On Tuesday, Crook County in Oregon became the 13th county to approve a proposal to secede from the state and join neighboring Idaho by 53.5 percent of the vote against 46.5 percent, as part of what supporters are calling the "Greater Idaho" project.

Backers of the plan argue the more conservative areas of eastern and central Oregon are currently dominated by liberal-leaning cities such as Portland and Salem and argue their interests would be better represented in traditionally Republican Idaho.

Thus far, the Oregon counties of Wallowa, Union, Baker, Malheur, Grant, Harney, Morrow, Wheeler, Crook, Lake, Sherman, Jefferson and Klamath have all voted to support the Greater Idaho project according to Citizens for Greater Idaho, a group campaigning in favor of such a split.

Advocates of Greater Idaho hope Umatilla and Gilliam counties will vote to join the project in full, as well as Wasco and Deschutes counties in part, at which point roughly the eastern two-thirds of what is now Oregon will have backed secession. Initially, Citizens for Greater Idaho also hoped to incorporate part of southern Oregon, but they ended this plan after voters in Josephine and Douglas counties voted against the proposal.

Citizens for Greater Idaho executive director Matt McCaw welcomed the Crook County result in a statement, saying: "The voters of eastern Oregon have spoken loudly and clearly about their desire to see border talks move forward. With this latest result in Crook County, there's no excuse left for the Legislature and Governor to continue to ignore the people's wishes."

Speaking to Newsweek he added: "We are happy for the people of Crook County that they had a chance to have their voice heard on the matter, and that their elected leaders now have no doubt what the people want.

  "Crook County voters, as well as the rest of eastern Oregon, have made clear that they want to pursue changing their state governance through this peaceful, win-win solution. We call on the governor and leaders of the Oregon legislature to move this forward and open up border talks."

Idaho Governor Brad Little told Newsweek: "I understand why many people want to be Idahoans. They're looking at Idaho fondly because of our strong economy, regulatory atmosphere and our values.

"Still, the decision to change Idaho and Oregon's borders would need to go through both states' legislatures and the U.S. Congress for approval. There's a lot that needs to happen before moving the border is within the realm of possibility."

The proposal would require approval by the legislatures in both states and Congress itself for counties to leave Oregon and join Idaho.

On its official website the Citizens for Greater Idaho states: "If the United States were governed as a single state, we wouldn't have the opportunity for state governance to vary according to the culture of a local area. The purpose of having state lines is to allow this variance.

"The Oregon/Idaho line was established 163 years ago and is now outdated. It makes no sense in its current location because it doesn't match the location of the cultural divide in Oregon. The Oregon/Washington line was updated in 1958. It's time to move other state lines."
If the Greater Idaho plan comes to fruition, Oregon would lose around two-thirds of its land but only 10 percent of its population, the New York Post reported, reflecting the more rural nature of the state's east.

Western States Strategies, the political arm of the Portland-based nonprofit Western States Center, opposes the Greater Idaho movement.
Speaking to Oregon Public Broadcasting in 2023, Western States chief of staff Jill Garvey said the group was concerned about Greater Idaho because of the history of secessionist movements in eastern Oregon linked to white nationalist campaigners.

"What we're doing is just pulling back the curtain. Nothing else. These are how these organizations are connected. We're naming what we believe their real goals are," Garvey said.
Newsweek has not seen any evidence that those behind Citizens for Greater Idaho hold white nationalist views.