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

California, Oregon and Washington announce western states pact

gov.ca.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 319 posts

Re: California, Oregon and Washington announce western states pact

#161

Post by shaftway »

wahern wrote: post #42
new_time wrote: post #20

I love the United States' flexible decentralized model. Different states have sufficient autonomy to tinker and try different approaches, allowing the best ideas to emerge from the collective. It's one reason why the US is such a dynamic place, similar to Europe but with the additional benefit of unified language, culture (broadly), economy, and high level regulations. It's truly a great system.

It's not necessarily as flexible as to encompass such sub-federal cooperation: "No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any Duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_O…

> unless actually invaded

I mean, Trump is calling himself a "Wartime President"[1]. And the virus technically is on American soil....

[1]: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/22/us/politics/coronavirus-t...

Re: California, Oregon and Washington announce western states pact

#162

Post by jMyles »

I'm in Oregon.

My first read: CTRL-F for "test" to see if there's any new statement on serological testing. Nothing.

This is all we want right now. This is the first priority, and whatever is second is somewhat distant.

Not having widespread serological testing to understand the prevalence in our communities really gives a feeling of being in a third-world country.

It's awesome that Drs. Bhattacharya and Bendavid have pushed the Stanford study forward (hopefully we have results this week). But seriously, there's no excuse for not having already done a round of random testing in every city, several times.

Re: California, Oregon and Washington announce western states pact

#163

Post by nawgszy »

wahern wrote: post #42
new_time wrote: post #20

I love the United States' flexible decentralized model. Different states have sufficient autonomy to tinker and try different approaches, allowing the best ideas to emerge from the collective. It's one reason why the US is such a dynamic place, similar to Europe but with the additional benefit of unified language, culture (broadly), economy, and high level regulations. It's truly a great system.

It's not necessarily as flexible as to encompass such sub-federal cooperation: "No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any Duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_O…

> or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay

It'd be nice to think that the largest pandemic of the last century would allow for this, but given the current supreme court bench I guess I wouldn't really bet on it

Re: California, Oregon and Washington announce western states pact

#164

Post by mulmen »

redis_mlc wrote: post #138

> Protecting the general public by ensuring any successful lifting of interventions includes the development of a system for testing, tracking and isolating. The states will work together to share best practices. If there is a reasonable expectation of that happening in the next couple of weeks, then ok. If this is just "hope", then we should end the lockdown and let the flu run its course, like every year. The overa…

Why would we need to test everyone twice a week?

Re: California, Oregon and Washington announce western states pact

#165

Post by kevingadd »

nostromo wrote: post #111

> We need to see a decline in the rate of spread of the virus before large-scale reopening, and we will be working in coordination to identify the best metrics to guide this. What's the end game here? If you slow the spread, and then reopen, it'll spread again. Nothing will have changed, you'll just have delayed it a bit.

If you read the announcement:

> Ensuring an ability to care for those who may become sick with COVID-19 and other conditions. This will require adequate hospital surge capacity and supplies of personal protective equipment.

Delaying it is the point, it ensures we have enough hospital capacity and PPE to handle the inevitable burst of cases when reopening. This is what people mean when they say "flatten the curve". If we simply open whenever and aren't prepared we'll have a massive spike in cases that exceeds hospital capacity, vs the current situation where the case growth is slower and hospitals are less burdened.

Re: California, Oregon and Washington announce western states pact

#167

Post by artificial »

jimhefferon wrote: post #115
paulstovell wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps it allows them to begin to open borders between each other, but keep borders to other states closed? If those three states' economies are very interlinked it might let them get closer to normality. Legally, is this possible in the US? In Australia for example each state has closed or is controlling their borders with each other, and this seems to largely be a decision for each state (I don't think there's a f…

> Legally, is this possible in the US? What in the US is legal has changed radically in the last three years.

Any particular areas? The churn of law in the US is vast, ex: taxes.

Re: California, Oregon and Washington announce western states pact

#168

Post by elliekelly »

jcranmer wrote: post #19

Also relevant is that the states of New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Connecticut, Rhode Island, and Delaware made a similar pact today. Edit: Massachusetts has also joined this pact as well (I thought it was surprising that it hadn't when I first read the news).

Governor Baker is a Republican and Trump is big on “loyalty” and deference. Since the pact is a way for the Governors to collectively let Trump know who will actually be “restarting” the states I would guess the short delay in Massachusetts joining was so Baker could sort out the politics ahead of time with DC.

Re: California, Oregon and Washington announce western states pact

#169

Post by taway43232 »

philwelch wrote: post #139
anoncareer0212 wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have no idea how crazy you sound as a European lol, the most straightforward way to put it is you're using an anonymous account on a website to dunk on someone in the comments section for implying they may care about avoiding infection during a pandemic

As a European I’d think you’d appreciate the point he’s making. This is analogous to Spain and Portugal deciding on a joint Iberian policy between the two of them instead of trying to go to the EU and haggle it out with Hungary and Sweden.

Well, he'd appreciate your point ever more had the tenant of the WH been someone who can actually read pages with letters instead of watching tv 12 hours a day.

Re: California, Oregon and Washington announce western states pact

#170

Post by kevingadd »

celdon25 wrote: post #105

From article 1, section 10 of the U.S. Constitution: "No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any Duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay." This scares me a bit. This agreement seems innocuous at first, bu…

"State" in that context clearly refers to foreign nations (states) not states as in The United States Of America. Foreign power is distinct because it would refer to things like governments-in-exile or perhaps resistance groups.
Post reply on HN