Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Sooooo, if Kamala Harris decided to run for president in 2020 while she was a US Senator from California, she would be banned from campaigning/raising money in Kansas, Mississippi, North Carolina, Tennessee, Alabama, Kentucky, South Dakota and Texas?
And regarding those---true story--I have not seen any of them for years in S. Fla (the flying kind) for some reason, but while living in Manhattan, one flew in an open window. They've made their way north.
Oh god, what's with NY... The only place where I saw 2 rats doing the nasty in the subway.
They're just not using taxpayer money for official state travel. Not discouraging people who aren't paid by taxpayers to go to those states.
One problem I have with this is it restricts the states public University Athletic Teams from traveling to those states with the travel ban. Not fair for the student athletes, most who are opposed to anti-gay laws. Last year there were several men's basketball teams that wore gay apparel playing in North Carolina (at Duke) which went over pretty well with the crowds and possibly brought on some positive influence.
Californians don't have any problem buying oil from Saudi Arabia, an example to the world in human rights for gays an women. The California hypocrites don't mind that one out of every five barrels of oil consumed in their state is from Saudi Arabia. The people in this state are world class virtue signalers with no substance.
It does not ban "government employees." It bans state or government funded/sponsored travel. People are free to spend their own money to travel anywhere they want on their own.
That's not true. They cannot go to those states even when spending their own money unless they take time off. This has been an ongoing roiling issue for the UC system, as there is a lot of question of whether or not graduate students on university stipends can travel to those states for academic work, even if using grant money for the travel (which are not state funds). Right now, they generally cannot unless the grant mandates the travel, but the policy is different from school to school.
I suspect that this will eventually come down on the side of an actual ban on government employees travel to those states without taking unpaid time off as well as paying out of pocket, just to prevent someone taking vacation time and traveling to a state under the ban to do work representing the state of California (e.g. conference presentations). This would be under the idea that travel with paid time off is travel on state of california money.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
