Greater Idaho Movement: No chance

Well, it beats the TEXIT Movement whose followers seek to make Texas its own country

The Greater Idaho Movement, created by rural organizers in Oregon, is an attempt by some Oregonians to have more than 18 of its counties join Idaho.


Some living in the thinly populated areas of the state believe Oregon officials are too focused on urban issues and not committed enough to rural concerns.

Although rural Oregon’s land area comprises over 70 percent of the state, its residents are far outnumbered by folks living in Oregon’s population centers. As a result, many rural Oregonians insist they have no say in state politics and believe their ideals and priorities are more closely aligned with Idaho’s.

“We want out from underneath Oregon’s governance and go underneath Idaho’s governance, which we tend to match up better with, as far as our values go,” the group’s president, Mike McCarter, told Business Insider.

“Now for 20 years-plus we’ve been trying to change the makeup and improve the makeup of the Oregon Legislature, but when you haven’t got the vote, there’s not much you can do about it.”

Is the movement gaining traction?
Seven rural Oregon counties have voted in favor of becoming part of Idaho, and organizers of the Greater Idaho movement say more counties could soon have the option on the ballot. However, the movement’s leaders understand the legislative obstacles to reaching their objective and realize such an endeavor, should it ever come to fruition, will take at least four years of small, consistent wins.

How many Oregon counties would be impacted?
Greater Idaho Movement’s plan calls for 18 Oregon counties to fully become part of Idaho with a split of 3 others. Such a massive land shift would convert 860,000 people, 21 percent of Oregon’s population, to Idahoans.

“You add those rural counties and that area to Idaho’s current area, it would make Idaho the third-largest state in the union after Alaska and Texas,” McCarter said.

Political party fallout?
Most of Oregon’s population lives in urban centers and heavily lean Democratic, while people in the state’s rural areas are predominantly Republican.

“Seventy-eight percent of the people are in the urban area, more or less in the Willamette Valley in Portland. They control the Legislature completely. They have a supermajority. That’s why they don’t care to listen to those representatives from central or eastern Oregon.”

“They’re dealing with issues around urban folks, and their social agenda is to be a sanctuary state to allow the homeless people to come in, to reduce the laws on drugs, to remove or lessen than the budget for police officers,” McCarter said.

Should Greater Idaho Movement’s plan be implemented, Oregon, which has 5 Members in the House of Representatives and 7 electoral votes, would likely lose two in each category to Idaho. The result would produce a 4-seat net gain for Republicans in the U.S. House and an easy 4 electoral vote swing for the same party.

“We’re not saying that that is wrong. We don’t agree with it, but they’re dealing with those issues, and those aren’t the issues that we have. Rural Oregon is traditional, has traditional values. We’re more into our communities, more into our schools, more into supporting law enforcement. Right is right, and wrong is wrong,” he added.

So, he is saying Oregon’s policies are wrong?

Make no mistake about their intentions, the Greater Idaho Movement is partially, if not mostly, fueled by the same urban vs rural political divide that’s plaguing the entire country.  

That animosity exists on both sides and can be found in most states, but we can’t reconfigure the entire country, can we?

McCarter even went as far as accusing state officials living in Oregon’s ‘concrete jungles’ of ‘taxation without representation’ even though rural Oregonians have full voting rights and enjoy the same federal rights, freedoms, and privileges as all Americans.

January 6 Capitol insurrection
Greater Idaho Movement claims its Facebook page was labeled pro-insurrectionist and subsequently removed by the social media giant, presumably during or not long after the melee.

Did the group express treasonous views, incite violence or float lies?

It would be very disconcerting if they said something dangerous enough to deservedly warrant a page ban.

“When Facebook removed a lot of people from Facebook” after the riot, “we were one of them who lost our page, and we were not talking insurrection or anything,” McCarter said. “We’re strictly by the book.”

Changing the Oregon/Idaho border would require the approval of both state legislatures and the U.S. Congress.

While this seems like a decent idea, there are also liberal, densely-populated areas at the mercy of rural-dominated states that lean conservative.

Would Indiana cede its liberal 8th Congressional District to Illinois? And would conservative Missouri allow Metropolitan St. Louis to join liberal Illinois?

The Greater Idaho Movement is unlikely to happen due to the outcry it would provoke.

Other counties across the country, urban, rural, liberal and conservative, would want to follow suit.

Maybe, just maybe, a compromise could be reached if a similar push by urban liberals was being considered somewhere else.

Please share your thoughts on the Greater Idaho Movement.

Source: Business Insider