Naive question: how is this better than each of these states doing its own thing (even if those things end up looking similar)? What does California gain by teaming up with WA and OR, for example?
California, Oregon and Washington announce western states pact
91–100 of 319 posts
Re: California, Oregon and Washington announce western states pact
#92Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If only we had some sort of united group of all the States, where the response could be coordinated and centralized for maximum effectiveness. We do, however by design that body does not have authoritarian control over things like 'shelter at home' regulations.
https://www.cdc.gov/quarantine/aboutlawsregulationsquarantin... > Under section 361 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S. Code § 264), the U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services is authorized to take measures to prevent the entry and spread of communicable diseases from foreign countries into the United States and between states. Nothing stops them from encouraging states, either. (We did this with speed lim…
Shelter at home is very different from controlling interstate travel. I agree on the latter point.
Re: California, Oregon and Washington announce western states pact
#93This is great, and it's a big chunk of population, but I keep feeling like we could do better. For example, these three States could do a great job, but there's nothing stopping a bunch of the other States from bungling it (like, say, ignoring health experts and exempting certain groups from mass gathering restrictions). Then those States end up exporting infectious individuals into the States which are doing things…
> If only we had some sort of united group of all the States, where the response could be coordinated and centralized for maximum effectiveness.
We do! It's called the United States government. I'll be letting the president know you're interested in him taking over and using his own ideas, instead of this one you seem to be particularly fond of.
Or, if that idea is slightly terrifying for you, perhaps it's a better idea that the states are handling this themselves. Your state conglomeration thing can always decide to use the National Guard to prevent outside travelers.
Re: California, Oregon and Washington announce western states pact
#94They should do a shared healthcare system as well. The future is states working together on their own thing, while letting chudland sink further into poverty.
Re: California, Oregon and Washington announce western states pact
#95Possibly relevant: > President Trump tweeted Monday that the "decision to open up the states" following shutdown measures taken to stop the spread of the coronavirus lies with him, not governors. https://www.axios.com/trump-coronavirus-reopening-governors-...
Ironically Trump refused to "shutdown" the States a decision he deferred to the Governors.
Honest question: did Trump have the legal authority to shutdown the states even if he wanted to? I thought this decision was always up to the governors themselves, and that the federal government didn't have any authority to ask for a shut down within each state.
Re: California, Oregon and Washington announce western states pact
#96Well, that was quick. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22828354 Today it is pandemic resolution. I fear that tomorrow, it might be economic ties, lockstep voting at the federal level, and National Guard drills, deployments, and contingency planning, where the West Coast slowly splits away from the rest of the country, with other states teaming up and following suit. This isn't the end, and it's the only appropria…
It's not going to happen, if nothing else, because CA is going to be grasping for federal budget bailouts later this year. Lockdown is going to crush state budgets.
I hope so, man, for our country's sake. Every day we're together is a second chance at making things right.
Re: California, Oregon and Washington announce western states pact
#97This is great, and it's a big chunk of population, but I keep feeling like we could do better. For example, these three States could do a great job, but there's nothing stopping a bunch of the other States from bungling it (like, say, ignoring health experts and exempting certain groups from mass gathering restrictions). Then those States end up exporting infectious individuals into the States which are doing things…
"Like having a pool with a 'peeing section'" is how I've read this piecemeal approach described.
Well when our federal government basically screws the pooch it's up to individual states to work together to limit the spread. And since most of the state governments seem to not really care about the health of their citizens, it makes sense that there would be small groups of states that do. Honestly I assumed that if the outbreak got really bad the PNW would eventually secede from the union because the federal government wasn't providing much aid. But this is a lot better than that.
Re: California, Oregon and Washington announce western states pact
#98As someone who lives in one of these states, I'm nonplussed at the announcement. It doesn't really seem to say anything concrete that I can tell. "We've agreed that we will use metrics...we are still deciding what these metrics will be." I thought the Stay Home, Stay Healthy order (in Washington state) wasn't unreasonable and wasn't just political babble, but I don't really know what to make of this piece. Anyone wan…
My brother lives in Oregon. He was complaining to me the other day that Oregon's requirement that you are not allowed to pump your own gas is an obvious COVID transmission vector. To get gas in Oregon, he follows these steps: 1.) pull up to gas station 2.) Roll down window to hand attendant (who isn't wearing a mask, nor is required to) his debit card. 3.) Get card back from attendant. 4.) Sanitize the debit card 5.)…
When pumping your own gas, you touch a pump handle and card reader that have been handled by hundreds of other people in the last few hours. Is that any better?
Re: California, Oregon and Washington announce western states pact
#99Earlier quoted context omitted.
That would prevent any such pact from being legally binding on the states. It doesn't necessarily prevent states from coordinating at all.
Exactly, this seems like an friendly handshake agreement to cooperate with an official name and press release. OTOH, pacts like the popular vote compact signed by some states in the past few years is almost certainly unconstitutional.
Is it? They're each deciding, independently, to handle their electors in a certain fashion. They each have the right to independently change that decision, without any penalty for doing so. It's not a binding agreement with another state in any fashion.
Re: California, Oregon and Washington announce western states pact
#100As someone who lives in one of these states, I'm nonplussed at the announcement. It doesn't really seem to say anything concrete that I can tell. "We've agreed that we will use metrics...we are still deciding what these metrics will be." I thought the Stay Home, Stay Healthy order (in Washington state) wasn't unreasonable and wasn't just political babble, but I don't really know what to make of this piece. Anyone wan…
My ELI5 interpretation: “Since good leadership is probably not going to come from the President, we’re going to create our own “mini-country” and provide good leadership within it.”
Instead of "mini-country", I would call just call it a group of united states.