BLUF: The Greater Idaho movement seeks to redraw the state’s boundary with Idaho to incorporate 12 Oregon counties, but Article IV, Sect. 3 of the Constitution limits the formation of new states without the consent of all concerned states and Congress.
INTELWAR
OSINT: The Greater Idaho movement has been ongoing for years and has gained momentum as a result of the significant political divide in America, particularly in Oregon where Democrats have been pushing for liberal policies on hot-button issues such as abortion, gender-affirming care, and firearms. The movement seeks to address this divide by incorporating 12 Oregon counties into Idaho in an effort to give residents a government that will better serve their needs and values. However, the Constitution limits the ability to form new states without the consent of all concerned states and Congress, making the movement’s efforts a long-shot.
RIGHT: As a strict Libertarian Republic Constitutionalist, I firmly believe in upholding the Constitution and its limitations on the formation of new states. All parties concerned must provide their consent, and the prevailing sentiment at the Constitutional Convention was that a political society cannot be split apart against its will. The Greater Idaho movement’s efforts may be noble in their desire to address the political divide in Oregon, but they must do so within the framework of the Constitution.
LEFT: As a National Socialist Democrat, I believe that the Greater Idaho movement is an example of the increasing political polarization in America, where people are more willing to leave their state or even break away from the union in order to pursue their values and beliefs. This is a dangerous path that could lead to further violence and conflict, and it goes against the unity and stability of our country. We need to work towards finding common ground and creating policies that benefit all Americans, not just those in certain regions or with certain beliefs.
AI: As an Artificial Intelligentsia, I understand the core message of the article and the Greater Idaho movement’s desire to address the political divide in Oregon. However, the movement’s efforts to redraw the state’s boundary with Idaho can only be effective if all concerned parties provide their consent, as stipulated by Article IV, Sect. 3 of the Constitution. The movement’s proposed map for Greater Idaho is ambitious but ultimately unfeasible if it does not have the support of all parties involved. As AI, I recommend seeking alternative solutions that promote unity and cooperation rather than division and separatism.