This would make sense, but perhaps not in the way you intended 
The PSF has two main roles (also see the PSF 1023 application form):
- Maintaining and protecting the IP rights in the CPython distribution and Python trademarks, so that it can create freely available CPython distributions and documentation.
- Running conferences (PyCon US) for the benefit of the Python community, but also as a source for generating profit which can then be disbursed to the community in form of grants
The second part is great when it works well, but given that PyCon US plays a major role in the PSF balance sheet, also a major risk, which could affect the first part. If the PSF were to go bankrupt, the IP in CPython and the Python trademarks would be lost.
A split into an organization which runs PyCon US and one which maintains the IP rights could help remove this risk, since the first part requires a lot less effort and financial investment, compared to the second part.
However, the split has other effects as well: Control over how PyCon US is run would be left to the organization B running PyCon US and the “IP rights PSF” organization A would likely not have much influence anymore. Even if B were to be set up as an org 100% owned by A, A would only have shareholder rights.
So it’s a path that would need careful thinking to pursue.