If you got to draw the map of the USA

[muon2]

For completeness on this thread, I'll link to my effort from another thread earlier this year.

[muon2]

The problem I have with that map, muon's that is.  It doesn't accurately depict the views of Eastern Idahoans, and Western Wyomingites, parts of Nevada, Colorado, and Arizona.  If you were to split them all off into ideologies, certain areas of those states would be incorporated into Utah.

As far as I can tell, I would agree with the rest of that map.  Especially I liked the part in merging eastern Oregon and Washington with Idaho, because they are very much alike.

I appreciate your comments. I will freely admit that other than a week in Boise two years ago, and some colleagues from Idaho Falls, I have had little personal contact with ID. In my map I avoided an unnecessary split of states. UT was difficult, because it remained under my 2.5 M population threshold (but not by 2010), but i didn't have a clear guide as to what counties should be attached to UT from AZ, NV, ID or WY. I'm open to suggestions.

[muon2]

Thanks for the ideas, Ill try to incorporate them.  However, your split leaves Clark and Fremont counties isolated from the rest. I'd guess that if they are more like the bordering area in MT and Yellowstone, WY, so I'll put them there.

Boise was very nice in August, but I didn't see much outside the city. Most of my time was near the State University, but I did take a day to see the Capitol, which was refreshing. It is one of the few Caputols I've been that really seemed to understand that it was the people's building.

[muon2]

Second question on your selection of counties: Is Twin Falls really part of North Utah? I wouldn't have guessed it, but I'll rely on your local expertise.

[muon2]

As to the first, it was deliberate to leave out Clark and Fremont, though I'd say they'd fall into a neutral territory.  Kind of like the Border States in the Civil War.

To Twin Falls, yes it most certainly should be considered in Utah.  It's also similar to Clark and Fremont but just edges over to the other side.  I was in Twin a few days back, after coming home from Utah.  You get this feeling that you're still kind of there. 

Other "border counties" would be Minidoka, Jerome, and Gooding.  Perhaps, Butte, but I think they fall considerably more on the Idaho side.

In that case I'll put Clark and Fremont into MT for now. I'd like them to be connected to a state and there doesn't seem to be any road to connect them to western ID.  The move adds one Congressional seat to UT at the expense of ID. The updated map is:

[muon2]

Anyone who tried to divide Texas could never walk the streets in that state again.

LOL, so true.

My brother lived and worked in TX for many years, and I spent many weeks on trips to work on the Super Collider in the early 1990's.  They surely would never split, but I met many in TX who describe three separate cultures centered around Houston, Dallas, and San Antonio. Austin is a convenient meeting place in the middle of those three.

[muon2]

Have you seen this map?

http://www.massinc.org/commonwealth/new_map_exclusive/ten_regions_index.html

It's been shown in the past, but its's been a while. So, it's useful to show it again.

However, I don't care for a number of characterizations in the map. I think the authors concentrated too much of voting patterns and topography, and not enough on culture and values. They also forced the populations to be too equal, and married regions that really wouldn't go together. For example:

1) Minneapolis/St. Paul is nothing like Memphis
2) Boston is not like Seattle
3) Columbus has a very different feel than Omaha
4) Concord NH and Cheyenne WY are very different small state capitals

[muon2]

For completeness on this thread, I'll link to my effort from another thread earlier this year.

In New Mexico, you should probably put Lincoln and Otero Counties with West Texas-Oklahoma,
and put Catron County with Northern Arizona...

I actually started with your quote below:

But I do know the first thing I'd do is attach El Paso to New Mexico. I'll post some of the other things later.

Going off of that idea...move the following counties to Texas: Otero/Lincoln/Chaves/Eddy/Lea/DeBaca/Roosevelt/Curry/ Quay/Harding/Union...they're basically Far West Texas anyway. Or, take those counties and add them to the Texas and Oklahoma Panhandles to create one new state. Put the rest of NM, including El Paso, in Arizona. NM actually wanted to be one state with Arizona, but Arizona voted it down...

The problem I had was that If Otero and Lincoln went to West Texas, the state of Upper Rio Grande became very pinched at El Paso. I relied on other sources to move Alamogordo to Upper Rio Grande, and then I let Lincoln County go along with it. The physicist in me also liked the idea of keeping White Sands with Los Alamos. If Alamogordo really should stay with Roswell instead of Las Cruces, I'll take another look.

On the West side I thought about moving San Juan and McKinley into the sate of Nevada with northern AZ. The principal reason would be to keep the Navajo Nation together in one state. Moving them with Cibola and Catron could make some sense. Originally I just followed the state line, but I'm open to suggestions. If Nevada includes parts of NM, do I need to revisit southern UT as well?

[muon2]

For completeness on this thread, I'll link to my effort from another thread earlier this year.

In New Mexico, you should probably put Lincoln and Otero Counties with West Texas-Oklahoma,
and put Catron County with Northern Arizona...

I actually started with your quote below:

But I do know the first thing I'd do is attach El Paso to New Mexico. I'll post some of the other things later.

Going off of that idea...move the following counties to Texas: Otero/Lincoln/Chaves/Eddy/Lea/DeBaca/Roosevelt/Curry/ Quay/Harding/Union...they're basically Far West Texas anyway. Or, take those counties and add them to the Texas and Oklahoma Panhandles to create one new state. Put the rest of NM, including El Paso, in Arizona. NM actually wanted to be one state with Arizona, but Arizona voted it down...

The problem I had was that If Otero and Lincoln went to West Texas, the state of Upper Rio Grande became very pinched at El Paso. I relied on other sources to move Alamogordo to Upper Rio Grande, and then I let Lincoln County go along with it. The physicist in me also liked the idea of keeping White Sands with Los Alamos. If Alamogordo really should stay with Roswell instead of Las Cruces, I'll take another look.

On the West side I thought about moving San Juan and McKinley into the sate of Nevada with northern AZ. The principal reason would be to keep the Navajo Nation together in one state. Moving them with Cibola and Catron could make some sense. Originally I just followed the state line, but I'm open to suggestions. If Nevada includes parts of NM, do I need to revisit southern UT as well?

Re: Otero County. Well, Upper Rio Grande does become pinched, because in places it doesn't extend too far from the river. But I'm curious what the 'other sources' are that you mentioned that thought Alamogordo should be with El Paso...? And Los Alamos is an island in the middle of the Upper Rio Grande...it is not at all like its surroundings, and is a high-tech Republican (and Anglo, I think) outpost. But county boundaries are often drawn badly in any event.

Re: The NorthWest. Moving San Juan, McKinley, Cibola, and Catron into Greater Nevada would be an excellent idea! And southern UT probably should be moved there as well - the Dine are one of the major, intact, Native groups in the U.S. Perhaps the southwest bootheel of NM could be added to southern Arizona?

As I mentioned on my link, much of the basis for may map was the 1981 work by Joel Garreau in his book Nine Nations of North America. His divisions are cultural not political, so I didn't look at voting much when dividing the counties. I started by dividing along his "national" lines, and tried to follow them most closely. The "state" boundaries within a "nation", used existing political and geographical boundaries as much as possible.

In the book, the Rio Grande valley is within MexAmerica which runs from LA to the gulf coast. Philosophically, he found this region to be typified by a boom-town spirit, and a willingness to accomdate growth, even against natural obstacles. In eastern NM, he took the boundary to be the Pecos River, east of which was the Breadbasket. The Breadbasket was typified by its ties to the farming culture of the Great Plains and a self-determination to be able to live off of the land.

Since I was following county lines, I included those counties in the Pecos valley in the Breadbasket state of West Texas, and those to the west in the MexAmerica state of the Upper Rio Grande. Since I've not been to any part of NM other than Alberquerque, I started with the book definition, then looked to see if there were any discernible differences based on web info.  Poking around the Alamogordo web sites and census numbers I didn't see anything to shift Otero to go with the counties east across the mountains. When I looked at the pictures and highlights, Otero looked more like AZ than OK. Feel free to advise me on other cultural factors I overlooked.

In the northwest I will shift some counties. West of the Continental Divide, Garreau set old Route 66 as the dividing line between MexAmerica and the nation of the Empty Quarter. I can see extending that farther to the southeast to Catron.

[muon2]

For completeness on this thread, I'll link to my effort from another thread earlier this year.

I've updated the link and map to reflect the move of northwestern NM counties to Nevada. To keep the population above 2.5 million, I made some adjustments in south TX.