[schoen]

I was just curious whether there was any historical evidence that the state borders themselves were ever a result of gerrymandering. Then I remembered an exhibit over at the Oakland Museum of California about proposals for the borders of California at the time of its statehood, which included debates about the effects of including lots of Mormons to the east (or not). A discussion summarizing some of these debates, but with a slightly different emphasis, can be found in

http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/row/landsurveys/Study_material/Stat...

It might be possible to interpret some of the proposals for the shape of the California-Nevada border as reflecting a kind of gerrymandering or considerations of political strategy. Maybe that's historically true of other U.S. state boundaries? (But the states haven't generally redrawn their boundaries in response to demographic changes over time.)

[ejstronge]

I have no background in this area, but saw an interesting allusion to your idea the other day[1]

    Republicans in Congress passed the 1862 Homestead Act, offering free land to settlers who would move to territories 
    that would eventually become states — creating more Senate seats and Electoral College votes for a Republican Party 
    eager to keep government control away from Southern Democrats. They even managed to divide the Dakota Territory into 
    two states, worth twice the political power.

1. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/21/upshot/as-american-as-appl...

[sjg007]

In business when someone wants to talk details, it means they want to f@@@ you.