Should Any U.S. State Capitals Move?

[Strykr]

The capital of New Jersey should be moved from Trenton, either to Princeton or Hoboken. Trenton is a complete disaster of a city. Also, the capital of Nevada should be Las Vegas.

[VelesHomais]

I hear Trenton is frightening even in daylight.

[CNB30]

Originally Posted by nicholasrudar

I'd move California's capital from Sacramento to either Los Angeles, San Francisco or San Diego

This would be a pretty good state capitopl...eh

[Middle-Island]

If they ever made New York City the state capital, every county above Westchester and Rockland would secede. Then again, why move the capital from Albany. It's a flawlessly perfect location, geographically. And NYC gets blamed for enough to begin with!

[bayviews]

Originally Posted by nicholasrudar

I'd move California's capital from Sacramento to either Los Angeles, San Francisco or San Diego

Better to have the state capital in a smaller burg like Sacto rather than re-ignating the rivalries between SF, which is very political and LA, which is too big to really care.

[desertpunk]

Originally Posted by nicholasrudar

I'd move California's capital from Sacramento to either Los Angeles, San Francisco or San Diego

Nah...

A) You could never recreate the amazing State Capitol Building in Sacramento, which was the historical heart of booming California at statehood in 1850.

B) LA, SF, and SD are doing quite fine without the added hubbub of being a state capital. If anywhere, places like Merced or Fresno would be more equidistant to the major population centers and could use the big economic boost...

[desertpunk]

Originally Posted by Middle-Island

If they ever made New York City the state capital, every county above Westchester and Rockland would secede. Then again, why move the capital from Albany. It's a flawlessly perfect location, geographically. And NYC gets blamed for enough to begin with!

Pffft!

Move it to Skaneateles!

[Tommy Boy]

Why don't make New York City a totally new state as the Empire State only? It would have been the 51 state and it would only have New York City with their boroughs. New York would handle it great because New Yorks GDP is one of th highest

[desertpunk]

Originally Posted by Tommy Boy

Why don't make New York City a totally new state as the Empire State only? It would have been the 51 state and it would only have New York City with their boroughs. New York would handle it great because New Yorks GDP is one of th highest

NYC AND Long Island. Capital: Ronkonkoma!

[BTA88]

Originally Posted by TransAtlanticTunnel

Los Angeles, California; Las Vegas, NV; Anchorage, Alaska; New York City, New York; Chicago, Illinois; Detroit, Michigan; Kansas City, Kansas; Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; Minneopolis, Minnesota; Seattle, Washington; Miami, Florida. To me, those cities should be the capital of their state. There may be more I missed. I don't know how big or small Austin, Texas is compared to Houston or Dallas or El Paso.

Wait, so you think the capitol should be moved to the largest city in each state except in PA? Why is that?

Also, Houston is the largest city in Texas, followed by Dallas, then Austin.

[GarfieldPark]

Kansas City, Kansas isn't the largest city in Kansas.

[Jennifat]

Originally Posted by BTA88

Wait, so you think the capitol should be moved to the largest city in each state except in PA? Why is that?

Also, Houston is the largest city in Texas, followed by Dallas, then Austin.

Originally Posted by GarfieldPark

Kansas City, Kansas isn't the largest city in Kansas.

I'm pretty sure that TransAtlanticTunnel is neither American nor understands the role of US state capital cities.

Besides which, I find it curious that he/she thinks Minneapolis should be the capital of Minnesota. How would the state benefit from moving the capital nine miles across the municipal border?

[BTA88]

Originally Posted by GarfieldPark

Kansas City, Kansas isn't the largest city in Kansas.

Sorry about that. I saw KC and my brain filled in Missouri after it.

I also had a mental lapse and said Dallas was the second largest city in Texas, that would actually be San Antonio for now.

Originally Posted by Jennifat

I'm pretty sure that TransAtlanticTunnel is neither American nor understands the role of US state capital cities.

Besides which, I find it curious that he/she thinks Minneapolis should be the capital of Minnesota. How would the state benefit from moving the capital nine miles across the municipal border?

It is curious. There's a lot of strange stuff on this forum, so I usually don't question it.

[CNB30]

Originally Posted by desertpunk

Nah...

A) You could never recreate the amazing State Capitol Building in Sacramento, which was the historical heart of booming California at statehood in 1850.

B) LA, SF, and SD are doing quite fine without the added hubbub of being a state capital. If anywhere, places like Merced or Fresno would be more equidistant to the major population centers and could use the big economic boost...

Originally Posted by GarfieldPark

Kansas City, Kansas isn't the largest city in Kansas.

It Isn't even in Kansas

[weava]

Originally Posted by CNB30

It Isn't even in Kansas

Kansas City, Kansas has a Nascar track and an MLS team, its not exactly an unknown town.....

[IraGlacialis]

Originally Posted by Tommy Boy

Why don't make New York City a totally new state as the Empire State only? It would have been the 51 state and it would only have New York City with their boroughs. New York would handle it great because New Yorks GDP is one of th highest

Bad precedent to set. If that was the case, you would have tons of state being chopped up just because there was "too much dissonance" between the city and state.
If NYC became its own state, then Chicagoland would likely follow, while California and Washington would break apart.

Originally Posted by BTA88

Sorry about that. I saw KC and my brain filled in Missouri after it.

I think you mean Witchta, KS then, whcih actually would not be a bad choice for KS, though Topeka itself is no slouch.

KC may be the largest city in the state of Missouri, but STL is the largest metro area and older of the two. With that, you really don't want to have the nastiness that would fly about if you picked one city or the other. Hence the nice central capital of Jeff City.

Again, you really don't always want the largest city to take the position of capitol city, especially if there is a big disconnect between the city and rest of the state, or there are more than a couple major cities.
Eg: I know that people in downstate Illinois are disillusioned enough about Chicago getting the attention; one doesn't need to add upon that.

[zaphod]

Ok sure, rubbing shoulders and informal schmoozing probably still counts, but theoretically state government could work if it was decentralized geographically.

I bet both the best and worst reason for moving a state capital these days would be the same that corporations think about, minus taxes of course. Either moving state offices to some podunk place that is cheap , or move them to somewhere more educated to get better workers and fold a office in with a big public university, or something.

[Stuck in Bama]

Alabama would of been better off in my opinion if the capital would of remained in Tuscaloosa or maybe even Huntsville. Having it in remain in Montgomery hasnt reaped any benefits for the state. It should of been moved to Birmingham when it became the state's largest city in the early 20th century.

[CrazyAboutCities]

If California even decide to split up its state into two states (North California and South California)... I am sure Sacramento will continue being state capital for North California but what about South California? San Diego?

[-Corey-]

For Southern California, maybe San Diego would become the State Capital. Beside Los Angeles, San Diego is the only big city that could handle a big change.
This could be the "State Capital" haha.