The shrilling consequence of California-style direct democracy is that the propositions on the ballet are becoming increasingly obfuscated, with advocates for each prop trying to sugarcoat its words to attract as many flies as possible.
So, the pitch goes: all of you, who want to protect private property, raise your hand and vote to stop the abuse of eminent domain (or “takings”) power of the government. Now, for the question: will the real eminent domain reform prop please stand up? If you think you can spot the difference between the two propositions on the ballot by simply reading them, good luck. I did and my head hurt from the doublespeak.
Prop 98 claims – Vote to protect all property rights. While we are at it, we will phase out rent control.
Prop 99 claims – No, we are the ones who will stop government abuse of eminent domain. Prop 98 is a scheme by landlords.
Here is a simple rule I follow when I can’t understand the political doublespeak: I identify who is speaking rather than what they are saying. Then, by ignoring the words, I just look for what the folks seek to gain with their rhetoric .
So, who are the supporters of Prop 98? The property rights organizations, tax payer groups, farm owners and small business owners. People whose property is the most likely target of abuse by the eminent domain clause – in a word, the landlords!
And, who is behind Prop 99? Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, both State Senators, AARP, League of Women Voters of California, California Teachers Association, National Wildlife Federation, Renter Advocates, Labor Unions, every shade of consumer advocacy, civil and human rights that don’t normally agree on the issues - all are fierce in their opposition to Proposition 98. What is the common aim shared by them?
They are all united in their belief that the “landlords” or the property owners should be defeated. Whatever the method, the property owners should be controlled, cajoled, subdued through direct action of the government.
Hang on! Wasn’t the whole point of proper eminent domain to protect the property owners from the abusive takings by the government? So, ironically, the supporters of Prop 99 ARE the government and their cabal from the left and they are going after the property owners in the name of stopping government abuse. Fox running the hen house!
This is the naked power of direct democratic action. Stripped of doublespeak, supporters of Prop 99 are saying: We, the government, propose to defeat the property owners who are defending against improper “taking” of their property by us (the government), in the very name of stopping government abuse of property takings (eminent domain)! We are stealing from you so others might not steal from you. We are doing this after all to stop the thieves.
The most egregious power play is “the poison pill” provision of Prop 99 that will nullify Prop 98 even if it is passed, as long as Prop 99 gets more votes. Several other blogs have analyzed these propositions in depth in light of stated intent versus real impact these would have. However, the most interesting and thorough report of Californian eminent domain abuse is by the Castle Coalition, a project of Institute of Justice. It describes the powerful nexus between the goverment and the redevelopment machinery that abusively declares a swath of private land "blighted". Disarmed legally, the private property owners are then left with no choice but to sell to the developers.
So, if you haven’t guessed, my recommendation is say Yes on Prop 98, No on Prop 99