> There is widespread bipartisan support for noncompetes. NY, a bastion of liberal politics still overwhelmingly refuses to make noncompetes illegal.
NY Governor Hochul vetoed it because she is a hack politician and yielded to Wall Street pressure. Politicians with a spine (or constitution, if you prefer) are in short supply.
> But in recent months, the legislation had come under fierce attack by Wall Street and top business groups in New York. They argued the agreements are necessary to protect investment strategies and keep highly-paid workers from leaving their companies with prized inside information and working for an industry rival.
That's the rule rather than the exception in the US as politicians go. Campaign finance reform failed because most (not all) politicians are indeed crooks who accept gold bars from foreign governments, embezzle from their campaign to buy luxury goods, or pay hush money to porn stars.
At which level(s), or do you mean voters? Voter sentiment has essentially no bearing on public policy, and it was even proven with data in a Princeton study confirming what we already knew. [0]
If I might quote Gore Vidal: There is only one party in the United States, the Property Party … and it has two right wings: Republican and Democrat. Republicans are a bit stupider, more rigid, more doctrinaire in their laissez-faire capitalism than the Democrats, who are cuter, prettier, a bit more corrupt — until recently … and more willing than the Republicans to make small adjustments when the poor, the black, the anti-imperialists get out of hand. But, essentially, there is no difference between the two parties.
Partisanship tribalism is a divide-and-conquer gambit that has been largely successful in keeping Americans fighting each other counterproductively and voting against their own interests.
