Quote:Assembly Bill No. 1887 is a California law enacted last year that prohibits most forms of state-funded travel to places with legislation deemed discriminatory, particularly against gay, bisexual or transgender people. Eight states are on the banned list.

Kansas, Texas, Alabama, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Dakota and Tennessee.

The executive director of Equality California, the state’s largest LGBT civil rights organization that sponsored AB 1887, told the Union-Tribune in July that the law’s intent is not to “impact student-athletes’ careers” by preventing them from competing in conference or NCAA championships.

“Our hope,” Rick Zbur said, “is that one of the things this does is results in tournament and conference games not being sited in these states, that California schools will use their advocacy efforts with the NCAA ... These games shouldn’t be occurring in these states. We want to send a message to these states that there is a cost to passing laws that are targeting our community.”

(03-13-2018 09:12 PM)Raider_Lope Wrote:  You know... with the California crowd, I can see that. That's a pretty harsh law. I live in one of the states on that list. Even within the boundaries of a so-called "red state" there are patches of blue, where folks would likely be more sympathetic with such a law as the one you referenced. That being said, there are likely conservative areas of California where fans might disagree with dropping down to a lesser conference simply for the political value that state lawmakers and advocacy groups may claim it provides.

(03-13-2018 09:15 PM)NeptunianEmp Wrote:  

(03-13-2018 09:12 PM)Raider_Lope Wrote:  You know... with the California crowd, I can see that. That's a pretty harsh law. I live in one of the states on that list. Even within the boundaries of a so-called "red state" there are patches of blue, where folks would likely be more sympathetic with such a law as the one you referenced. That being said, there are likely conservative areas of California where fans might disagree with dropping down to a lesser conference simply for the political value that state lawmakers and advocacy groups may claim it provides.

There is actually portions of California that want to form their own state because they don't like the legislation that is dominating the current Californian government. This is stupid as hell because it does punish student athletes. If anything this might jeopardize the quality of Californian athletics.

(03-14-2018 10:15 AM)PojoaquePosse Wrote:  There is no conspiracy. The WAC is perpetually on the brink of disbanding. Plus CSUB is joining their CSU brethren. Anyone WAC AD with half a brain would have moved to stable conference at the drop of a hat. Nothing to see here...

(03-14-2018 01:51 AM)jdgaucho Wrote:  I guess the counterpoint could be: if this bill forced CSUB out of the WAC, then why was their departure set for 2020? why not move after this school year?

(03-13-2018 11:08 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  The legislature dares not put this on the ballot as an initiative. It would probably lose.

I say this living in an urban and left wing area. But with a lot of Hispanic, and Asian immigrants who hold much different views than the Democrats they vote for on issues like this. (There is no GOP, and these conservative values people wouldn't touch the GOP with a ten foot pole because of the deep white Nationalist streak in the party that is hostile to them on ethnicity). Every once in awhile you see this split play out between "labor' (read Hispanic and working class) and "progressive" (read White, and high income Asian) like the very close battle in my district between Ro Khanna ("progressive") and Mike Honda ("labor"). It also showed up in the Senate race between Kamela Harris ("progressive") and Loretta Sánchez ("labor"). The money is heavily with the progressives, but the ethnic and socioeconomic split is huge -- they have very different views on the environment for example.

I wish we had a combination first past the post and proportional representation system like a lot of Europe, Japan and elsewhere. If we did both Republican and Democrat parties would splinter and you would not have unnatural coalitions. Conservative social value blue collar folks (many Hispanic) would back a very different party ("labor") than the urban elite Democratic party ("progressives") with these crazy lawfare initiatives. Also the Republicans would split between more socially liberal urban ("classical liberal") and more blue collar and rural paleocons (more "Nationalists" than anything else). Give the control of the parties, the Progressives would control the Democratic party and keep that name, while the Nationalists control the GOP and would keep that. . Politics would be very different and the parties as we know them would be broken. Very different coalitions could form.

(03-14-2018 10:15 AM)PojoaquePosse Wrote:  There is no conspiracy. The WAC is perpetually on the brink of disbanding. Plus CSUB is joining their CSU brethren. Anyone WAC AD with half a brain would have moved to stable conference at the drop of a hat. Nothing to see here...

(03-14-2018 06:29 PM)ManleyPointer Wrote:  

(03-14-2018 10:15 AM)PojoaquePosse Wrote:  There is no conspiracy. The WAC is perpetually on the brink of disbanding. Plus CSUB is joining their CSU brethren. Anyone WAC AD with half a brain would have moved to stable conference at the drop of a hat. Nothing to see here...

I think OP is suggesting that the politicians leaned on the Big West universities to accept Bakersfield.

It wouldn't surprise me if they wanted all of the in-state public, D1, non-football programs in 1 conference. If not for this issue, then for other issues that might arise in the future.

(03-14-2018 06:36 PM)CrimsonPhantom Wrote:  

(03-14-2018 06:29 PM)ManleyPointer Wrote:  

(03-14-2018 10:15 AM)PojoaquePosse Wrote:  There is no conspiracy. The WAC is perpetually on the brink of disbanding. Plus CSUB is joining their CSU brethren. Anyone WAC AD with half a brain would have moved to stable conference at the drop of a hat. Nothing to see here...

I think OP is suggesting that the politicians leaned on the Big West universities to accept Bakersfield.

It wouldn't surprise me if they wanted all of the in-state public, D1, non-football programs in 1 conference. If not for this issue, then for other issues that might arise in the future.

Yup

(03-14-2018 06:29 PM)ManleyPointer Wrote:  

(03-14-2018 10:15 AM)PojoaquePosse Wrote:  There is no conspiracy. The WAC is perpetually on the brink of disbanding. Plus CSUB is joining their CSU brethren. Anyone WAC AD with half a brain would have moved to stable conference at the drop of a hat. Nothing to see here...

I think OP is suggesting that the politicians leaned on the Big West universities to accept Bakersfield.

It wouldn't surprise me if they wanted all of the in-state public, D1, non-football programs in 1 conference. If not for this issue, then for other issues that might arise in the future.

(03-14-2018 10:17 PM)Raider_Lope Wrote:  

(03-14-2018 06:29 PM)ManleyPointer Wrote:  

(03-14-2018 10:15 AM)PojoaquePosse Wrote:  There is no conspiracy. The WAC is perpetually on the brink of disbanding. Plus CSUB is joining their CSU brethren. Anyone WAC AD with half a brain would have moved to stable conference at the drop of a hat. Nothing to see here...

I think OP is suggesting that the politicians leaned on the Big West universities to accept Bakersfield.

It wouldn't surprise me if they wanted all of the in-state public, D1, non-football programs in 1 conference. If not for this issue, then for other issues that might arise in the future.

Pointer... you have one of the best user names I've seen on the forum. Please tell me you're a Flannery O'Conner fan, or at least picked up your name from her short story "Good Country People". I taught that story to my Southern Literature students several years in a row... nothing like a Bible salesman named Manly Pointer.