Live data from Hacker News

California, Oregon and Washington announce western states pact

gov.ca.gov

211–220 of 319 posts

Re: California, Oregon and Washington announce western states pact

#211

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).

If only there was some sort of multi-state organization through which individual states could pull together on issues spanning multiple states. Such a "federal" approach would be very useful. If only someone had thought of this years ago. Of course it would have to be staffed by people selected and respected by all, but surely there is some way of doing that too.

Re: California, Oregon and Washington announce western states pact

#212
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.)…

People aren’t trained to operate a gas pump. That’s what they told me last time I visited Oregon.

They must have some very complicated gas pumps in Oregon, much more complicated than the pumps used in nearly every other US state... ;)

Re: California, Oregon and Washington announce western states pact

#213
post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ironically Trump refused to "shutdown" the States a decision he deferred to the Governors.

Yes, he wanted to dodge responsibility for the unpleasant job of shutting things down. Now he wants to enjoy positive publicity for opening things back up.

No, he wanted to avoid being called a dictator for shutting things down.

Re: California, Oregon and Washington announce western states pact

#214

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…

Certain agreements are definitely allowed: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_compact

Of note: "Not all compacts between states require explicit Congressional approval – the 1893 Supreme Court decision in Virginia v. Tennessee affirmed that only those agreements which would increase the power of states at the expense of the federal government required it."

I'm not claiming that this pact is formally one of these "interstate compacts", but your maximalist reading of that article forbidding "all kinds of agreements" seems to be incorrect.

Re: California, Oregon and Washington announce western states pact

#215

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…

I would think they have wiggle room with "or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay."

Re: California, Oregon and Washington announce western states pact

#216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dude...if we're talking about secession, we're talking about civil war. In a country with the second most nuclear weapons in the world. With a federal government already looking to adversaries for cooperation. You're talking nuclear missiles or chemical weapons fired against San Francisco, Los Angeles, or Seattle from land-based silos in the Dakotas, or mutinies aboard our SSBNs, or Russian troops landing en masse in…

Why would the US government nuke cities they're trying to take back?

Maybe they don't want to use troops as an occupying force. Afghanistan / Iraq already proved how difficult it is to occupy territory, it'd be a lot easier without insurgents resisting. A war of attrition would suck up a lot of blood and treasure the government would need to ward off threats to a much-weakened U.S.

Maybe the half life of radioactive isotopes is acceptable enough to relax habitation restrictions in a short enough period of time. People do currently live within the restricted zone of Chernobyl, they just have shortened lifespans, but they are functioning properly. You can probably garrison troops after nuking an area six months after doing so, as long as you cycle them out on a regular basis.

Maybe white-collar service workers are less valuable than blue-collar laborers, especially if they're already demoralized. You can torture a blue-collar worker to create output, albeit slower and lower quality and with Byzantine faults. You can't torture an asset management consultant to give you a high ROI. The brain doesn't work like that. So at that point he or she is just another mouth to feed and you can get rid of him or her. Extrapolate to an entire city.

Maybe it's just pure hatred. Most cities are highly Democratic and liberal, which today apparently labels someone as less than yourself, as someone less than human.

Re: California, Oregon and Washington announce western states pact

#217

Well, 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…

> I fear that tomorrow Why fear? This is my dream! The Senate is irreparably broken. There is no conceivable way that it can become more fairly representative of the people without a breakup of the United States. The smaller less populous states aren't going to just give up their outsized power voluntarily. California is suffering the most due to the Senate's structural unfairness, and it has the most to gain from su…

Instead of California succeeding, maybe it should be broken up into to smaller states:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partition_and_secession_in_Cal...

Re: California, Oregon and Washington announce western states pact

#218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you provide any source for criticism from the left on this decision? I only found this: > Although Democratic leaders and Democratic presidential candidates have been highly critical of Trump’s response to the coronavirus, we couldn’t find any examples of them directly and clearly criticizing the travel restrictions. [0]: https://www.factcheck.org/2020/03/the-facts-on-trumps-travel...

My Twitter timeline was full of people claiming xenophobia and racism for most of February and some of March, some with claims he was distracting from his impeachment. There was a coordinated effort by some jouralists to smear Trump as xenophobic and racist for what he was trying to do. Today they're saying he didn't do enough. There were many stories that were essentially down playing the virus and dog whistling to…

[deleted]

Re: California, Oregon and Washington announce western states pact

#219

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.

Then why would the constitution forbid a foreign nation (state) from entering into an agreement with another foreign power?

Re: California, Oregon and Washington announce western states pact

#220
post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Have you been following the coverage? There are a lot of mixed messages (opening the economy by Easter, no I mean May, no I mean ASAP), lots of misinformation that contradicts the medical consensus (Trump pushing hydroxychloroquine as if he's the drug's spokesperson), a lot of half actions (Trump invokes Defense Production Act, but then refuses to use it), and blatant lies ("anyone who wants a test can get one"), mul…

Trump actually did use the DPA to order GM to produce medical ventilators. Because a car company will have no problem retooling all of their factories to pump out medical devices. I believe that just taught all the CEOs of companies like GM that they shouldn't offer to do a damn thing publicly before they've already got a program in place.

This is as opposed to ordering one of the several companies in the US who already make medical ventilators to simply make more ventilators.

Post reply on HN