While reading Gov. Romney's proposals for reorganizing
higher education in Massachusetts, I realized that the New England
states (total population about 15 million; land area 63,000 square
miles) might save considerably by having one governor and legislature
instead of six. After all, other states, such as Texas (population
21 million; land area 262,000 square miles) and California (population
35 million; land area 156,000 square miles), are much larger and
have only one governor.
Another possibility is to duplicate the Dakotas
and Carolinas with North New England (3.3 million people in Maine,
Vermont, and New Hampshire; 49,000 square miles) and South New
England (11 million in Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Connecticut;
14,000 square miles).
Of course, seats (and clout) would be lost in the
U.S. Senate and other disadvantages are likely. But if tax cuts
and budget reductions are the highest priority, then merging small
states seems a possible solution for savings rather than cutting
essential services in education, health care, human services,
infrastructure, and other areas. My preference is to pay my share
of taxes for these services.
IRENE STARR
Amherst
Irene Starr is the retired director of the Foreign
Language Resource Center.