3 ms·

> State-level regulation enables greater accountability to local constituents, empowering communities to shape labor policies directly. In theory, yes. In prac

> State-level regulation enables greater accountability to local constituents, empowering communities to shape labor policies directly. In theory, yes. In practice: 1. State legislators are heavily influenced by local trade associations and their lobbyists — and their campaign contributions. See, e.g., car dealers, liquor distributors, and landlords, to name some that come to mind immediately. 2. Federal-level regulation is needed to prevent a "race to the bottom" among states competing to be the most "business-friendly" in the hope of attracting jobs. See, e.g., South Dakota's banking laws that caused so many banks to locate their credit-card operations in that state, as well as Delaware's famously management-friendly corporate laws.

margalabargala 3y ago
> 1. State legislators are heavily influenced by local trade associations and their lobbyists — and their campaign contributions. See, e.g., car dealers, liquor distributors, and landlords, to name some that come to mind immediately. There's functionally no difference here from federal legislators. You might think "oh a federal congressperson runs a larger campaign so it would take more money to buy them off". Then you'd look at the scale of the donations it took some of them to vote certain ways for interest groups. Net neutrality was a recent example. Single digit thousands was all it took for some. That's not out of the reach of any business with an interest in influencing legislation.
- dragonwriter 3y ago
  > Then you'd look at the scale of the donations it took some of them to vote certain ways for interest groups. Net neutrality was a recent example. Single digit thousands was all it took for some. Or, they got single digit thousands of donations from interest groups that aligned with their natural voting inclination (or the way party groups or other groups they are concerned with aligning with beyond direct issue-specific donations wanted), and ascribing the donation easily attributable to the position as a significant reason for the vote is wrong.

margalabargala 3y ago

> 1. State legislators are heavily influenced by local trade associations and their lobbyists — and their campaign contributions. See, e.g., car dealers, liquor distributors, and landlords, to name some that come to mind immediately. There's functionally no difference here from federal legislators. You might think "oh a federal congressperson runs a larger campaign so it would take more money to buy them off". Then you'd look at the scale of the donations it took some of them to vote certain ways for interest groups. Net neutrality was a recent example. Single digit thousands was all it took for some. That's not out of the reach of any business with an interest in influencing legislation.

dragonwriter 3y ago
> Then you'd look at the scale of the donations it took some of them to vote certain ways for interest groups. Net neutrality was a recent example. Single digit thousands was all it took for some. Or, they got single digit thousands of donations from interest groups that aligned with their natural voting inclination (or the way party groups or other groups they are concerned with aligning with beyond direct issue-specific donations wanted), and ascribing the donation easily attributable to the position as a significant reason for the vote is wrong.