You all remember Prop 78? It was the prescription drug proposition sponsored by the drug companies during Arnold’s special election.

You remember what the biggest problem with it was? It was a classic example of the fox pretending it cares about the hen house. The goal of the drug companies was to convince people that real reform took place when it didn’t really. They wanted to offset true reform by consumer groups in Prop 79. The very groups over the years defending and benefiting from charging high prices for prescription drugs pretending to now support reform. Pure window dressing!

Now, we have a similar example. This time, it comes from people who tend to be on the other side of the aisle

The very people who have defended the abuse of eminent domain involving governments forcing the transfer of private property from one owner to another by claiming the other can produce more tax revenue are now proposing this eminent domain reform package.

Just like the drug companies, their motive is clear. They want to offset true reform by property rights activists that does not include the flaws of Proposition 90. So rather than opposing it, they do what the drug companies did: offer a bullshit alternative

It appears to offer some protections, but the loopholes make it meaningless. Case in point: they claim it only allows taking property for private use when part of a “comprehensive plan to eliminate blight.”

CURRENT LAW ALREADY REQUIRES BLIGHT. THE PROBLEM IS THAT BLIGHT IS VAGUELY DEFINED THAT IT CAN APPLY TO ANYTHING, ANYWHERE AS LONG AS THERE IS ANYTHING BLIGHTED WITHIN THE AREA. THIS DOES NOTHING TO CHANGE THAT.

This only applies to owner-occupied homes, not rental property. What is it about renting a home that makes you less innocent? It doesn’t protect farms, churches, and homeowners who haven’t lived in their house for more than a year. What is it about just purchasing a home that makes you less innocent?

This would protect some homeowners, and increase compensation for some small business owners (only if <25 employees, when California law defines small business as <100 employees). But just like Prop 78, passing this is worse than passing nothing. It would convince voters that real reform has passed when it hasn't

Just like Prop 90 and 78, this is a fox dressed as a hen. Pathetic!