[CQ-Contest] DC and NAQP

[Michael D. Adams]

I wonder:  if radio had developed 20-30 years earlier, or if AZ and/or
NM had waited another few decades before being admitted to the union,
would they have been counted as multipliers in "state"-based contests?

If you want to get into technicalities, one could also ask if Ohio
counted as a state-multiplier prior to 1953 (the year in which
Congress issued its formal declaration of Ohio's admission into the
Union).

I think you can get around the politics of DC statehood (or DC voting
rights, or DC retrocession) by noting either:

1.  Many/most state-based contests also treat Canadian provinces, and
US & Canadian territories as separate multipliers, suggesting that
"state" is just short-hand to describe such divisions; or

2.  "State" can be interpreted as being a term to describe the
first-order subdivisions of the United States.   For example, the U.S.
Census publishes statistics for "states and state equivalents", with
DC falling under the "state equivalent" header.

Of course, my inner troublemaker is trying to formulate some twisted
logic that would argue for DC being a separate DXCC entity, which
would render this particular debate moot, in the extremely unlikely
event that it ever came to pass.  :)

--
Michael D. Adams (AB1OD)
Poquonock, Connecticut | mda at ab1od.org


On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 6:35 PM,  <Jimk8mr at aol.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> In a message dated 8/10/2012 8:35:03 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
> geoiii at kkn.net writes:
>
> The  mults in NAQP are US states, Canadian provinces and north American
> countries.
>
> DC is not a state.
>
>
>
>
>
> ===================
>
>
> This is not true.  Canadian multipliers are not Canadian provinces.  They
> are Canadian provinces AND TERRITORIES.
>
> Therefore Yukon, Northwest Territories, and Nunavut are three distinct
> multipliers. Combined they probably have less amateur activity than the
> District of Columbia. They are certainly much less accessible for visitors  than
> is DC.
>
> I used to be skeptical of DC as a multiplier, thinking that the only way
> one could operate from there was if one had access to a club station at a
> (likely highly secure) government facility. But as DC has gentrified over the
> past twenty years, many people have shown this not to be the case. I have
> also  visited places in the District that seemed like they would be
> comfortable places  to operate in Rover style, at least during daylight hours.
>
> Unfortunately American politics enters this discussion.  Granting DC  the
> contest status afforded the states would cause cognitive dissonance among
> those opposed to granting DC statehood, which would in turn result in two
> liberal Democratic Senators, plus a voting House member. I suspect many of
> those  supporting it are bummed out by our political system that gives tiny
> states  (population wise) far more political representation than large states
> like  California or Texas.
>
>
> 73  -  Jim  K8MR
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest