So much for "states-as-laboratories" [1]. There may be some usefulness in that concept, but without eventually harmonization of best practices, it can also be incredibly wasteful and create harmful barriers to entry.
This is actually a good case for the concept as some states will improve their processes to better work with educators like Lambda and the learnings will spread to many of the other states over time. The only way for their to have been a unified process for paperwork, previously, would have been to require too much and to implement a process to prevent states from proactively updating their process quickly enough to be helpful.
There's really not much pressure for states to adopt best practices. I work at a tax policy think tank, and a lot of the most populous and richest states also have some of the most poorly constructed tax code (e.g., CA's Prop 13). They can get away with it because people want to live and work there regardless. The network effects of established urban areas--especially with specialized industries like Silicon Valley has--are difficult to overcome.
I certainly don’t dispute your assessment there, as an IL resident. In quieter areas where regulators have more ability to make changes without making newspaper headlines, and a larger portion of a department’s scope can be covered at a specialized conference, don’t better practices spread a little more quickly?
[1] https://scholar.valpo.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1888&c...