Moving Conservative Oregon Counties to Idaho Unlikely, Not Impossible

• Seven rural counties in Oregon have voted to move to conservative Idaho.
• Experts told insiders that the secessionist effort is unlikely but not impossible.
• “I don’t think the map of the United States will look the same in 2050,” said one expert.
• Check out Insider’s business page for more stories.

The goal of the Greater Idaho movement is simple: to move Idaho’s border to encompass most of rural Oregon (and eventually parts of northern California) – but the chances of success are extremely slim.

The movement has picked up speed lately as seven counties have now voted to consider or pursue the move. Organizers say Idaho’s conservative values ​​are more in line with rural Oregon; They argue that conservatives are not adequately represented in government in the solid blue state.

But Oregon and Idaho state legislatures and the US Congress would have to approve the move, and it is not entirely clear why either of the three parties would do so.

However, experts told insiders that the effort is nowhere near impossible and that the idea of ​​moving state borders is not unprecedented. One expert said a change in the physical condition of the United States was not only possible, but almost inevitable.

“I don’t think the map of the United States will look the same in 2050,” said Richard Kreitner, author of Break It Up: Secession, Division, and the Secret History of America’s Imperfect Union.

Moving state lines isn’t unprecedented, but Greater Idaho is one of a kind

There are several examples of the division of states in American history.

Before North Dakota and South Dakota were founded in 1889, there was the Dakota Territory. West Virginia was founded in 1861 when it separated from Confederate Virginia. Maine became a state in 1820 after it voted to secede from Massachusetts. And Kentucky broke off from Virginia in 1792 and became the 15th state.

But while moving state lines is not uncommon, the efforts of the Greater Idaho Movement stand out for several reasons.

Supporters of President Donald Trump attend a “Stop The Steal” rally at the Oregon State Capitol to protest the election results on Saturday, November 14, 2020, in Salem, Ore.

AP Photo / Paula Bronstein

First, experts told Insider they were unaware of an example where a large part of a state dropped out to join another state instead of creating a new one.

Second, previous examples of government secessionist movements typically address a clearly defined problem.

In the case of Greater Idaho, there is not a single, well-defined problem that can be solved by secession. Reasons for the split, according to the movement’s website, are: American values, law and order, lower taxes, security, a less regulated economy and the feeling of being represented in the state government.

Movement leaders previously told Insider’s Sarah Al-Arshani that Sarah Al-Arshani Idaho’s values ​​are more in line with rural Oregon values ​​and that they want to be better represented in state government. But in earlier stories about state separation, the reasons were more specific.

When Kentucky separated from Virginia in 1792, it was mainly because the people living there believed the state government was not doing enough to clean up the land of the Native American people, who understandably refused to leave. Although the reason was immoral, it provided clear motivation for people to form their own state that would better protect their interests.

As for secessionist movements today, including efforts in California and Texas to break away and create their own countries, Kreitner said there is nothing like it, at least not yet.

“I think there was a bit of looking into actual problems to capture that feeling, but mostly it was useless,” he said.

Changing the US map could be a good thing as “most state borders are pretty arbitrary”

But that is not to say that all secessionist movements are equally far-fetched, and Kreitner does not believe that Americans should “hang our pearls” on the Greater Idaho movement. In fact, he said, rethinking state borders might be a good thing.

“Most state borders are pretty arbitrary, especially in the west, where they are often right-angled,” said Kreitner. “These are not meaningful distinctions and they should be re-examined. It could make our policies more rational.”

Frank H. Buckley, a professor at the George Mason University School of Law and author of the book “American Secession: The Looming Threat of a National Breakup,” agreed that reconsidering the American Constitution could be positive.

Buckley told Insiders that the premise of his book, which focuses on secession efforts from the United States, is that secession is “far more likely than you think and possibly not as terrible”.

This December 21, 2020, file photo, pro-Trump, and anti-mask protesters are holding a rally outside the Oregon State Capitol while lawmakers meet for an emergency meeting in Salem, Ore.

Andrew Selsky, File / AP

As for Greater Idaho, Buckley said it could be a win-win for all parties. Idaho could expand its state and with it its resources. Oregon lawmakers could benefit from the change as a kind of gerrymandering and further consolidate their party’s dominance.

“If you’re a Democratic politician in Oregon, you might think that leaving Republican voters in the state isn’t a bad idea,” he said.

Meanwhile, the proposed population shift is so small that it is unlikely to affect representation in Congress. And contrary to efforts aimed at Washington, DC statehood, the Idaho enlargement would not contribute to the US Senate.

And some rural Oregonians would likely get a government more attuned to them, which Kreitner says is becoming increasingly important after the very different government responses to the coronavirus pandemic.

As for the reorganization of state borders, Kreitner said it was not exactly clear what that would look like. A proposal known as bioregionalism suggests organizing our political, cultural, and economic systems around natural features such as mountain ranges and waterways, which would result in a more sustainable and equitable society.

Kreitner said the country’s refusal to consider the idea prevented research and development of worthwhile solutions. But as long as our current political division persists, the idea of ​​secession, either from the country or from individual states, is likely to persist.

“There is a lot of talk about dissatisfaction with current regulations in all parts of the country,” he said. “It’s too appealing given America’s history.”

Do you have a news tip? Contact this reporter at kvlamis@insider.com.