So the Governor of California is not going to use state money to visit $Texas? I call bullshit.

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

Aren't travel bans supposed to work the other way round? The banning entity stops people coming to it...

So Californians are banned to travel to these U.S. states? But I bet Saudi-Arabia, Iran, etc. are fine with Gov. Moonbeam?

While I didn't read the article I've heard some news stories on this. It is not everybody and is for public officials (or such) only. Basically, if the state of CA is paying for your travel it won't cover or reimburse for travels to those listed other states. For politicians it is more clear cut but for college sports (they get state money too) what is supposed to happen? CA has some major schools that play teams across a good portion of the country (like another pointed out).

Carry on with the rest of the conversation though.

Am I supposed to keep up with all this sh--?

---

sometimes

this ban is the use of public monies for professional travel for state employees - CA is not the only governmental entity putting such a ban in place.

It's symbolic. There are exceptions for anyone who actually needs to travel to those places.

Tennessee's response:


http://www.al.com/...t.html?ICID=ref_fark

Oh shit! Bustin' out the "whereases" They better be careful - we'll cut off their iPhones, Android/Google, and Facebag.

I would have to go to the ye olde timey machine but CA's ban could be constitutionally iffy in that it applies only to certain states

My understanding is that Fresno State's football team is the only affected college sports team with a currently-scheduled game in one of the banned states (it will be played this upcoming season). Fresno State is exempted from the ban for this one game because the game was scheduled prior to the ban's enactment (and backing out would have cost Fresno State a payday in the neighborhood of $1.4M, or some number like that).

I have no idea how things will work when a public school team earns a postseason berth for a game to be played in one of the banned states (like a bowl game). We shall see.

Another thing: I imagine private schools like USC and Stanford receive state funding for various programs. I have no idea if that fact will affect those teams under this ban. Or is the ban merely upon state-funded trips? Like, UCLA's boosters could pay for the travel to an away game in those states, but I just don't know any details of the ban so I have no idea how that works.

---

War is god

I was thinking along these same lines, but I cannot find a Constitutional Right infringed by this "ban."

It isn't really a "ban." One can still make the trip. But, CA taxpayer money will not be used for the trip. Cannot wait until a CA school has to forfeit a game/tourney/championship over this.

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

Stupid posturing from a state that leads the way in stupid political charades. I don't agree with some of the things that have came out of the states deemed discriminatory, but what does California think their chest puffing will accomplish? It's the same kind of stupidity that led to the response and backlash in November with the stupid person we have sitting in the POTUS seat.

Yep. It might be understandable in light of these facts. In 2015 about 550,000 people moved to Texas. 650,000 left California in the same year, with about 10% of those, and their jobs, going to Texas.

---

Suffer Well.

They are hoping to apply pressure to get them to change. This tactic has already had an impact in North Carolina where they amended tier original law.

Its very interesting how California believes its a "right" for immigrants from other countries to travel and immigrate to the US but its okay to ban travel to another state based on how those states have decided to govern themselves.

Travel from CA state government employees isn't going to be enough to compel an entirely different state to change their laws. The things that compelled NC to change were pressure from non-governmental entities such as performers and fans who said that they'd not perform or attend large events in the state, which applied a huge amount of private, public pressure and caused the state to take pause about concern for revenue. That's how it should be in our system of government, not a state government making the choice to make one-sided political statements against another state.

That's fair.

Just because they are both called bans doesn't mean they are at all the same. One is a travel ban the other is a boycott of spending government money.

Well, kinda. The NCAA's refusal to hold events in NC caused NC to roll back their "bathroom bill." So, yes, the tactic worked, but not when employed by another state.

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR