After 113 years of separation, leaders of North Dakota and South Dakota have expressed interest in establishing an open dialogue that could lead to re unification of the two states.
North Dakota Gov. John Hoeven first mentioned the possibility of opening talks with his state’s neighbor to the south at a press conference last month. Two days later, South Dakota Gov. William Janklow echoed Hoeven’s message, announcing that it was in the interest of his government to seek solidarity with North Dakota.
“The rift between our states has persisted long enough,” said Janklow. “We have lived in constant fear of North Dakota our entire lives. The people of South Dakota are finally willing to put the past behind them and open their arms to all Nodaks. I have a vision that in my lifetime, all Dakotans will salute the same flag, sing the same beloved state song, and eat the same cherished casseroles and goulash hot dishes.”
While exact plans have not been set, the leaders’ recent remarks have indicated an eventual summit, possibly in nearby neutral states like Minnesota, Montana or Canada. Such a meeting would be the first time dialogue was opened up between the two Dakotas since 1948, when North Dakota officially became a Republican state.
Originally united as the Dakota Territory, the land was divided in two states as it applied for statehood in the 1880s.
A recently uncovered letter from Pubert Grumplekin, a former North Dakota state senator, shed some light on the rift that divided the territory. The letter was written in 1889, days after statehood was granted to North Dakota and South Dakota.
“This was supposed to be a fair and equitable venture for both regions of the territory,” Grumplekin wrote. “But South Dakota got all the good stuff. They get to build Mount Rushmore and they get most of the Badlands. What do we have in North Dakota? Nothing. We’ve been screwed. No one’s ever going to come here because we suck.”
Since then, the border between the two states has been one of the most heavily armed areas in the world. Demilitarizing the border will surely be at the top of the agenda when talks officially begin.
But even with such promises of peace, tension remains high between the disgruntled Dakotas. Gov. Hoeven threatened to call off the summit last week when President Bush labeled North Dakota an “Axis of Boredom.” Slowly realizing that his words were destabilizing the peace process, Bush later amended his words.
“It’s not that I have anything against North Dakota,” Bush remarked. “I went up there once to go hunting with daddy. But man, that place is seriously boring! We were in Fargo and we couldn’t even score any blow. Come on!”
Ned Gustafson, a professor of political science at the University of North Dakota, is an expert on Dakota politics and inter-relations.
“Reunification is a nice sounding prospect,” Gustafson said, “but we must remember, these are two political systems, two cultures that have been isolated since the 19th century. The only migration that has occurred has been refuges fleeing the oppressively boring conditions in North Dakota. This will no doubt signal radical changes in both states.”
When asked about the national ramifications of a united Dakota, Gustafson was confident that Washington would adjust well to the new situation.
“This would certainly be a first for the U.S.,” he said. “Our country has never lost a state. But we’ve had Puerto Rico lying around forever. Most likely, we’ll add them on as the new 50th state so we don’t have to change all those flags everyone’s been buying.”
Editor’s Note: The Comical is a totally satirical Web feature. Please don’t sue. For more RED Herrings see www.red-mag.com.