Follow The Money
by Timothy Sandefur
Bill Lama of polosverdesblog has a post here explaining why he's voting for Prop. 90. He makes an excellent point about the money involved:
It’s hard to understand why a measure to protect personal property rights would have such vociferous opposition. The primary opponents of Prop. 90 include groups that pushed hardest to get the $37 billion public works bond package on the ballot: the California Chamber of Commerce, the California Business Roundtable and the League of California Cities.
It's even better than that. The television stations are already saturated with "No on 90" commercials, yet we aren't seeing any "Yes on 90" commercials. I called a campaign staffer on Tuesday to ask why that is, and was informed that the "Yes" campaign has run out of money, and can't afford to place the commercials they've prepared. And yet the anti- campaign claims that the proposition is being pushed forward by wealthy powerful developers exploiting the middle class. Now, if the proposition is supported by the wealthy landlords, how come all the money seems to be on the anti- side?
The answer, of course, is that the wealthy interests are actually opposed to reforming eminent domain, because eminent domain is so often used for "redevelopment." (H/T: Initiative is A Good Thing.)
What to read next
PLF asks the U.S. Supreme Court to rule that there is no “legislative exception” to the unconstitutional conditions doctrine
It seems that some governments and courts prefer to treat Supreme Court precedent as an option, rather than a requirement. The Supreme Court has ruled—twice—that it’s unconstitutional for government to … ›