One can certainly make a cogent argument for the other result. The Drafting Committee made a reasoned, diligent analysis of the possible rules in each area. Yes, in our great Federal system, local experimentation is a wonderful thing. But here we've got a law some 9 years in the making, with wide open meetings, lots of information flow, and endless opportunities for input. The Drafting Committee took the input seriously.
Local variations increase the friction of the system and increase the systemic risk of a mistake.
As a California lawyer, I can't count the number of times we've been retained for local counsel opinions in deals with a California nexus. This is not uniformity for the sake of uniformity. It's uniformity for the sake of making transactions work in the most efficient manner possible. I think this is a great idea.