I'm not aware of any movement per se, but as Citylaw said there are a few states that might allow a non-ABA grad to sit for the bar.
So, why don't more states allow it? I think it's due to several factors.
Protectionism
Part of a state bar's job is to make sure that the market doesn't get flooded and prices stay high. Is it fair or just? I'm not sure, I have mixed feelings. Nonetheless, it's a factor.
The ABA is a dinosaur
Even their rules for fixed facility accreditation are behind the times.
Performance of online schools
This is the big one. There is a lot of skepticism out there regarding the quality of online education in general, not just law schools. Most employers at competitive, reputable companies pretty much roll their eyes at online BAs, MBAs, etc. The same goes for JDs. Most lawyers (especially outside of CA) are VERY skeptical of online degrees.
Some of the skepticism is unfair snobbery, and some of it is legit. The fact is, online schools have high attrition and low bar pass rates. That's not a good combo. It means that either the admissions are too easy, the academic rigor is too low, or both.
I really don't think there will be any serious move towards either ABA accredited online education or towards more states' allowing online degrees until that changes. There is the example of William Mitchell School of Law, but that's fairly unique.
In CA it's a little different because we've always done things are own way. Although even in CA, I do see that most employers draw a big distinction between non-ABA (but state bar accredited) and unaccredited online schools. Most CA lawyers know enough smart, practicing non-ABA grads that the stigma is sort of dissipated.
As far as states like OR and NV, I just don't think there is any internal pressure from the state bar members to amend the rules and expand the educational requirements. I fact, most would probably be against it. Until that changes, I don't think outside lobbying will be sufficient to change the rules.