PORTLAND, Ore — The movement to create a "Greater Idaho" is gaining some traction after five Oregon counties voted to keep the discussions going.
A representative for the grassroots group, Move Oregon's Border for a Greater Idaho, Keaton Ems, says the idea has been going on for decades, but the movement didn't officially get underway until right before the pandemic.
Last November, Jefferson and Union counties were the first to vote on moving forward with it. Now, following Tuesday's special election, voters in Malheur, Lake, Sherman, Grant and Baker counties have approved the measure that would require county commissioners to discuss joining Idaho.
The critics are of course present, making what at first appearance seem reasonable concerns. 5/19/21 Legrande Observer:
The devil is in the details. The devil is also in hard realities. Veteran Mike McCarter, president of Move Oregon’s Border, wrote an opinion piece in local papers supporting MOB, which wants to force 850,000 Oregonians to become Idahoans and force 75% of the land in Oregon into Idaho.
This fellow veteran looks at just eight of a thousand devilish details and realities that would result from MOB’s plan.
1. Snowplows. Those plows that keep our highways and freeways open are owned by Oregon. Will Oregon donate millions of dollars of plows to another state? Is Idaho going to spend millions to buy plows and pay drivers to service nearly all the snow country of Oregon, which is now largely paid for by western Oregon gas taxes? Who will keep our highways clear? MOB volunteers?
Would Oregon agree to let them go? Reasons why they might. Joining Idaho also reduce costs to the state government of Oregon. I have no doubt that those counties are a net drain, having no big tech companies, multimillionaires, but lots of poor people.
Without those narrow-minded conservatives, the progressive majority would have no opposition to their dream list (some of which will be found unconstitutional, but spending a few million dollars per case to virtue signal is a reasonable state expense):
1. Handgun ban.
2. Assault weapon and large capacity magazine ban (except for authorized members of social advocacy groups such as Antifa and BLM).
3. Legal sales of all hard drugs. Possession is already lawful, but shouldn't BIPOC teenagers have a chance to make something more than "chump change"?
4. Improved social equity by assessing a state income tax of 100% on incomes above $1 million and dramatically higher taxes on "property" which is largely owned by beneficiaries of "white privilege."
5. Following California's lead and aiming for prohibition on gasoline engine cars sales.
6. Require all new houses to be entirely solar powered. (Yes, it is Oregon, so you will need vast amounts of battery storage to get through an Astoria winter.)
7. Prohibiting schools (public or private) teaching American history outside the 1619 Project.
Many of these objections can be met with, "So, Move. The Loyalists moved to Nova Scotia and surrounding area after the other 13 colonies became independent, why should this situation work differently? And had John Tyler been a bit more involved in the minutia in the Dorr Rebellion, we might have precedent for how to handle such matters ("I will support the government in power" is tremendously Delphic in its ambuguity and potential for a shooting war in the smallest state of the union).
ReplyDeleteI get why parts of Oregon want to leave.
ReplyDeleteHow do people in Idaho feel about this? Mr. Cramer has been in Idaho for what... decades now?
I would welcome them. Those with whom I have had contact are very Idaho in their sentiments. They would probably prosper under a less abusive state government.
ReplyDelete