Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It isn't just a matter of whether or not Idaho is cool with it, though. There's several levels of government it has to work through to get approved, ending with the U.S. Congress. The last time a state had borders changed was West/Virginia during the Civil War. This state border change is never, ever going to happen.
When I said I wondered why those people don't just move to ID, what I meant is, with their complaints being the political mismatch with how OR generally votes, moving to ID would solve that issue, wouldn't it? And moving to ID means the shifting population would give ID more electoral votes in Presidential elections, and OR would have fewer. I don't see why those citizens are taking the most difficult route here.
Because this would mean that people they disagree with (say Portland) win over them, driving the other party out. Just because the "other party" is not as aggressive and is not willing to take the guns and to "restore the order," doesn't mean that they should be driven out from the land they dwell on.
So if their values are closer to the neighboring state, it's only logical to join it.
After all, that's what democratic vote VS violence is all about, isn't it?
Except they aren't being driven out. No one is making them leave or preventing them from leaving if they want. I mean, we see this debate all the time, all over the country. The phrase, "if you don't like it there, move" is a thing for a reason. I feel like the eastern Oregonians are trying to have their cake and eat it, too. If the politics are that big of an issue, they can move to a place that is a better fit. That's more reasonable than trying to move federal borders to suit their needs.
Location: East of Seattle since 1992, 615' Elevation, Zone 8b - originally from SF Bay Area
44,585 posts, read 81,206,701 times
Reputation: 57821
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lycanmaster
Some eastern Washington counties are also wanting to be part of Greater Idaho from my understanding as well.
There is also the Cascadia movement, which would include British Columbia and the states of Washington and Oregon. None of these will ever happen, it's just too much to get approved by the entities involved.
It's my understanding there's a great number of Mormons in eastern WA and OR, and Idaho has a large Mormon population (note the huge Mormon Temple when you near the DT area which dominates the skyline) so I understand what's behind it all.
I grew up in Idaho. Lots and lots of Mormons.
Are you saying the OR and WA Mormons want their land joined with ID so they can all live in a Mormon state?
Except they aren't being driven out. No one is making them leave or preventing them from leaving if they want. I mean, we see this debate all the time, all over the country. The phrase, "if you don't like it there, move" is a thing for a reason. I feel like the eastern Oregonians are trying to have their cake and eat it, too. If the politics are that big of an issue, they can move to a place that is a better fit. That's more reasonable than trying to move federal borders to suit their needs.
As cheap energy become ever more expensive energy, metropolitan populations will be moving out to farms and small towns for work. The coastal crowding in Oregon is a temporary condition. That change may still be unwelcome in rural areas, since that is also the end of corporate megafarming and other temporarily profitable business models and subsidy dumpsters.
Location: East of Seattle since 1992, 615' Elevation, Zone 8b - originally from SF Bay Area
44,585 posts, read 81,206,701 times
Reputation: 57821
Quote:
Originally Posted by GotHereQuickAsICould
I grew up in Idaho. Lots and lots of Mormons.
Are you saying the OR and WA Mormons want their land joined with ID so they can all live in a Mormon state?
I wouldn't consider this to be a Mormon thing, it's simply conservatives in liberal states, tired of being out voted by the big cities. Neither Oregon nor Washington has a significant number of Mormons.
Well.....no? I've heard that said both to Democrats in red areas and Republicans in blue areas. All the citizens in question have the ability to exercise their right to vote, we do live in the US, and there *are* blue AND red states. So they've been voting, but their political beliefs don't line up with the majority of voters in their state, so, the opposing view carries where they live. Are you saying that lobbying moving federal borders is a more reasonable move in your opinion, than relocating?
ETA: The other thing I often read in such cases, is not to move, but stand your ground, try to promote your views, and continue voting in hopes that eventually the majority will swing your way. Nothing wrong with that, either, but that's not what they're doing!
Some Northern California counties want to go as well. There's an 80 year old movement up there to create "The State of Jefferson" for rural more conservative areas to break away.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
