A renewed push for eastern Oregon to break away from the state and join Idaho is gaining traction, with supporters arguing that their conservative values align more closely with Idaho’s political landscape than with the policies of Oregon’s urban centers.
The “Greater Idaho” movement, which has been in discussion for several years, seeks to redraw state lines to transfer nearly a dozen rural Oregon counties into Idaho’s jurisdiction. Advocates of the effort contend that the policies coming out of Oregon’s capital, Salem, are dictated by more liberal metropolitan areas, particularly Portland, and do not reflect the needs of conservative, rural communities.
Recent votes in several counties have shown increasing support for exploring the feasibility of the move, with some local leaders encouraging state lawmakers to engage in discussions with Idaho officials. The proposal, however, faces significant legal and logistical hurdles, as altering state boundaries would require approval from both state legislatures and Congress.
Opponents argue that the movement is impractical and unlikely to succeed, citing the complex legal framework required to modify state borders. They also warn of economic consequences, including potential disruptions in taxation and public services for both Oregon and Idaho.
Despite the challenges, backers of the proposal remain committed to the cause, viewing it as part of a broader push for rural representation and policy autonomy. While political secession efforts in the U.S. have historically met mixed results, the growing interest in eastern Oregon’s realignment with Idaho signals continued frustration over ideological divides between urban and rural communities.
State lawmakers from both Oregon and Idaho have yet to formally engage in negotiations, but the persistence of the Greater Idaho movement suggests the debate over state boundaries and political representation is far from over.