Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Five Oregon counties vote to leave state, create 'Greater Idaho'

upi.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 673 posts

Re: Five Oregon counties vote to leave state, create 'Greater Idaho'

#381

Post by vineyardmike »

URSpider94 wrote: post #85
mjevans wrote: post #35

Given the article's mention of Rural vs Urban I lean towards the belief that this is driven by a sense of both conservative values in government and probably a lack of understanding in how the government of the people serves the people. More precisely how taxes and math work. The GAO and similar offices should do a better job of preparing reports on where every collected tax dollar is being spent; both in the physica…

I would love to see the data, but from the data I have seen, the data conflict with the popular (populist) narrative. A lot of people in America seem to believe that the hardworking "real Americans" in the middle of the country are subsidizing the poorly-run coastal liberal enclaves. In reality, the money almost always flows in the other direction; taxpayers in cities are subsidizing the rural-dwellers. This has noth…

I drove through a few of the counties (eg. baker) mentioned in the article to visit a dog breeder, and the breeder had (nearly) her own highway exit. Complete with 2 overpasses. Must cost millions to build and maintain.

Her house was the only one visible for as far as you could see from that exit. All i could think about was how much better her life was for that exit and how all her total tax income forever could never ever come close to covering the costs society bore to build that exit.

I have always lived in very liberal, expensive, coastal cities and have always heard talking points about waste on welfare to cover poor inner-city americans (typically by rural/suburban conservatives), and all i could think was how backwards this was, and how many families could be fed by the cost of this one exit ramp.

Does this mean that society shouldn't build that ramp? I don't know because rural farmland obviously needs to access the rest of society (to ship food), and everyone sorta deserves to access the road system

Re: Five Oregon counties vote to leave state, create 'Greater Idaho'

#382

Post by nickff »

icedistilled wrote: post #329
bsder wrote: post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see why Oregon would object unless there is some industry out there that is paying megabucks in taxes. Dumping a bunch of people sucking down more money than they pay seems like a win for Oregon. Idaho, on the other hand, might object. That would be comedy gold. "We secede." "Congratulations! Good luck finding somebody who wants you, though."

It sets a bad precedent. Any county can just vote to break off into another state due to political reasons or to form their own state? Either one party will use that to their advantage and disallow the other party from doing the same, or every state will devolve into fragments. Why stop at counties? Why can't zip codes choose the grouping that best represents them too?

I fail to see how this would be a 'bad precedent' or 'problem'. Why is keeping arbitrary borders established over a hundred years ago more important than better representation and sortition?

Re: Five Oregon counties vote to leave state, create 'Greater Idaho'

#383

Post by chrononaut »

akomtu wrote: post #181
GongOfFour wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here is the website for one of the groups pushing for this: https://www.greateridaho.org/ Taxes are just one part of this. They list these other issues of concern: > 1. American Values: Oregon will continue to violate more and more American values and American freedoms because normal rural Americans are outnumbered in Oregon. Not in Idaho. Addicts will be attracted to Oregon from all over the world by the 2020 drug d…

Looks like it's the old dispute about 2A and I kind of understand them. Last time I heard, Oregon voted to outlaw mags with more than 10 bullets. Rural folks have disagreed and resolved the conflict in a civil manner: by declaring that they will have different laws from the big city Oregon.

Not sure what they've done in practice here from what you wrote. Are you implying that they made a public declaration that they would simply choose to ignore such a law?

Re: Five Oregon counties vote to leave state, create 'Greater Idaho'

#384

Post by ericmay »

Pfhreak wrote: post #129
ericmay wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Idk, why not just break up Oregon a little bit? I don't have a dog in this fight, but... why are we so adamant about clinging to certain structures even if they don't work for people? You might say "but not everybody agrees with this move..." well sure but at what point do we say the will of the general population matters more without appealing to some higher authority like the U.S. to implement rules that you agree…

Because America is balanced on a knife's edge, and the Senate and Electoral college basically runs the show. If you introduce a new state that leans blue, that's two more blue senators and N more electoral college votes for a blue president. Republicans will staunchly oppose this. And vice versa. If the senate were proportional to population, and if the electoral college were likewise apportioned via popular vote, th…

You're in the wrong frame of reference here and trying to balance out some sort of America that I think is likely to not exist all that long.

The senate thing though wouldn't be relevant based on what this article is saying. Oregon would have 2 senators as it does now, Idaho would have 2 as well. Potentially could have an effect on the house though but that depends on the population demographics.

> If the senate were proportional to population, and if the electoral college were likewise apportioned via popular vote, then maybe you could be more flexible with state boundaries.

Well no I don't think that would change much. But I also view the senate as it currently exists as good. Frankly, legislation was intended to be difficult to pass - it should be even more difficult to pass. If something doesn't have broad consensus then getting a slight majority and ramming it down the other side's throat (why are there only two sides anyway) is a lightning rod for partisanship.

But also, why would there be states in a hundred or two hundred years? Maybe nuclear weapons will keep the nation state together like it has Russia. Idk.

Re: Five Oregon counties vote to leave state, create 'Greater Idaho'

#385

Post by lainga »

nickff wrote: post #382
icedistilled wrote: post #329

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sets a bad precedent. Any county can just vote to break off into another state due to political reasons or to form their own state? Either one party will use that to their advantage and disallow the other party from doing the same, or every state will devolve into fragments. Why stop at counties? Why can't zip codes choose the grouping that best represents them too?

I fail to see how this would be a 'bad precedent' or 'problem'. Why is keeping arbitrary borders established over a hundred years ago more important than better representation and sortition?

The balance of seats in the Senate

Re: Five Oregon counties vote to leave state, create 'Greater Idaho'

#386

Post by mrcartmenez »

briefcomment wrote: post #332
thoughtstheseus wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like a suburb. The real inefficient structures.

In what suburb do you have only two neighbors within walking distance?

Does America have a concept of walking distance?

Re: Five Oregon counties vote to leave state, create 'Greater Idaho'

#387

Post by ghaff »

edoceo wrote: post #306
ghaff wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It depends on your definitions. A lot of people would object to defining urban as encompassing having to drive anywhere except to connect to immediate neighbors. I can basically go to my two immediate neighbors. Otherwise I have to get in a car. Is that urban?

Rural is defined in USA here: https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/rural-economy-population/rur...

So that basically says that essentially no one in the state of MA is rural and that almost no one in the state of CA is rural. Which probably doesn't correspond to how average people think about rural vs. urban. So the fact that I can look off my back deck and see nothing but trees is a reasonable urban environment.

Re: Five Oregon counties vote to leave state, create 'Greater Idaho'

#388

Post by [deleted] »

fyijbxmuyidudm wrote: post #174
schaefer wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can I just say, for me the use of the term "illegals" under the section of Law and Order comes across as a dehumanizing slur. how unfortunate.

Illegals is, of course, a shorthand for illegal alien. The shorthand was created because of the regularity of having to describe such an individual. In what way could someone describe the reality of "a person who has violated international border agreements and is residing in a country in violation of the laws of that country" that you would not consider dehumanizing?

[deleted]

Re: Five Oregon counties vote to leave state, create 'Greater Idaho'

#389

Post by bpodgursky »

catgary wrote: post #252
not2b wrote: post #220

The US constitution requires that, for this to happen, Congress, the Oregon legislature, and the Idaho legislature must all agree. There's no provision that it is a matter that local country residents get to decide.

Would Oregon necessarily be against this? This seems like a great way to (a) get rid of nut jobs from the state legislature, and (b) get rid of a bunch of counties that sinkholes (financially speaking).

Honestly I see this failing in Oregon not because anyone is particularly against it, but because the Republicans in the state legislature have no power and the issue would never be brought to the floor.

Re: Five Oregon counties vote to leave state, create 'Greater Idaho'

#390

Post by christophilus »

asdff wrote: post #233
ilamont wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another weird border situation played out in the "Oblong" where a botched Colonial land survey created a kind of no-man's land between New York State, Connecticut, and the southwest corner of Massachusetts. How it got resolved related to an utterly bizarre incident in the 1850s. https://anchor.fm/lostmass/episodes/The-Lost-Corner-AKA-Hell...

Michigan and Ohio once went to war over Toledo.

Little known fact: the bullet holes from that skirmish is where we get the phrase “Holy Toledo”.
Post reply on HN