California, Oregon and Washington announce western states pact • Hacker News Board

Re: California, Oregon and Washington announce western states pact

#201

Post by rlt » Mon, Apr 13, 2020, 10:09 PM UTC

kevingadd wrote: post #170

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.

Why would they use two different meanings of "State" (capitalized, no less) in the same sentence?

Re: California, Oregon and Washington announce western states pact

#202

Post by jcranmer » Mon, Apr 13, 2020, 10:09 PM UTC

elliekelly wrote: post #168

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.

Baker (and Hogan, for that matter) are very popular Republican governors in pretty deep blue states. They haven't been big on kissing Trump's ass, both before and during this crisis.

Re: California, Oregon and Washington announce western states pact

#203

Post by jmckib » Mon, Apr 13, 2020, 10:10 PM UTC

dahdum wrote: post #117

DoreenMichele wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious: Was that the law before the pandemic? If so, couldn't the pandemic be a good reason to campaign to change the law so Oregonians can pump their own gas?

That law hasn't changed because it's essentially a jobs program. They did retcon equal access for the disabled / elderly in there, but the ADA covers it well enough for every other state.

It's also part of the reason you can't buy liquor at a grocery store in Oregon. If we really need more pointless jobs, I'd rather the state just hire some people to dig holes and fill them back up. At least everybody else wouldn't be inconvenienced that way.

Re: California, Oregon and Washington announce western states pact

#204

Post by tmh79 » Mon, Apr 13, 2020, 10:12 PM UTC

rlt wrote: post #77

lisper wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly right. One of the rules of the game is that you're not allowed to say anything negative about Donald Trump even if (perhaps especially if) it is factually correct. If you do, he will retaliate (by, for example, withholding badly needed aid). So the governors have to speak in code. Listen to Newsome's news conference today and the answer he gave to a reporter about his reaction to Trump's announcement that the…

> If you do, he will retaliate (by, for example, withholding badly needed aid) Has this actually occurred? I know NY asked for way more ventilators than they got, but as I understood it they were giving them out "just in time" rather than up front in case they were needed more elsewhere.

There are also lots of reports of confiscations of PPE:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/06/us/politics/coronavirus-f...

https://www.firehouse.com/safety-health/ppe/news/21133559/fe...

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/fema-denies-involvement...

I hate to be a conspiracy theorist, but this smells real bad to me. The reports of confiscations are coming from democratic states, not republican states. And it seems like republican lobbyists are getting into the game of distributing PPE:

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/bob-livingston-group-mike...

What it seems to me is happening is a coordinated yet amateurish attempt to restrict the PPE flow to/within democratic states, while allowing the free flow of PPE in republican states. This allows some lobbyists to make money off of it, as well as sticking a finger in the eye of dem leaders (and dying people/healthcare workers in dem states).

Re: California, Oregon and Washington announce western states pact

#205

Post by jandrewrogers » Mon, Apr 13, 2020, 10:12 PM UTC

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…

These kinds of pacts between States to coordinate on specific issues that are under of the umbrella of their sovereignty are quite common and perfectly legal. The whole point of sovereignty is that they have the freedom to deal with the issue as they wish as long as it doesn't abrogate one of the narrow powers delegated to the Federal government, such as this case. There are even pacts between States to coordinate action directly against Federal policy e.g. the Sagebrush Rebellion.

In other cases where the Federal government does have jurisdiction, such as interstate treaties regarding shared resource rights, the Federal government can delegate the issue to a group of affected States to sort out amongst themselves e.g. the Colorado River Compact of 1922.

Re: California, Oregon and Washington announce western states pact

#206

Post by ummwhat » Mon, Apr 13, 2020, 10:12 PM UTC

vondur wrote: post #120

mrb wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, this Western States Pact is a result of lack of leadership at the White House and federal level. They feel the US government is not doing enough, so they took the matter into their own hands.

So what are the issues with the Federal Government response? I often hear people criticize it, without any concrete examples

On phone so can't link now.

1. Ignored the pandemic response playbook. This document was prepared after the SARS outbreak and contained all the lesson s learned.

2. Reckless public statements. Calling the virus "no worse than a flu" and "a hoax" certainly caused people to not take it seriously and helped it to spread. Pushing the hrdroxocloriquine study before the research was conclusive has gotten people killed.

3. Depriving states of essential resources. Massachusetts not only had their request for masks denied, but also paid for their own masks only to have them seized for the "federal stockpile". In the end the governor had to get masks smuggled in on the New England Patriots private jet.

4. When New York projected it would run out of ventilators in 6 days, their request was denied on the grounds that Trump felt 30k ventilators was too big a number.

5. The emergency production act (or whatever it's called) could have been invoked at any time to address the ppe shortage. Afaik it hasn't been.

Re: California, Oregon and Washington announce western states pact

#207

Post by basch » Mon, Apr 13, 2020, 10:14 PM UTC

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).

I mentioned the Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Illinois consortium the other day. Theirs was formed to solidify buying power. These are looking analogous to the relationship between cities and and a county. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22835488

You can roughly see where you would expect these to form on this map. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megaregions_of_the_United_Stat...

Re: California, Oregon and Washington announce western states pact

#208

Post by kelnos » Mon, Apr 13, 2020, 10:14 PM UTC

JoshTriplett wrote: post #113

JPKab wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.)…

Oregon has already lifted the restriction on pumping your own gas, for exactly this reason.

Add "not allowed to pump your own gas" to the list of "things that are completely unnecessary and stupid that have been removed because of COVID-19 and never need to come back".

Re: California, Oregon and Washington announce western states pact

#209

Post by sremani » Mon, Apr 13, 2020, 10:14 PM UTC

drc37 wrote: post #152

mrb wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, this Western States Pact is a result of lack of leadership at the White House and federal level. They feel the US government is not doing enough, so they took the matter into their own hands.

This is all 100% political. The only reason they are doing this is to preempt President Trump's announcement tomorrow about the formation of a committee to get this going. Anytime they say it's not political, that is 100% what it is.

I am afraid it is, but I do not see that much of an incentive for a Governor to keep their State shut-down when it does not have to.

May be its posturing or may be its not.

I think the interests of White House and Governors are more in line than not.

Time will tell.

Re: California, Oregon and Washington announce western states pact

#210

Post by bpodgursky » Mon, Apr 13, 2020, 10:15 PM UTC

kevingadd wrote: post #182

bpodgursky wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

CA has a pretty big rainy-day fund. It'll be exhausted eventually, but I'm not sure it will be this year. The most recent sources I've found suggest the state has around $20bn in reserves, which probably is enough to buffer us through a bad year unless tax incomes completely drop to 0.

The budget for the year was $208 billion, so you only need a 10% haircut to need help. And the budget is HEAVILY funded by (1) Silicon Valley IPOs, and (2) Hollywood. Both of those are going to generate $0 near-term.

Not to mention retirement funds which are going to be obliterated, but that's a somewhat separate issue from the budget.