside the lines, in this case state borders, sometimes produces a far better picture.
2
"The Chinese approach", i.e. "stamping out all history", was an approach taken about 50 years ago by the Chinese government then to try to unify the country. You'll still find lots of regional pride today among the citizens even after all that. They somewhat encourage regional pride today as long as it is done in the spirit of unity and not division. (Sometimes in the eye of the beholder.)
Also, as I've noted other places, I'm pretty sure the author isn't calling for reorganizing our political system around 7 new "states". He is saying we should think about our economic future in this way instead through a state-based model.
Also, as I've noted other places, I'm pretty sure the author isn't calling for reorganizing our political system around 7 new "states". He is saying we should think about our economic future in this way instead through a state-based model.
4
All very good ideas from Parag Khanna, but the Republican Pachyderm will have none of it.
Of course the future demands modern infrastructure, better education, a cooperative visionary spirit and forward-thinking sensibility, but as long as the Neo-Confederacy War of Nincompoop Nihilism rages throughout Republistan celebrating retrogradism, social retardation and redneck recalcitrance, America will continue to crash into the reefs of right-wing recidivism.
Even in 2016, half the country thinks contraception, higher education, mass-transportation, science and universal healthcare are left-wing conspiracies.
They have neither the stomachs, the hearts or the minds for the future...the distant past will do just fine, thank you.
America's only hope is to build around Republistan and hope that the GOP preference for commercial greed eventually outweighs its proud penchant for spiteful stupidity.
It's telling of course that the renaissance has happened and will continue to happen around cities where progressiveness is alive and well, while 'uncitied' America continues to cling to its religion, Republicans and ruralism.
One day America's Civil War will be over, but not until they burn the last hillbilly Confederate flag of treason and remove the Confederate logo from the Mississippi state flag.
Until then, America's cities, blue states and Democratic zones will stagger along the road to modernity, pulling and subsidizing the red Republican bowling ball of bigoted backwardness.
Of course the future demands modern infrastructure, better education, a cooperative visionary spirit and forward-thinking sensibility, but as long as the Neo-Confederacy War of Nincompoop Nihilism rages throughout Republistan celebrating retrogradism, social retardation and redneck recalcitrance, America will continue to crash into the reefs of right-wing recidivism.
Even in 2016, half the country thinks contraception, higher education, mass-transportation, science and universal healthcare are left-wing conspiracies.
They have neither the stomachs, the hearts or the minds for the future...the distant past will do just fine, thank you.
America's only hope is to build around Republistan and hope that the GOP preference for commercial greed eventually outweighs its proud penchant for spiteful stupidity.
It's telling of course that the renaissance has happened and will continue to happen around cities where progressiveness is alive and well, while 'uncitied' America continues to cling to its religion, Republicans and ruralism.
One day America's Civil War will be over, but not until they burn the last hillbilly Confederate flag of treason and remove the Confederate logo from the Mississippi state flag.
Until then, America's cities, blue states and Democratic zones will stagger along the road to modernity, pulling and subsidizing the red Republican bowling ball of bigoted backwardness.
587
Man!! You are on a roll today. I often read your comments first before I read the article.
9
Perfectly, succinctly stated.
6
That last sentence was as accurate as can be. I just wanted to say thank you for always sharing what many of us are thinking. You articulate it in such a way that one might think you had worked on the Daily Show with Jon Stewart.
6
Anyone familiar with "Hunger Games" may recognize this map as something speculated to to Panem. Though there are not 13 districts, Easy to devide of the Great Plains, and the west to get to that 13.
As the United States is heading towards oligarchy, anyway, setting up a model, based on Panem, makes sense. Heck, they even have District 1 mapped out (The Front Range). Capital City is just west of Denver, based on the stories.
So, does that mean we will be seeing "Hunger games" in out future.
Oh yeah, here is a map of Panem to compare:
https://www.google.com/search?q=map+panem&client=ubuntu&hs=UPV&a...
As the United States is heading towards oligarchy, anyway, setting up a model, based on Panem, makes sense. Heck, they even have District 1 mapped out (The Front Range). Capital City is just west of Denver, based on the stories.
So, does that mean we will be seeing "Hunger games" in out future.
Oh yeah, here is a map of Panem to compare:
https://www.google.com/search?q=map+panem&client=ubuntu&hs=UPV&a...
7
You came up with "Hunger Games". I am reading Sinclair Lewis's 1935 book entitled "It Can't Happen Here" where a dictator takes over the USA and reorganizes the governing regions. Someone has drawn the map here: http://i.imgur.com/WntpnJO.png with commentaries here: https://www.reddit.com/r/imaginarymaps/comments/2oti0g/map_of_usa_from_t.... According to Wikipedia, "It Can't Happen Here is a semi-satirical 1935 political novel by American author Sinclair Lewis. Published during the rise of fascism in Europe, the novel describes the rise of Berzelius "Buzz" Windrip, a populist United States Senator who is elected to the presidency after promising drastic economic and social reforms while promoting a return to patriotism and traditional values. After his election, Windrip takes complete control of the government and imposes a plutocratic/totalitarian rule with the help of a ruthless paramilitary force, in the manner of Adolf Hitler and the SS." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/It_Can't_Happen_Here. The book is a good read during this election cycle.
1
The map is cool, but it's hard to see what is actually being proposed here, given that "[s]tates will continue to have an important political and regulatory function to fill."
I do worry about assigning more political power to "robust urban clusters." Much of the US economy is already centralizing in just a handful of metropolitan areas, as major companies relocate from formerly strong regional cities like Cincinnati and St. Louis. I fear reorienting the political process around metropolises could accelerate this process and only widen the gap between the winners (NYC, LA, etc.) and losers.
I do worry about assigning more political power to "robust urban clusters." Much of the US economy is already centralizing in just a handful of metropolitan areas, as major companies relocate from formerly strong regional cities like Cincinnati and St. Louis. I fear reorienting the political process around metropolises could accelerate this process and only widen the gap between the winners (NYC, LA, etc.) and losers.
9
That's the point. Read some of the posts here! it's not about sharing with the poorer parts of the country -- it is about CONCENTRATING ALL THE POLITICAL POWER into just two regions -- the Northeastern corridor and the Pacific Coast. Thereby cementing into power lefty liberals, blue staters, Democrats, etc. Everyone else would be disenfranchised, and massive social engineering (and high high taxes) would be the rule of the day.
And coming from an Indian professor, educated in London and teaching in Singapore -- who has nothing to lose from such a silly idea.
And coming from an Indian professor, educated in London and teaching in Singapore -- who has nothing to lose from such a silly idea.
11
A classic liberal/conservative split -- to what extent will we be guided by the future or by the past?
Thank you, NY Times, for prompting awareness and discussion. This is exciting.
Thank you, NY Times, for prompting awareness and discussion. This is exciting.
6
No.
2
Oh sure.
Let's ignore 238 years of constitutional rule and political compromise and take advice from someone who teaches at a university in an autocratic country.
Thanks, but no thanks.
Let's ignore 238 years of constitutional rule and political compromise and take advice from someone who teaches at a university in an autocratic country.
Thanks, but no thanks.
86
Let's ignore 238 years of constitutional rule and political compromise and take advice from someone who teaches at a university in an autocratic country.
How's that been working for you in the last few decades?
How's that been working for you in the last few decades?
4
It's a policy proposal think piece, not a call to rebellion. Relax.
10
Nicely done. Economically not good enough to solve many problems, however.
Since it's clear to just about every thinking individual that we have grown too large and diverse to govern properly, my solution is to revisit secessionism and actively encourage the South to go their own way as a separate country.
The South is an enormous economic drain on the rest of the country. Few if any of those states are currently self-supporting, relying endlessly on Federal money contributed by states in the Northeast and West to stay afloat. The same states they despise for their liberalism and Democratic governors are what keep them from starving to death.
They drag down the employment figures, are always at the bottom of any measure of quality of schools, are at the bottom of the heap in social legislation, continue to be overtly racist, and generally contribute little economically. Their food and music is pretty good, but we'd have those even if they left.
So let them secede (and please take Texas with you), and see if things don't improve immeasurably for the rest of us. We can do very well without them, and their fondest wish of being able to fly their rebel flag everywhere will be fulfilled.
Since it's clear to just about every thinking individual that we have grown too large and diverse to govern properly, my solution is to revisit secessionism and actively encourage the South to go their own way as a separate country.
The South is an enormous economic drain on the rest of the country. Few if any of those states are currently self-supporting, relying endlessly on Federal money contributed by states in the Northeast and West to stay afloat. The same states they despise for their liberalism and Democratic governors are what keep them from starving to death.
They drag down the employment figures, are always at the bottom of any measure of quality of schools, are at the bottom of the heap in social legislation, continue to be overtly racist, and generally contribute little economically. Their food and music is pretty good, but we'd have those even if they left.
So let them secede (and please take Texas with you), and see if things don't improve immeasurably for the rest of us. We can do very well without them, and their fondest wish of being able to fly their rebel flag everywhere will be fulfilled.
153
Uh, thanks. We hope California cracks off the tectonic plate and falls into the ocean during the next big earthquake too.
After all, we'll have your movies, music and food left, so your actual existence doesn't matter to us.
BTW: do you realize that California is by far, the poorest state in the union? Far poorer than Alabama or Mississippi -- 24% live in poverty. You have a homeless problem that dwarfs anything in the rural South. And the most illegal aliens.
Also the South would hardly starve to death. I'm guessing you've never traveled there, before dumping all your snobby bigotry on the South -- because it provides a good share of all the food grown in the Eastern USA. It was agricultural powerhouse, when California was a barren strip belonging to Mexico.
After all, we'll have your movies, music and food left, so your actual existence doesn't matter to us.
BTW: do you realize that California is by far, the poorest state in the union? Far poorer than Alabama or Mississippi -- 24% live in poverty. You have a homeless problem that dwarfs anything in the rural South. And the most illegal aliens.
Also the South would hardly starve to death. I'm guessing you've never traveled there, before dumping all your snobby bigotry on the South -- because it provides a good share of all the food grown in the Eastern USA. It was agricultural powerhouse, when California was a barren strip belonging to Mexico.
4
I have traveled in the South. Nice people for the most part who keep voting for utterly insane and clueless state and federal politicians who do their best to give all y'all (see what I did there?) a bad name.
Perhaps the South was an agricultural powerhouse. But its power was built on slavery which, much to the disgust of many Southerners, is no longer legal. In fact, the South's entire robust economy was built on slave labor for a couple of centuries. Once slavery ended, and farmers actually had to pay people, that robust economy was no longer so robust.
Were California to fall into the ocean, your feeding trough at the Federal government would be seriously depleted. The loss of federal funds, supplied mostly by California and New York, would bankrupt every southern state.
The reason we have a huge homeless problem (which we admittedly do) is because even the homeless won't live in the South.
Perhaps the South was an agricultural powerhouse. But its power was built on slavery which, much to the disgust of many Southerners, is no longer legal. In fact, the South's entire robust economy was built on slave labor for a couple of centuries. Once slavery ended, and farmers actually had to pay people, that robust economy was no longer so robust.
Were California to fall into the ocean, your feeding trough at the Federal government would be seriously depleted. The loss of federal funds, supplied mostly by California and New York, would bankrupt every southern state.
The reason we have a huge homeless problem (which we admittedly do) is because even the homeless won't live in the South.
1
I imagine that today's south would indeed starve. You don't grow enough anymore to feed yourselves, most have forgotten how to can, to quilt, to put up meats in the smokehouse. You see, you are going to need to know how to do those things again, because after secession, all who have an inkling of thought in their head will get out as fast as they possibly can, and you wil be left a theocratic backwater, much like Afghanistan. We will feed ourselves with our great plains and food from Mexico. We will open our borders to Mexico, central America and South America...heck, we will let in everyone, but you southerners. You would just bring your hate and your superstitions with you. And don't even try to tell me about the "new south". I was born and bred in Dixie and I know all too well what the south is about. Can't wait to get back to my adopted home up north.
2
The Erie Canal was funded by the state of NY not the federal government.
32
The author is spot-on with every point. The 50 states are largely arbitrary. As the economy moves forward, and people with the means and skills to move to cities do so, the rural and suburban decay that is left behind will collapse local economies not within the orbit of a large metropolitan area, thus accelerating the emergence of two Americas. The only way to combat this is with a significant realignment in regional economies to allow for a more cohesive approach. Can you imagine (corruption issues notwithstanding) what the Port Authority could do with its hands freed from having to report to TWO separate governors of two separate states? The upcoming NEC Future rail corridor development plan could perhaps be a focus for this regional, and eventually, continental change, that the author is calling for. If it happens.
The basic premise that societal functions follow the existing demography and geography is elegant and natural. All policy, not just infrastructure spending, could benefit by adopting such a premise.
However, THIS division into these seven mega-regions seems arbitrary and biased. Washington and New Mexico have little in common compared to, say, Pennsylvania and Ohio.
When large sections like Inland West, and Great Plains are proposed, it exposes a bias of "those states all look alike to me."
However, THIS division into these seven mega-regions seems arbitrary and biased. Washington and New Mexico have little in common compared to, say, Pennsylvania and Ohio.
When large sections like Inland West, and Great Plains are proposed, it exposes a bias of "those states all look alike to me."
31
And they probably DO all look the same -- to an Indian economics professor, who was born in INDIA and grew up in the United Arab Emirates -- went to college in London -- and today teaches in Singapore.
His ties to the US must be minimal at best. I'll bet my last nickel he has never even visited any of those states in "flyover country" that he is writing off, and ensuring have no political power, ever.
His ties to the US must be minimal at best. I'll bet my last nickel he has never even visited any of those states in "flyover country" that he is writing off, and ensuring have no political power, ever.
3
@Concerned. I agree with your posts that this essay seems to be a liberal fantasy and the biggest losers politically would be conservatives. But, it would be good if you stopped emphasizing his place of birth though. Reading his wiki page, he attended high school in upstate NY and college in Georgetown University and is most likely a US citizen. We can disagree with his views without taking shots at his nationality.
4
Thank you, NY Times, for publishing progressive articles like this. It is very interesting.
When visiting East Asia I usually wonder why the US cannot have the high speed rail systems on which I ride there. Not only do they allow for workers to commute a hundred miles, but also expand what each person views as their home or "where they are from".
I would think that this expanded home association would help to break down some of the growing ubran/rural or red/blue rhetoric and feelings that poison our common humanity a little bit.
When visiting East Asia I usually wonder why the US cannot have the high speed rail systems on which I ride there. Not only do they allow for workers to commute a hundred miles, but also expand what each person views as their home or "where they are from".
I would think that this expanded home association would help to break down some of the growing ubran/rural or red/blue rhetoric and feelings that poison our common humanity a little bit.
26
"When visiting East Asia I usually wonder why the US cannot have the high speed rail systems on which I ride there. "
Isn't California building a high-speed rail system? The organization of the states has little to do with that. Remember our railway system was built across the country in the late 1800s. As I recall, we had the same system of states back then.
Isn't California building a high-speed rail system? The organization of the states has little to do with that. Remember our railway system was built across the country in the late 1800s. As I recall, we had the same system of states back then.
We've learned that major cities have exponentially greater power than states or rural areas when it comes to economic development. Yet this assumes that all things remain constant. Does anyone remember the 1970s, when people fleed the cities, and TV shows about urban areas focused on the decline of our cities. There seems to be an assumption those days won't be seen again.
And as I look at the lines drawn for the high-speed rail, I notice that it draws a circle around Appalachia. My Appalachian mind reels.
People have been very cavalierly discussing the necessary death of coal, and for the sake of our climate I agree. However, that is rarely followed by any discussion of how to reach out to this region. The Federal governemment has had a history of making Appalachia its wasteland. There are no military bases in Appalachian counties, and national parks are only at the periphery of the area. Coal, timber, and gas are to be gleaned from these hills, but nothing is to be put back. Corporations and distant cities have grown rich on this rape, and all with Federal approval.
So new we come to the new economy and those who toiled to create the old one are excised. Oh, but not in the Northeast. Notice there's a special line just for Albany and Syracuse, whose boom days are long past?
Come up with a better plan, and a rail line that is inclusive. City hive economies ebb and flow. Rural ones have always stayed.
And as I look at the lines drawn for the high-speed rail, I notice that it draws a circle around Appalachia. My Appalachian mind reels.
People have been very cavalierly discussing the necessary death of coal, and for the sake of our climate I agree. However, that is rarely followed by any discussion of how to reach out to this region. The Federal governemment has had a history of making Appalachia its wasteland. There are no military bases in Appalachian counties, and national parks are only at the periphery of the area. Coal, timber, and gas are to be gleaned from these hills, but nothing is to be put back. Corporations and distant cities have grown rich on this rape, and all with Federal approval.
So new we come to the new economy and those who toiled to create the old one are excised. Oh, but not in the Northeast. Notice there's a special line just for Albany and Syracuse, whose boom days are long past?
Come up with a better plan, and a rail line that is inclusive. City hive economies ebb and flow. Rural ones have always stayed.
9
The States will never be reorganized. If Congress is unwilling to grant national representation to D.C., there is no way it will ever accede to a system that grants greater influence to urban centers. I will leave it to your imagination what the probable political consequences of a system where California, in keeping with its equal population, has the same representation in the Senate as Washington, Oregon, Utah, Idaho, Nevada, Wyoming, Montana, Colorado, Nebraska, South Dakota, North Dakota, Kansas, Hawaii, and Alaska.
The best we can hope for is that the States get their acts together. I am frankly amazed that there are still ticket-punchers in Philadelphia train stations. This practice disappeared decades ago in many countries, and its perseverance is a testament to the sclerotic governance that has come to characterize the people in charge of our infrastructure. Surely the Acela corridor can solve this problem and introduce a system like, say, Korea, which has succeeded in allowing people to get anywhere around the country at a low price. And we have the advantage of not having been bombed into oblivion during the Korean War.
The best we can hope for is that the States get their acts together. I am frankly amazed that there are still ticket-punchers in Philadelphia train stations. This practice disappeared decades ago in many countries, and its perseverance is a testament to the sclerotic governance that has come to characterize the people in charge of our infrastructure. Surely the Acela corridor can solve this problem and introduce a system like, say, Korea, which has succeeded in allowing people to get anywhere around the country at a low price. And we have the advantage of not having been bombed into oblivion during the Korean War.
16
Having been bombed to oblivion may have actually contributed to Korea's superior transportation system. They had to rebuild from the bottom up, instead of piggy backing on an antiquated system. Same with the German and Japanese train systems.
Not that I'm advocating for oblivion-bombing as a tool for economic development...
Not that I'm advocating for oblivion-bombing as a tool for economic development...
3
You object to ticket punchers? Does everything have to be mechanized? The Philadelphia train station is charming precisely because of its history and its "relics." Because of the Pennsylvania Railroad, once a model for the world, the station exists in its architectural splendor, with some of its 19th century reminders, and some excellent updating. It is truly an American treasure.
5
One of my treasured experiences was a job where I regularly visited an old courthouse whose early-20th-century elevators were not replaced until the last two ancient operators decided to retire a few years ago.
It was like stepping back in time, into a Bogart movie -- the dial indicators overhead, then the operator opening the door, pulling the inner cage closed after you stepped into the ornate wood-paneled box, asking what floor (no buttons), and pulling the "tiller" to take you there. These are the human interactions and work we've lost to mechanization and efficiency, the beautifully detailed craftmanship lost to bland utility.
Someday, perhaps, we will need to return to that world, if only to keep the 99% of us working and provided for.f
It was like stepping back in time, into a Bogart movie -- the dial indicators overhead, then the operator opening the door, pulling the inner cage closed after you stepped into the ornate wood-paneled box, asking what floor (no buttons), and pulling the "tiller" to take you there. These are the human interactions and work we've lost to mechanization and efficiency, the beautifully detailed craftmanship lost to bland utility.
Someday, perhaps, we will need to return to that world, if only to keep the 99% of us working and provided for.f
Bravo. I've been saying this for years about NY/NJ. It's so ridiculous that Hudson County NJ is a mile from midtown Manhattan but is almost in another country as a result of land grants by English kings in the 17th century.
60
The Bay Area is similarly segregated between counties / metro districts, meaning robust planning for transit and housing has been completely impossible.
2
Applaud the efforts of Mr. Khanna, especially noting the efforts taking place globally along these lines. Of course, this is not a first attempt at rebuilding the country (or the continent), as Neil Peirce and Joel Garreau made laudable attempts as well --> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Nine_Nations_of_North_America. It is interesting that after making the economic arguments for regional cooperation, Mr Khanna steps back, almost apologetically, to note that "...States will continue to have an important political/regulatory function to fill." I think that the rest of the article shows that the states, in fact, don't have an intelligent economic role to play due to the inherent geographic challenges (e.g. Sacramento, Springfield, and Tallahassee, among others, are in a constant state of dissonance trying to hold disparate economic interests together). If anything, it is the huge cultural shifts that will really cause challenges to state hegemony, and they'll point to the constitution to hang on as long as possible (like we as Americans tend to do with other amendments and use them as red herrings for specious arguments).
2
Please show the map... thank you!!
There is a thumbnail on the main page but nothing on the article page
There is a thumbnail on the main page but nothing on the article page
1
In my browser the existence of the map is a function of the width of the window. When the window is made too wide (about 16 inches) the map disappears. A very interesting phenomenon.
1
Such a thing can be accomplished de facto if a region's members of Congress are capable of banding together to form voting blocs. It also means a greater region's populace has to see themselves as part of that greater whole, and evidence for that would be if they elect legislators who will form such blocs. Creating regions by fiat might work for a while, but if it isn't preceded by popular self-perceptions it will fall apart.
1
Weren't the boundaries of the states established by fiat as well?
Have you ever watched "How The States Got Their Shapes" on History T.V.?
Have you ever watched "How The States Got Their Shapes" on History T.V.?
2
Excellent post. Indeed, regional capitols would also help solve many problems plaguing our nation. The "states rights" argument - while usually code for legal discrimination - actually has some traction if we consider the fact that national policy is typically welcomed by some regions and shunned by others. Thus, maybe it's time that the federal government surrender some of its duties to regions, where they could be implemented with less hostility. Universal health care would be more attainable in the northeast and along west coast; looser gun regulations would make more sense in rural sections of the country; easier access to abortion would face less resistance in the more secular regions of the nation, and so on. Indeed, strong regional governments would also cultivate the very thing that so many American's identify with: increased competition. Give regions more power, keep them loosely joined through federal union, and then let them cultivate their comparative advantages. The federal government could then be run through a democracy of elites, where a single 'president' is replaced by a council of regional executives.
2
Alas, the Supreme Court has decided (thanks to a majority of lefty liberals) that we all must suffer the dreadful ACA....we have no right to determine our marriage laws in our states (as we did since 1776)....that we have no right to our own abortion laws.
Lefty liberal now want to take away our Second Amendment rights, even changing the Constitution to do so.
This "plan" is just a stealth way to take away state's rights and impose lefty liberal social engineering, concentrating all power into the two wealthiest areas -- the Northeast and the Pacific Coastal areas. Who just happen to be overwhelmingly blue and liberal.
Lefty liberal now want to take away our Second Amendment rights, even changing the Constitution to do so.
This "plan" is just a stealth way to take away state's rights and impose lefty liberal social engineering, concentrating all power into the two wealthiest areas -- the Northeast and the Pacific Coastal areas. Who just happen to be overwhelmingly blue and liberal.
2
Why not a loose Confederation of Regional Governments, with a Parliamentary National Government, akin to that of Canada's 10 Provinces, Eh?
If it works so amazingly well there, with sound banking regulation, a national single payer health-care system, a relatively small national debt and all of the advantages of Canada's system of government, it should work here as well!
If it works so amazingly well there, with sound banking regulation, a national single payer health-care system, a relatively small national debt and all of the advantages of Canada's system of government, it should work here as well!
3
Speak for yourself, CC. I'm self-employed, divorced and middle-aged. Before the ACA, my premiums cost more than my mortgage, and I was about to lose my insurance, and with it, my glaucoma treatment. The ACA came along just in time.
.
.
2
interesting. The "dayton" argument would help a place like New Mexico, seemingly always stuck at #48. Being part of something larger might provide a needed jump start. Side benefit--does this mean fewer politicians (14 senators)?
2
What about underwater America? You know, most of Florida, Jersey coast, Long Island, Rhode Island and the rest of the land that's going under (literally) before year 2100? Call it the wet vote.
148
LOL, you'll be underwater in NYC too. Just saying'.
1
I am deeply irritated by the author's failure to carve out Cascadia as a separate region. We will take San Francisco. But after all those bumper stickers, flags, tee-shirts, and drunken plots of secession in our microbreweries, this is a real slap in the face.
4
Imagine being lumped with Texas as a Minnesotan!
1
The transit corridors proposed by Khanna might themselves one day prove to be stultifying dinosaurs like the current US states, locking future people into the economic and social patterns of the present. It would also require upending 230 years of tradition and legal precedent, but I guess a scholar at a school named for Lee Kuan Yew cares little about such trivialities...
34
You're right. If we adopt a new model, it will eventually (centuries from now) be as outmoded as the old one. It's much better to do nothing.
Are we a nation or fifty amalgamated states?
2
We are a nation and a republic made up of 50 states, with their own powers -- those that are not specifically delegated to the Federal Government.
5
Any law preventing states from building independent alliances with each other to promote regional planning? Or would that be too much states' rights?
This explanation and proposal are interesting and thought-provoking but they leave the reader with nowhere to go. The map would benefit from an interactive feature and the article would benefit from a short description of each region or else a link to a site where we could get more information.
25
Overall, a fascinating exercise, but as a representative of the Flyover States of America I have to ask the question, why The "Great" Northeast?
70
I took it as the "greater northeast area" (since calling D.C., for example, part of the North is sort of a stretch). But yes... the terminology's a bit odd.
3
Because we would be losing the great "Empire State" boo hoo...
Because it's where most of the money and smarts are.
2
Perhaps the best evidence that the State/Federal model doesn't work is Mitch McConnell, the sorriest excuse for a Senate Majority Leader I have ever seen. He is repeatedly re-elected by the state that leads the nation in virtually every form of dysfunction, both social and economic. But the current Congressional leadership system favors tenure over leadership.
Mitch is the worst when it comes to facing the biggest future challenges, climate change in particular. While the Pacific coast states are already implementing their own regional climate change mitigation initiatives, Mitch is fighting for the coal industry, even while it sinks into bankruptcy, leaving a horrible legacy of disabled workers, air and water pollution and destruction of whole ecosystems.
Its time to end the blockade of Congress by the Dixiecrats and their heirs.
Mitch is the worst when it comes to facing the biggest future challenges, climate change in particular. While the Pacific coast states are already implementing their own regional climate change mitigation initiatives, Mitch is fighting for the coal industry, even while it sinks into bankruptcy, leaving a horrible legacy of disabled workers, air and water pollution and destruction of whole ecosystems.
Its time to end the blockade of Congress by the Dixiecrats and their heirs.
527
> "Mitch McConnell, the sorriest excuse for a Senate Majority Leader I have ever seen"
REALITY-CHECK= There have been several CSPAN & PBS pieces lately looking at the current state of the Senate, talking with former leaders like Trent Lott, Dashel, Mitchell, Dole, & etc
Over & over again, both sides say that Mitch is actually a very decent person
BUT- He is the GOP Party Leader in the Senate, and if he wasn't acting more or less, the way that he does, then he would have been replaced long ago, by somebody else who did
A general consensus on the GOP side, is that Mr. McConnell is a little 'too willing' to go along with DEMs. Ask Ted Cruz what his opinion is of Mitch
The *CORE* problem is that the coalition that drives the GOP/Party-of-the-Rich {ReligiousConservatives & NRA}
. . simply out-votes everybody else
And they don't sit out midterm elections the way that is typical for young, low-information leftists
REALITY-CHECK= There have been several CSPAN & PBS pieces lately looking at the current state of the Senate, talking with former leaders like Trent Lott, Dashel, Mitchell, Dole, & etc
Over & over again, both sides say that Mitch is actually a very decent person
BUT- He is the GOP Party Leader in the Senate, and if he wasn't acting more or less, the way that he does, then he would have been replaced long ago, by somebody else who did
A general consensus on the GOP side, is that Mr. McConnell is a little 'too willing' to go along with DEMs. Ask Ted Cruz what his opinion is of Mitch
The *CORE* problem is that the coalition that drives the GOP/Party-of-the-Rich {ReligiousConservatives & NRA}
. . simply out-votes everybody else
And they don't sit out midterm elections the way that is typical for young, low-information leftists
2
This has to be written by someone who goes long distances flying over America, not traveling at ground level by car, train, or thumb actually seeing and interacting with America.
It claims to be a readjustment to face reality when, instead, it is a recipe for ossification of what is and/or what the author considers utopia. One of the beauties of the inefficient American system is that it allows nowhere to become somewhere quite quickly, even as somewheres become nowhere.
In a way, I feel sad for Parag Khanna, whose enjoyment and appreciation for our country seems so limited. Corridors have walls. That's a pretty limited vision for an expansive future, either intellectually, materially, aesthetically, or spiritually.
It claims to be a readjustment to face reality when, instead, it is a recipe for ossification of what is and/or what the author considers utopia. One of the beauties of the inefficient American system is that it allows nowhere to become somewhere quite quickly, even as somewheres become nowhere.
In a way, I feel sad for Parag Khanna, whose enjoyment and appreciation for our country seems so limited. Corridors have walls. That's a pretty limited vision for an expansive future, either intellectually, materially, aesthetically, or spiritually.
324
" One of the beauties of the inefficient American system is that it allows nowhere to become somewhere quite quickly..."
Actually, the author has a much better understanding of America than you do. Rather than "recipe for ossification" what Parag has drawn here is a regionalization that has existed for decades, and corresponds closely to other attempts at redrawing the boundaries of the US (such as the "nine nations" of North America from a couple of decades ago).
As a New Englander, I feel much more culturally associated with Canada and Europe than I do with the US Southern States or the Midwest, for example. I would much rather have to show my passport to enter Texas or South Carolina than I would when traveling to Nova Scotia or Ireland, not that I would ever want to go to Texas or South Carolina, except for anthropological study or an exotic vacation.
Actually, the author has a much better understanding of America than you do. Rather than "recipe for ossification" what Parag has drawn here is a regionalization that has existed for decades, and corresponds closely to other attempts at redrawing the boundaries of the US (such as the "nine nations" of North America from a couple of decades ago).
As a New Englander, I feel much more culturally associated with Canada and Europe than I do with the US Southern States or the Midwest, for example. I would much rather have to show my passport to enter Texas or South Carolina than I would when traveling to Nova Scotia or Ireland, not that I would ever want to go to Texas or South Carolina, except for anthropological study or an exotic vacation.
19
Hey, I grew up in Texas and it does contain a huge variety of unique and gorgeous natural beauty and wildlife, ranging from plains, desert, semi-tropical, the distinctive Hill Country the center, and the spectacular cliffs of the Big Bend, overlooking the Rio Grande and norther Mexico. One reason I worry about a wall would be its effect on migrating wildlife.
In the Hill Country, you can still dig easily into shelves of Triassic-age limestone and find fossilized clams and other sea creatures who lived in a younger Earth, when Texas was a warm and shallow sea where dinosaurs ranged along the shores.
In the Hill Country, you can still dig easily into shelves of Triassic-age limestone and find fossilized clams and other sea creatures who lived in a younger Earth, when Texas was a warm and shallow sea where dinosaurs ranged along the shores.
1
What Renaldo is prescribing is the Balkanization of America into like-minded entities. Not too many years ago there were Blacks arguing for an independent nation on the Gulf Coast, whites for secession in northern Idaho, Texans for basic dismemberment, etc.
What makes America what it is, what does makes it different, is that we are a geographic, religious, historical, and ethnic amalgamation united not by common history, religion, or ethnicity but by idealistic goals, however limited in attainment, embodied in the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and a couple centuries of struggle toward those goals.
What makes America what it is, what does makes it different, is that we are a geographic, religious, historical, and ethnic amalgamation united not by common history, religion, or ethnicity but by idealistic goals, however limited in attainment, embodied in the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and a couple centuries of struggle toward those goals.
5
Good luck trying to make this happen when we can't even get rid of the penny or switch to metric. Technocracy is a cold corpse in the life of the US.
14
And the cost of all this is...?
2
In short, think outside the box.
1
A quick note: The only person (family actually) arguing about a new bridge between Detroit and Windsor is the American billionaire owner of the one existing bridge large enough to carry truck traffic. The Canadian government offered to pay for virtually everything to have a second bridge but the family is fighting it tooth and nail.
7
I am reading this electronically, and call up the article but there is no map. Good article called a New Map for America, but there is no map. Please fix
I've been saying this same thing for years. The 50-state model is completely outdated. The country should be grouped into natural regions. It would save so much money in so many ways, including less government officials and offices. And that's why it will unfortunately never happen. The politicians operate based on self-interest and will never vote themselves out of a job. Such a shame as this country suffers from the straitjacket of a 200+ year-old document created by men but treated as the infallible word of God. I think Jefferson, Madison, Hamilton, et al would think we were crazy to still be using the same system with only a few tweaks along the way. We need a complete overhaul for the new century (and every century). Where is some visionary leadership?
9
The author is based in Singapore, which is a modern-day city-state. This model seems to envision a new division of political and economic power between the federal government and new, urban-centered power centers.
Meanwhile, much energy has been expended on developing the old model, where power is distributed between the federal and the state levels.
The notion that our 50 disparate state apparatuses would simply stand back for something new to form, or would allow the federal government to implement it, is ludicrous. The state system is how our huge and diverse nation leverages power within and toward the federal government. What possible incentive is there for this long-developed system to cede that power to so-called urban archipelagos, that are, by the way, often quite at odds with the states in which they reside?
We are stuck with states being the intermediary to the federal government. Not only is the US not Denmark, it is not Singapore.
Meanwhile, much energy has been expended on developing the old model, where power is distributed between the federal and the state levels.
The notion that our 50 disparate state apparatuses would simply stand back for something new to form, or would allow the federal government to implement it, is ludicrous. The state system is how our huge and diverse nation leverages power within and toward the federal government. What possible incentive is there for this long-developed system to cede that power to so-called urban archipelagos, that are, by the way, often quite at odds with the states in which they reside?
We are stuck with states being the intermediary to the federal government. Not only is the US not Denmark, it is not Singapore.
8
We should have been told that the author was not an American.
No American would have called the west the "Inland West" anyway. The west has always been mythical in American culture. To suddenly call it "Inland" makes it seem bland.
We Americans are not bland.
If this ever happened, we would definitely have a marketer come up with better names than "Inland West" and "The Great Northeast." Those names evoke "old."
No American would have called the west the "Inland West" anyway. The west has always been mythical in American culture. To suddenly call it "Inland" makes it seem bland.
We Americans are not bland.
If this ever happened, we would definitely have a marketer come up with better names than "Inland West" and "The Great Northeast." Those names evoke "old."
The author demonstrates a lack of understanding of how our government works. The states are each sovereign in their own right, a sovereignty that can be traced back to the founding of the United States of America. In fact, the federal government only has powers that were delegated to it by the states, as noted in the 10th Amendment ("The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people."). Changing that is not as simple as it would be in the other countries mentioned in the article, because they don't share our system of government.
10
I am put in mind of Great Britain over the last three millennia. Peoples speaking different languages and enduring different governments gradually flowed into a more-or-less cohesive whole, even as emigrants from around the world have entered in the last fifty years.
1
Until SCOTUS takes those powers away from us, and takes away our right to vote and make our own state laws in keeping with that 10th Amendment.
1
It was the only way to get the 13 original colonies to cooperate because each colony was afraid of losing power over "its state".
1
Organizationally, this seems like a great idea. After all, why should a metro area like New York City split between 3 different states in a relatively small area. But one thing I'd worry about is the rise of local pride in these regions. If each region is defined by a certain set of characteristics AND is so big, what's to prevent the growth of nationalism for each of these areas? what if one decides to split off. This idea could work best for the country only if there were many smaller regions centered around only 1 or 2 cities each. America is probably on of the most geographically unified large countries in the world, and it shouldn't take that for granted.
3
Very good article, but why just keep to USA. I think it is time to reset our thinking and include all of North America as one interconnected peoples. So many of our woes would be eliminated.
2
In order to be more environmentally sound, our country should have boundaries changed to reflect watersheds so that the people live where their water drains, thus forcing them to be more responsible in keeping the resources clean. The protection of the environment should be considered vital to the economic well being of a place.
8
This map and analysis is complete fantasy, considering the existence of a Republican Congress that has stalled any hopes for high-speed rail, much less the repair of what we've come to call our crumbling infrastructure.
But what is truly offensive is the naming of a Southeast Manufacturing Belt that depends for its existence solely on Republican-dominated state governments that have crushed organized labor and kept wages down to near poverty levels in order to attract mostly foreign manufacturing plants that otherwise would have been shipped overseas to China and other low-wage locales.
But what is truly offensive is the naming of a Southeast Manufacturing Belt that depends for its existence solely on Republican-dominated state governments that have crushed organized labor and kept wages down to near poverty levels in order to attract mostly foreign manufacturing plants that otherwise would have been shipped overseas to China and other low-wage locales.
14
"Republican Congress that has stalled any hopes for high-speed rail, much less the repair of what we've come to call our crumbling infrastructure. "
Could that possibly be because the democrats demand that all infrastructure work be done only be "prevailing wage" union workers who then kickback most of their union dues to the democrats. The GOP would be foolish to agree to such an arrangement that gives kickback money to the democrats.
Could that possibly be because the democrats demand that all infrastructure work be done only be "prevailing wage" union workers who then kickback most of their union dues to the democrats. The GOP would be foolish to agree to such an arrangement that gives kickback money to the democrats.
1
A similar suggestion was proposed in the early 80's in the book “The Nine Nations of North America”. It argued that the borders we have now are arbitrary and irrelevant. Instead, it’s proposed that North America be divided into nine “nations” based on their own distinct economic, political, cultural, and environmental characteristics (a.k.a. “bioregionalism”): New England, The Foundry, Dixie, The Breadbasket, The Islands, Mexamerica, The Empty Quarter, Quebec, and (my favourite) Ecotopia.
I’m sure much of the Middle East could benefit from this kind of thinking as well. But as with much else in that region, I wouldn’t hold my breath.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Nine_Nations_of_North_America
I’m sure much of the Middle East could benefit from this kind of thinking as well. But as with much else in that region, I wouldn’t hold my breath.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Nine_Nations_of_North_America
14
Excellent map! Needs a couple more lines, though - connect Las Vegas to Denver, Denver to Omaha, and Des Moines to Chicago. There are existing rail lines there already.
Also, another needed improvement - make the trains run on time in the West. As a Northeasterner, I was shocked to learn when I moved to Omaha that you can never get an Amtrak train on time here. I'm talking HOURS late on a regular basis. So much for the idea of taking a train to Denver!
Also, another needed improvement - make the trains run on time in the West. As a Northeasterner, I was shocked to learn when I moved to Omaha that you can never get an Amtrak train on time here. I'm talking HOURS late on a regular basis. So much for the idea of taking a train to Denver!
5
They used to be able to get them there on time back in the 40s and 50s.
3
The Great Northeast? Shouldn't it be the Great Pacific Coast? The Great Inland West? Or maybe just The Plains would do. Very odd, but then, you are writing from your own perch in the Northeast, I suppose.
Nice map, distorted labels.
Nice map, distorted labels.
1
Someone said the author was from Singapore, actually. I agree that the names are pretty bland.
This is central planning by another pointy headed liberal quasi-socialist ivory tower academic.
The strengths of the 50 state system is that it promotes competition between states and regions, ensuring that each is as competitive as possible.
To your big government, ahistorical proposal, I simply say 'no'.
The strengths of the 50 state system is that it promotes competition between states and regions, ensuring that each is as competitive as possible.
To your big government, ahistorical proposal, I simply say 'no'.
10
There is nothing liberal, socialist or pointed headed about good inexpensive transportation system. Your anti intellectualism is showing!
19
How's Michigan fairing in this competition?
3
"Intellectual" is code for ineffective, gullible, judgmental, and feckless.
This map is almost identical to the one that Joel Garreau drew in his book, "The Nine Nations of North America," in 1981, which got a lot of attention then and is still frequently cited by regional planners. Probably a case of great minds thinking alike, and Khanna makes some shrewd recommendations for infrastructure. But some mention should be made of Garreau's work, if only to note that these ideas have been around for 35 years, without much progress.
10
Good good luck with that.
Get money out of politics, limit the Supremes (and everyone else) to ten years in any job, them things need fixing first.
The day after you name a region "manufacturing" say goodbye to just that, and why isn't it the Greater Northeast, a bit of hubris, me thinks.
Get money out of politics, limit the Supremes (and everyone else) to ten years in any job, them things need fixing first.
The day after you name a region "manufacturing" say goodbye to just that, and why isn't it the Greater Northeast, a bit of hubris, me thinks.
3
The 21st century will not be a competition over territory, but over connectivity — Cogent strategic thinking here.
I sent this article to my son who is a transportation planner. When young families consider moving, they want tech connectivity, decent health care, an international airport, and good schools for their kids. That's what has lifted up the Triangle area. Sadly, much of our state remains in severe economic stagnation. And, our state legislature is out of touch on so many things.
I sent this article to my son who is a transportation planner. When young families consider moving, they want tech connectivity, decent health care, an international airport, and good schools for their kids. That's what has lifted up the Triangle area. Sadly, much of our state remains in severe economic stagnation. And, our state legislature is out of touch on so many things.
6
If I moved to the Carolinas, it would be to a port city. I had a small craft store in the northeast, with most of our merchandise coming from Europe. All our big mills and distributors has their U.S. warehouses on the Carolina coast. Even if I hadn't known their addresses, I would have figured it out just from the accents of my phone contacts. Those cities must be hopping!
1
While I applaud the approach of this article and its regional approach, it suffers from its focus on high-speed rail. High-speed passenger rail networks are incredibly expensive to build and maintain and therefore only economically feasible in a few dense, highly-trafficked areas. This is why they work so well in Europe, Japan, China's eastern regions and the Northeast Corridor. The economic case for such expensive vanity infrastructure connecting points like Albuquerque and Dallas or Salt Lake-Boise-Seattle, however, is absent.
While less glamorous, it would be far more effective to spend on long-overdue repairs and maintenance of existing infrastructure along with a few unglamorous but essential new projects like improved port facilities and modernized air traffic control.
These project will grab few headlines but deliver taxpayers far greater bang for their buck.
While less glamorous, it would be far more effective to spend on long-overdue repairs and maintenance of existing infrastructure along with a few unglamorous but essential new projects like improved port facilities and modernized air traffic control.
These project will grab few headlines but deliver taxpayers far greater bang for their buck.
5
I beg to differ. I have travels the bullet train from Shanghai to Beijing on many occasions, it is a fast 5+ hours through the open spaces of the country, and it is usually about 3/4 full. OH, and it costs $50, yes $50!
5
A national high-speed rail network would be too expensive and slower than existing air connections. But regional networks would work, and would stimulate these regional economies. The Great Lakes region is about the same size as Germany, which has its very effective InterCity system. The Great Lakes already is a coherent economic region but its major cities are just too far apart to work together. A proper high-speed net would have speeds up to 220 mph (common in other countries), and would reach from Minneapolis in the north to Cleveland in the east (Toronto, too: why not?) and St. Louis and Louisville in the south. It would put most of these cities within a couple of hours of the region's hub in Chicago. That's commuting distance, and much faster than existing air links, not to mention the current putt-putt Amtrak schedule. As Khanna says, places like Chicago and Minneapolis are becoming global cities, while the rest of the region is being left behind. High-speed rail would enable this hinterland to link into the vibes of the more successful cities. Expensive? Sure. But as in Europe or China, it would more than pay for itself.
10
Just Michigan and Wisconsin combined are much larger than Germany. I don't see that sort of system working in the US. The scale is too different.
1
Let the Hunger Games begin
4
The author here obviously missed it, but this is the premise behind the Hunger Games novels -- the nation of Panem, divided into 13 "districts".
5
Seriously. One look at this map and I thought "Panem."
4
It's a logical extrapolation into the future. Many science fiction works have envisioned variations of a future U.S. broken into similar regions. The only thing missing on this map is the Republic of Texas. I grew up there, and they never got over having been a sovereign nation before statehood. I can't see them doing anything but being their own region, possibly with the annexation of NM and OK.
22
Build the trains first. The rest will follow.
209
Somehow I am challenged to see why anyone would want to take a high-speed train from New York to San Francisco. There is no way it would beat the 6 hours of flying time, and there is no way to have these high speed trains run at high speed city-to-city. Just think what it would cost to buy the real estate for a straight (required for high speed) corridor from Penn Station to the center of San Francisco. The first and last 20 miles would probably be more expensive than the intervening 2500. (That, and the Rockies re not going to be cheap to traverse with high-speed rail either)
4
> "Build the trains first. The rest will follow"
Out of touch with reality, there is very little public support for most 'trains'
1) There is almost nowhere that they can survive economically without massive subsidies
2) The flip-side is that if they raised the fares high enough to actually cover the costs of their operation, many simply couldn't afford them, and ridership would drop like a stone => then fares would have to increase again, and ridership would drop again => rinse-&-repeat until you reach zero
Out of touch with reality, there is very little public support for most 'trains'
1) There is almost nowhere that they can survive economically without massive subsidies
2) The flip-side is that if they raised the fares high enough to actually cover the costs of their operation, many simply couldn't afford them, and ridership would drop like a stone => then fares would have to increase again, and ridership would drop again => rinse-&-repeat until you reach zero
1
Well, Europe did manage to traverse the Alps and the Channel. And we got to the moon, which was no picnic either.
2
Seeing the connections in Midwest makes me want to facepalm.
It's no wonder Obama's Amtrak promises in Midwest never materialized, and that the trains there still run in the middle of nowhere most of the time. Yay, let's zig and zag Minneapolis-Des Moines-Omaha-Kansas City! It's not like anyone cares where people live and where they go to! Flint? Flint what? Toledo? Why would they want to go to Ohio from there?
It's no wonder Obama's Amtrak promises in Midwest never materialized, and that the trains there still run in the middle of nowhere most of the time. Yay, let's zig and zag Minneapolis-Des Moines-Omaha-Kansas City! It's not like anyone cares where people live and where they go to! Flint? Flint what? Toledo? Why would they want to go to Ohio from there?
3
Right. I can't imagine a Minnesotan wants to be effectively governed by the much more populated Texas.
1
As a practical matter, this map represents what exists now. What is lacking, as the author points out, is any imaginative thinking.
18
This is a creative readjustment of state lines into 7 mega-regions. My first impression is that it makes sense in many ways.
Unfortunately, it would probably require a new U.S. constitution to make it feasible as a functioning system. And that is unlikely to happen.
But congrats to Parag Khanna for bringing this map to light...
Unfortunately, it would probably require a new U.S. constitution to make it feasible as a functioning system. And that is unlikely to happen.
But congrats to Parag Khanna for bringing this map to light...
218
While this is novel and creative idea it also highlights why we will never get high speed rail as outside of the Northeast corridor and Chicago there is no political will to move this much needed utility forward. Too few states realize the significance of this modern amenity to make us focus on it any time soon.
12
Stanley D. Brun offered a very similar map (p. 230 in Sommers, L.M. ((Ed)) Atlas of Michigan. East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University Press, 1977).
1
http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2014/07/03/where-do-borders-need-to...
The fact is that these connections extend beyond state borders & in some cases national borders. The way we have chosen to govern ourselves is increasingly ill suited to the needs of individual citizens, of commerce & effective government.
The ongoing struggle between more liberal Southern cities & socially conservative Republican State governments is in the headlines this very week with fights over GLBT rights. On a larger scale conservative State governments are adopting ALEC (American Legislative Exchange Council) written pattern laws that preempt the ability of local governments in everything from municipal broadband, minimum wage laws, school policies & other things making it difficult for communities to tailor laws to the needs and desires of their locality.
The simple truth is America needs a reboot with a new Constitution redefining the roles & relationships of the American nation. Boundaries that made sense in a world of water wheels & horse drawn wagons no longer make sense. Cairo Illinois has little in common with Chicago, but are strapped at the leg by a state boundary. The same is true in my area where three states divide an economic area around Memphis, Tennessee.
We can do better.