Proposition 64


My take on Proposition 64 - Yes

This is part of my ongoing series of posts on each of the Propositions we'll be voting on. Here is the original post, with my ground rules for evaluating propositions, my scorecard and links to each of my arguments.

Proposition 64 - Yes

Under our current laws, individuals can sue companies over what could be a violation of the "public good." This sounds like a pretty good idea, and in fact, for a long time (the laws have been around 70+ years) it was a good idea. Enter a few unscrupulous lawyers and you have a pretty big mess. The more law firms that become dependent on finding these sorts of cases, the more they start scrutinizing the letter of the law and ruining the spirit of it. They find the tiniest of violations, and then extort huge settlements by dangling a lawsuit over the heads of a corporation. Check out some examples of the cases that have been brought in the past if you think this is exaggeration.

Normally, I would be opposed to anything that restricts the rights of consumers to bring lawsuits, but we have to be honest. This law is restricting the rights of lawyers and law firms, not consumers. Usually the consumer still ends up screwed, because the lawyer takes the lion's share of the huge payout. There are also still a ton of laws binding businesses to good practice that this Prop wouldn't touch - things like prohibiting businesses from polluting, or falsely re-labeling products that have expired.

Bottom line: Businesses are being extorted by law firms that worship the letter of the law. California can not afford to keep chasing away job-creators with lawsuits that don't really benefit anyone but lawyers.

Posted: Mon - November 1, 2004 at 08:46 AM | | | | | | |

©