Five Oregon Counties vote to Join Idaho

[Galloism]

If they were seriously bothered by politicians trying to pass legislation with tricks like that, they wouldn't want to go to a red state. Those counties voted for Trump. They're fine with rejecting elections results. Don't act like they're bothered by tyranny.

Well, political hypocrisy isn't new of course.

Hell, "emergency" bills are done by both sides in various states.

But in this case, the legislature was explicitly attempting to do an end-run around the right of the people as enshrined in the constitution of the state, and that's what led to this standoff.

[Bear Stearns]

If they were seriously bothered by politicians trying to pass legislation with tricks like that, they wouldn't want to go to a red state. Those counties voted for Trump. They're fine with rejecting elections results. Don't act like they're bothered by tyranny.

What is your actual problem against letting these people join Idaho? It'd have zero impact on the senate, and would only marginally impact the house. Democrats in Oregon get to increase their majority and Republicans in Idaho get to increase theirs. Everyone wins.

[Punished UMN]

Of course. Rural folk have to have their “values” pressed on everybody else.

Mr. Black Forrest, you don't understand, when I agreed to this """democracy""" I never thought I'd be living in a urbanized society! what, am I supposed to give up the rightful power of my land holdings just because some serfs ran off to the cities and created "industrialism"?

Nobody alive agreed to this particular form of democracy. Oregon's constitution was ratified in 1859.

[Galloism]

If they were seriously bothered by politicians trying to pass legislation with tricks like that, they wouldn't want to go to a red state. Those counties voted for Trump. They're fine with rejecting elections results. Don't act like they're bothered by tyranny.

What is your actual problem against letting these people join Idaho? It'd have zero impact on the senate, and would only marginally impact the house. Democrats in Oregon get to increase their majority and Republicans in Idaho get to increase theirs. Everyone wins.

Well, except for republicans still in Oregon and democrats in Idaho.

[Deacarsia]

I strongly support this idea.

[Bear Stearns]

In the long run people would be happier with this arrangement. It would cool partisan tensions.

People redrawing state lines would open endless arguments about which counties go where and whether blue cities should become their own states. It would massively increase partisan tensions.

The point of self-determination is that people can have these arguments.

People don't want to be controlled by their opposition. And yes, blue cities (probably just the larger ones) could easily be states in their own right.

[Bear Stearns]

What is your actual problem against letting these people join Idaho? It'd have zero impact on the senate, and would only marginally impact the house. Democrats in Oregon get to increase their majority and Republicans in Idaho get to increase theirs. Everyone wins.

Well, except for republicans still in Oregon and democrats in Idaho.

They'd still have options (countersecession, voting against this, etc.) so I don't see what the problem is.

[Proctopeo]

If they were seriously bothered by politicians trying to pass legislation with tricks like that, they wouldn't want to go to a red state. Those counties voted for Trump. They're fine with rejecting elections results. Don't act like they're bothered by tyranny.

What is your actual problem against letting these people join Idaho? It'd have zero impact on the senate, and would only marginally impact the house. Democrats in Oregon get to increase their majority and Republicans in Idaho get to increase theirs. Everyone wins.

Yeah, but Oregon would have fewer people to never reinvest tax money to. And that's terrible.

[Bear Stearns]

Yes it should be allowed. It’s self determination. Now will it happen is another matter entirely

You mean like white only states? Pass.

I mean what would be so bad about that? People who want diversity wouldn't want to live in a state that is 95%+ white conservatives, and those same whites wouldn't want to live in a diverse area. What is the benefit of forcing them together other than one group wanting to dominate the other?

[Bear Stearns]

What is your actual problem against letting these people join Idaho? It'd have zero impact on the senate, and would only marginally impact the house. Democrats in Oregon get to increase their majority and Republicans in Idaho get to increase theirs. Everyone wins.

Yeah, but Oregon would have fewer people to never reinvest tax money to. And that's terrible.

Well if Oregon doesn't want these people to support secession, maybe they should throw them a bone every once in awhile.

I don't see why this has to be so complicated. Czechoslovakia split apart without bloodshed.

[Shofercia]

If you're perpetually losing elections, why wouldn't you want to switch states?

Move instead of changing borders.

But then you're saying that state borders are sacrosanct. What happened to land and cattle don't vote?

The majority of people in these counties are voting for the change in borders though. Surely majority rules (in this specific case)? Also, it seems excessively unreasonable to expect that the majority of people in a region are just going to up sticks and leave if they don't like the way things are run... in their own home area.

Its nothing more than an advisory referendum held during an election with usually the lowest turnout that Salem is never going to even bring up for debate. The only other thing on the ballot was likely school board.

I'm fairly certain that neither Republicans, nor Democrats, would be up in arms over a school board election. Perhaps it comes from years, even decades of being oppressed by unnecessary taxation and regulations.

If they aren't even going to get a committee (assuming that's true), why would you care? Let them be.

I mean that’s pretty easy, it’s because this shit is a predecessor to rebellion and separatist terrorism, and eventually to state absence and de facto paramilitary control of large areas of the nation (as evidenced by the demonstration/siege-cum-proto-rebellion that took place there before this)

They're separating from the US by remaining in the US? Logic!

Republicans don't give a darn about about the planet and if they want to act like children and grandstand instead of worrying about if their children know about birds and fish other than from a book or natural beauty from a Bob Ross painting the heck with them.

No one said they were sacrosanct but its not going to be changed over we don't like the fact that we lose elections and don't get more representation than our population allows.

You're a confusing individual. If you dislike the Republicans so much why not let them leave? It sounds like you just want to exert control over them. Also they dont want to leave because they lost, they're leaving because they aren't represented in their state.

Also how can you demand the Republicans "respect the vote" while you refuse to respect the vote of the Republican counties that wished to leave?

Just going to drop this here: viewtopic.php?p=36715870#p36715870

[Wolfsdale]

If they were seriously bothered by politicians trying to pass legislation with tricks like that, they wouldn't want to go to a red state. Those counties voted for Trump. They're fine with rejecting elections results. Don't act like they're bothered by tyranny.

What is your actual problem against letting these people join Idaho? It'd have zero impact on the senate, and would only marginally impact the house. Democrats in Oregon get to increase their majority and Republicans in Idaho get to increase theirs. Everyone wins.

You don't get it. It's republicans and rural people proposing it ergo it's bad, regardless of actual arguments and whether it makes sense or not. Maybe if it was democrat's proposal it would have went through, but though luck.

[Shofercia]

In the long run people would be happier with this arrangement. It would cool partisan tensions.

People redrawing state lines would open endless arguments about which counties go where and whether blue cities should become their own states. It would massively increase partisan tensions.

How would making the majority of people happier increase partisan tensions?

What is your actual problem against letting these people join Idaho? It'd have zero impact on the senate, and would only marginally impact the house. Democrats in Oregon get to increase their majority and Republicans in Idaho get to increase theirs. Everyone wins.

Yeah, but Oregon would have fewer people to never reinvest tax money to. And that's terrible.

They could always invest in California's High Speed Rail scam, now connecting the vital hubs of Bakersfield and Merced!

[Senkaku]

Czechoslovakia split apart without bloodshed.

now there's something to aspire to

People redrawing state lines would open endless arguments about which counties go where and whether blue cities should become their own states. It would massively increase partisan tensions.

How would making the majority of people happier increase partisan tensions?

Making the majority of voters in those counties happier =/= making the majority of people happier, since partisan tensions are not exclusive to or defined by the happenings in Eastern OR

I don't think we can conclusively say it would make things worse, but it's much easier to see how it could make things worse than how it could make things better, particularly on a national level (and frankly even at the local level; as I said, I don't think this will suddenly remove the animosity in the area, it'll just align it with new administrative boundaries)

[Thermodolia]

Mr. Black Forrest, you don't understand, when I agreed to this """democracy""" I never thought I'd be living in a urbanized society! what, am I supposed to give up the rightful power of my land holdings just because some serfs ran off to the cities and created "industrialism"?

Nobody alive agreed to this particular form of democracy. Oregon's constitution was ratified in 1859.

We should be following Tommy J and his idea that constitutions need to be redone every 20 years

[The Lone Alliance]

If they were seriously bothered by politicians trying to pass legislation with tricks like that, they wouldn't want to go to a red state. Those counties voted for Trump. They're fine with rejecting elections results. Don't act like they're bothered by tyranny.

Well, political hypocrisy isn't new of course.

Hell, "emergency" bills are done by both sides in various states.

But in this case, the legislature was explicitly attempting to do an end-run around the right of the people as enshrined in the constitution of the state, and that's what led to this standoff.

Let's not forget all those unconstitutional Morality bills Red States passed in the past few years that served no purpose but to piss off the Democrats inside those states.

I'm fairly certain that neither Republicans, nor Democrats, would be up in arms over a school board election.

You'd be surprised, in the past year there were School Board Elections that became hot topics for the right because the school boards started pushing Critical Race Theory.

Perhaps it comes from years, even decades of being oppressed by unnecessary taxation and regulations.

But largely it was that in this case.

[San Lumen]

Nobody alive agreed to this particular form of democracy. Oregon's constitution was ratified in 1859.

We should be following Tommy J and his idea that constitutions need to be redone every 20 years

Many states are required to have referendums on whether to have a constitutional convention every so often.

[Constaniana]

I'm not surprised. Having once lived in Malheur County for a short while, one can quickly see they're far more similar to the people east of the Snake River rather than those on the west coast. Towns there are much better connected to Boise than Salem. There's a reason everyone there roots for Boise State rather than the University of Oregon.

Boise is a very blue city.

I wound up living on the outskirts of Boise for about 6 months. While I wasn't exactly involved in local politics, I know enough to confidently say it's not "very blue". Sure the mayor is a Democrat I guess, but it's hardly San Francisco II. Furthermore, Ada County and pretty much everything else around Boise, and most of the rest of the state are rather red, which is why Republicans have a firm grasp on the state government.

[The Lone Alliance]

Boise is a very blue city.

I wound up living on the outskirts of Boise for about 6 months. While I wasn't exactly involved in local politics, I know enough to confidently say it's not "very blue". Sure the mayor is a Democrat I guess, but it's hardly San Francisco II. Furthermore, Ada County and pretty much everything else around Boise, and most of the rest of the state are rather red, which is why Republicans have a firm grasp on the state government.

There's a difference between being a Blue City and being whatever Portland and San Francisco are.

There's blue, and then there's emitting Cherenkov radiation.

[Dresderstan]

Best part, Oregon keeps all of the places it actually cares about.

Utter nonsense. One county in their proposal Wallowa which borders Washington and Idaho rejected a referendum on this last year.

What happened to your idea of just propose the same referendum again later on, since you just love to mention that in Maine?

[Chan Island]

You know, reading through this thread, I'm not actually all that opposed to these counties joining Idaho. All those straight line boundaries in the west were drawn up hundreds of years ago, when there was almost nobody out there, and times have since changed.

Can't say I care for the specific qualms these people are bringing up (oh noes, Oregon is raising taxes on lumber while the timber industry is making record profits! The horror?), but this is a feelings over facts thing. If the people in these counties feel like they should belong to Idaho and not to Oregon, then that is their right. And all the arguments people are using to oppose this all seem nonsensical.

[Northern Socialist Council Republics]

And they do have a point, if a majority of voters in a county want to change then why should they be blocked from doing so?

Extend that line of reasoning a bit and you see how absurd it is: If the majority of voters in a household want to join a different county then why should they be blocked from doing so?

The logical end result of the principle of self-determination is anarchy. If you accept that people have a right to freely choose which government has authority over them, then what that actually means is that governments have no authority over individuals.

Adjustments of borders between states should not happen except with the approval of both of the state’s involved and the national government.

[San Lumen]

And they do have a point, if a majority of voters in a county want to change then why should they be blocked from doing so?

Extend that line of reasoning a bit and you see how absurd it is: If the majority of voters in a household want to join a different county then why should they be blocked from doing so?

The logical end result of the principle of self-determination is anarchy. If you accept that people have a right to freely choose which government has authority over them, then what that actually means is that governments have no authority over individuals.

Adjustments of borders between states should not happen except with the approval of both of the state’s involved and the national government.

You do need the approval of both states and the national government. This will go nowhere as the Oregon legislature won’t even give it a committee hearing.

[Panslavicland]

While I sympathize, I think this would only result in retaliatory measures where liberal areas in conservative states do the same thing and as a result nothing is solved in the end. A better solution would be to introduce the electoral college to statewide elections, so that rural counties gain the same level of increased influence that rural states now have in federal elections.

[Vassenor]

While I sympathize, I think this would only result in retaliatory measures where liberal areas in conservative states do the same thing and as a result nothing is solved in the end. A better solution would be to introduce the electoral college to statewide elections, so that rural counties gain the same level of increased influence that rural states now have in federal elections.

But why do rural areas need increased influence?