Transcript Document 7820029

The Future Use of
Interstate Compacts
Summit of the States on
Interstate Cooperation
June 1 - June 2, 2006
By Keon S. Chi
The Council of State Governments
Key Questions
How (in what forms) are states cooperating?
What are trends in interstate compacts?
What are potential areas for future interstate
compacts?
Who are/could be key players in future
interstate compacts?
What are state legislative committees on
interstate cooperation doing?
Why do states need interstate cooperation
and/or compacts in the future?
Are states going to change their behaviors
in interstate cooperation?
Forms of Interstate Cooperation
Interstate Compacts
– Formal agreements/contracts
– Legally binding
– Legislative/Congressional approval
Multistate Legal Actions
– Joint legal actions
– Tobacco settlement by NAAG
Uniform State Laws
– National Conference of Commissioners on
Uniform State Laws (NCCUSL)
– No involvement with “collective action” per se
Administrative Agreements
– Executive agencies
– Formal or informal
Trends in Interstate Compacts
There exist more than 200 interstate
compacts.
The number of compact membership for a
state ranges from 16 to 50.
One third of interstate compacts with 8 or
more states are bilateral.
Only 10 percent of interstate compacts
have a majority of states as members.
App. 15 percent of compacts are regional.
Trends appear to be toward a resurgence of
interstate compacts. A total of 49 compact bills
were enacted in 2005; at least 16 compact bills
were enacted in 2006 thus far. App. 30 interstate
compacts are being considered by Congress.
Recent interstate compacts tend to have more
administrative, financial, and technical
dimensions.
Currently, more than 100 compact bills are
pending in state legislatures.
These compact bills deal with insurance, criminal
justice, the electoral college system and a wide
range of policy issues.
Potential Areas of
Interstate Compacts
Regional policy/program innovations
– Resurgence of regionalism
– Regional organizations
Border states’ cooperation
– U.S.-Mexico Border: Border Legislative
Conferences; Border Governors Conferences
– U.S.-Canada Border: Legislators’ and
governors’ meetings
Top 5 state policy areas
– Education, Health & Human services, Public
safety, Transportation, Environment
Emerging trends areas
– Aging, immigration, economic development,
natural resources, technology, globalization,
suburbanization/exurb-metropolitan reform,
etc.
Key Players in
Interstate Compacts in the States
Governors and policy staff
Elected executive officials
Executive agency directors/managers
Legislative leaders
Legislators and staff
Legislative service agency directors
Interstate compact administrators
The Media
Researchers & consultants
Interest groups
Civic organizations
Legislative Committees on
Interstate Cooperation
Each state’s participation in interstate
cooperation as a member of The Council
of State Governments
Committees/commissions on Interstate
Cooperation in both houses of state
legislature (most states)
Governor’s Committee on Interstate
Cooperation (state officials and private
citizens – DE)
Functions of Committees on
Interstate Cooperation
Adoption of compacts
Enactment of uniform or reciprocal
statutes
Adoption of reciprocal administrative
rules and regulations
Informal cooperation with state
government offices
Personal cooperation of state government
officials
Interchange and clearance of research
and information
Other suitable process
Why Interstate Cooperation?
Constitutional Provisions
Art. IV, Sec. 1 & 2:
“Full faith and credit” clause
Interstate rendition clause
“Full privileges and immunities” clause
Art I, Sec. 2:
Interstate Compacts
Art III, Sec. 2:
Resolution of controversies among states
Why Interstate Cooperation?
Reasons
Effectiveness and efficiency
– Goal achievement and less costs (economies of scale)
Flexibility and autonomy compared to national
policy
– No to the “one size fits all” approach
Dispute settlement
– Among the states
State sovereignty
– Against “coercive regulatory federalism”
Cooperative behaviors leading to “win-win”
situations
– Especially on a regional basis
Threats of Federal/Congressional preemption or
mandates
–
–
–
–
Disparate state regulatory statutes
International trade agreements
Technology development
Lobbying by Interest groups
CSG: Goal, NCIC, and “State Governance
Transformation” Initiative
– Interstate/multi-state solutions to common problems
– Promotion and assistance for interstate compacts
– Networked/collaborative government to meet challenges
from emerging trends
I
States in Interstate Relations:
Bottom Line: Duality
Self-interests v. Cooperative Behaviors
Individual v. Collective Actions
Disparity v. Uniformity
Rival v. Ally
Competition v. Cooperation
“Federalism without Washington”
Thank you