3 ms·
> The best part about Prop 22 is it reveals who reads their props before expressing an opinion on them. Well, thanks for exposing that your heuristic is broken
by nullc 6y ago
> The best part about Prop 22 is it reveals who reads their props before expressing an opinion on them.
Well, thanks for exposing that your heuristic is broken-- because the only place I've seen it brough up is from reading it myself.
(If you saw it discussed elsewhere you may well have seen /me/ writing about it).
The 7/8th's threshold is an insult-- it exists for the only purpose of telling an effective lie about the legislatures ability to amend these exclusions.
- renewiltord 6y agoPerfect. Having read it yourself, perhaps you can explain to us why you have concluded that a 7/8ths majority could overturn it.
- nullc 6y agoA substantial amendment to the Business and Professional code could defacto overturn it. That isn't the only way the props effects could be effectively bypassed, they could be bypassed by other updates to california law, e.g. to unionize app workers, changes to laws governing working conditions for drivers, etc. All such changes are potentially pre-empted by prop22's language. Prop22 arguably creates a fairly broad automatic veto for Uber/et. al. against any California law that could be argued to impede the rideshare business. For example, there is a clear argument post prop22 that a law which prohibited registered sex offenders from being rideshare app drivers would now require a 7/8th's vote. Uber has repeatability shown itself more than willing to exploit loopholes in an unethical manner and we've now granted them a fairly generalized shield against loophole closing. Ultimately the courts may not be willing to follow such a broad effect, but the recipe for a lot of time and money to be wasted litigating it is coded right into the proposition.
- renewiltord 6y agoThis is Wikipedia lawyering. It's no surprise Californians found themselves unconvinced.
- nullc 6y ago"Wikipedia lawyering"?