If you would like more information about what’s happening in Oregon, please FReepmail me. Please send me your name by FReepmail if you want to be on this list.
Posted on 03/18/2023 12:30:10 PM PDT by thegagline
Corey Cook still holds a fondness for her days living in Portland, where the downtown pubs and riverfront cherry blossoms made her proud to call the Rose City home during her 20s.
But as she started growing wary of the metro area’s congestion and liberal politics, she moved to the suburbs, then the exurbs, before heading east, eventually escaping Portland’s sphere of influence on the other side of the Cascade Mountains in 2017. But even here, where she now runs a Christian camp amid the foothill pines overlooking the Grande Ronde Valley, she cannot help but notice how the values of western Oregon are held over the eastern part of the state by way of laws making guns less accessible and abortions more accessible.
Unwilling to move east into Idaho, farther from her family, Ms. Cook, 52, now wonders if redrawing the state maps could instead bring Idaho’s values to her.
“Oregon is not a unified state to me anymore,” she said. “To say that I’m an Oregonian is a geographic truth, but it doesn’t really have meaning to me the way that it did before I lived in eastern Oregon.”
The broad sense of estrangement felt across rural Oregon has led conservatives in recent years to pursue a scrupulous strategy to open a theoretical escape hatch, gathering thousands of signatures for a series of ballot measures that have now passed in 11 counties. Those measures require regular meetings to discuss the idea of secession. In those places, including Union County, Ms. Cook’s new home, county commissioners in rooms adorned by Oregon flags and maps are now obligated to talk about whether it would one day make sense to be part of Idaho.
The “Greater Idaho” movement joins a long history of U.S. defection struggles. In California, for example, there have been more than 200 attempts over the years to break up the state. Greater Idaho sees its solution as more simple — a shift in an existing border that would claim the entire eastern half of Oregon without creating an entirely new state. Despite being a political long shot, the sustained and growing interest from residents in the area and attention from politicians in Idaho have illustrated how much the state is already divided in spirit.
“It’s got worse over the years,” said John Lively, a Democratic state representative who grew up in one of the counties considering the secession plan. “It’s really reflective of the divide we have in our country.”
Mr. Lively has met with Greater Idaho leaders, saying that while he does not support their effort, the movement has followed the appropriate channels and opened up an opportunity for western Oregonians to take notice of why people on the other side of the state have grown so disaffected.
Last month, taking notice of the percolating chatter on the other side of the border, Idaho’s state representatives approved a measure to initiate formal discussions with Oregon over whether and how to redraw a state boundary that spans some 300 miles. Oregon lawmakers have so far not answered the call.
To some residents in eastern Oregon, the secession movement has been cathartic, a sort of relief valve for decades of boiling frustrations with government in a region that has in the distant and not-too-distant past hosted its share of anti-government violence.
To others, the secession effort has felt quixotic, or even idiotic. Success would require passage through the state legislatures in both states and in Congress, requiring the Democrats who currently control broad political power at the Capitol in Salem, Ore., to get onboard with the idea of giving up half the state to a neighbor that does not share their values. Such a shift would leave others in the region more vulnerable, including the Klamath Tribes, where there are fears that a switch to Idaho would undermine efforts to fight for environmental protections on their ancestral lands.
A Marine Corps veteran who helps develop products for the hunting industry, Mr. Nash makes visits to the grocery store that can mean hours of serendipitous conversation with every person he sees.
Mr. Nash, 36, has watched eastern Oregon’s growing frustration with government policies that alter the region’s way of life. Limits on logging contributed to a steep decline in the sprawling timber industry, leading to mill closures and mass layoffs. “Eastern Oregon largely gets treated as western Oregon’s playground,” he said.
Mr. Nash plans to vote to advance the secession debate, though he does not support actual implementation. He fears that a switch to Idaho would bring its own set of complications.
“I don’t think there is a historical precedent to say ‘this is going to work,’” Mr. Nash said. “I’d just rather we figure out how to restore Oregon to a better place.”
Redrawing the map would require much more than fresh cartography. Logistical challenges grow more thorny with each new question: Would people in eastern Oregon be ready to embrace a sales tax? How would Idaho, which bans legal marijuana, manage eastern Oregon’s thriving weed industry? How would the states transition eastern Oregon’s state employees, with some benefits already earned, to a new retirement system with different rules and compensation?
Barbara Dee Ehardt, an Idaho Republican state representative who sponsored a resolution to invite cross-state talks, said she saw benefits for conservatives in Idaho. Among them, she said, a border shifting westward would move legal marijuana and legal abortions farther from the reach of people in her state.
Leading the Greater Idaho movement is Mike McCarter, 75, a resident of La Pine worked for 30 years in the state’s nursery industry and currently teaches classes on concealed handguns and shooting, and recently acquired an Idaho flag for his home.
Mr. McCarter said in an interview that in the process of spreading his message, he has spoken with the People’s Rights group, which is led by Ammon Bundy. In 2016, Mr. Bundy started an armed takeover of a wildlife refuge in Harney County, which has voted to join the Oregon secession movement.
But Mr. McCarter said that he does not align with the group’s tactics, adding that he wants his effort to provide an outlet for people to express their frustrations through peaceful means.
“We are not looking at the civil disobedience way,” he said.
State boundaries, he argued, were set with the idea of organizing like-minded people and can be adjusted to conform with evolving communities, as when divisions between the eastern and western parts of Virginia led to the creation of West Virginia.
“Even though people can say the odds are still way against it — and they probably are — it’s still bringing the issue to the surface,” Mr. McCarter said.
On their own, the county commissioners have little power to alter Oregon’s state lines, but supporters of the Greater Idaho movement have continued to put pressure on them, in hopes they will put pressure on state lawmakers. At the meeting last month, the activists urged the commissioners to formally notify their state lawmakers that local citizens had voted to engage in the idea.
The commissioners agreed, approving the message unanimously.
“I do share the frustrations of the people that are wanting to do it,” Donna Beverage, one of the commissioners, said after the meeting. “I just don’t know how difficult it is going to be. But at the same time, when people are frustrated, we can fight for change.”
It would be a matter for the states involved, obviously.
Where does the federal government have any say? I’m sure any new states requires ratification or whatever.
Besides, it’s CalvinBall all the way down anyway. Why does everyone insist on dotting all the i’s and crossing all the t’s at this point? Why should I care 12 states over what they do in Oregon anyway? Let them decide.
Interesting you mention that, prior to World War II, Democracy was defined as “Rule by the masses. Attitude toward property communistic. Results in license, anarchy, discontent. Mobocracy”.
After World War II, the popular definition was changed to this vague, anodyne, freedom sounding boilerplate. The official line on AFRTS public service slots was that only Democracy could keep a country free of despotism or dictators, it wouldn’t be possible for totalitarianism, the people wouldn’t never allow it.
Some of the old broadcasts haven’t aged very well at all.
Democracy, like the German “Democratic” Republic. Or The “Democratic” Peoples Republic of Korea.
The rural/urban divide isn’t just in Oregon.
Take: Georgia, Illinois, NY, Michigan, Wisconsin, Colorado, Arizona, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio, Washington and coming soon….South Carolina and Tennessee
I would say the threshold is WWI, the blurring of the distinction rapidly picked up pace during and after WWII.
Democrats won't initially like this idea any more than they like Greater Idaho, because as mentioned above they are not interested in good government - they desire to rule over the peasants. But the idea of a State of Chicago having two new Democrat Senators and more House seats than the remaining State of Illinois might tempt some of them to at least explore the idea.
They don't care. People who don't agree with progressives are not considered deserving of basic civil rights. The constant bleating of "Our Democracy" means that to their majority absolutely everything is up for grabs including the property, the wealth, and the children of anyone outside it - and their civil rights as well, which is why the Founders rejected democracy and opted for a republic. The proggies will turn dissident or disobedient areas into barbed-wire prison camps before they'll allow them freedom.
Well, I won’t quibble over exact time frame. The point I was making is the absolute sea change in definitions. Sound familiar?
Even the word itself “Democracy” is not mentioned, not even once, in the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution nor the Bill of Rights. There’s a reason for that, and it is because the government was setup the way it was precisely to try and prevent what is happening now.
Yes, but crazy is more prevalent in the urban areas, not just per capita. Numerous experiments with lab animals has shown things get . . . weird .. like what we’re seeing now, when people are stacked up too tightly.
Agree!
State Level Electoral College.
Each county gets 3 votes.
Your guy/gal sweeps with more than 66% they get all 3
50.1 to 65.9…..your guy/gal gets 2 votes, loser gets 1. That way they can’t bitch about it not being overwhelming.
I doubt you’d have a Democrat Governor, Lt Gov, SecState, AG in any but 3 or 4 states.
And no amount of fraud in the cities or Democrat areas could overcome that
I like it but Reynolds vs Sims would probably get in the way.
I see your point.
It still might work as they’ll be fewer “districts”.
However, in light of that I wonder how the NC case would be affected. If they win then no one but the legislature can make the rules.
I think it’s every state in the union.
Where does the federal government have any say?
Something like that was common earlier. Many state legislatures apportioned the seats according to counties. The Supreme Court did away with it in the 1960s. Baker v. Carr. “One Man One Vote.”
The Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, a part of the Bill of Rights, was ratified on December 15, 1791. It expresses the principle of federalism, also known as states’ rights, by stating that the federal government has only those powers delegated to it by the Constitution, and that all other powers not forbidden to the states by the Constitution are reserved to each state.
************************************************************
Aggressive and fastidious enforcement of the 10th Ammendment upon the federal government by the states would, long term, and in just this mans opinion, be better for America.
If you would like more information about what’s happening in Oregon, please FReepmail me. Please send me your name by FReepmail if you want to be on this list.
The Supreme Court did away with it in the 1960s. Baker v. Carr. “One Man One Vote.”
Question: If it’s one man, one vote, then why do we still have the Electoral College on the federal level?
That decision should be the answer to the Left’s dream of the popular vote. Damn near every law, at every level is just a copy of one above it. Some charges require a certain “level of jurisdiction” while others do not.
Georgia has Simple Battery(state charge). Atlanta has Disorderly Conduct(city charge) that has the same exact criminal elements.
So, why not implement an Electoral College procedure just like the ones used for electing the President? The President is the Chief Executive of the USA. A Governor is a Chief Executive of their respective state.
The case that the NC legislature has before SCOTUS, if I’m getting it right, exactly challenges the Baker decision. The Constitution states that the state legislatures make the rules. In NC, the legislature made the rules. Democrats challenged the rules and went to court, where the liberals on the state supreme court sided with the Left, citing the typical discrimination crap. But, if the NC Legislature wins and SCOTUS rules according to what’s written in the Constitution, then neither the courts nor Elias can ever file a lawsuit again, unless they can prove violations of the Voting Rights Act, which I don’t think is easy to do these days.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.