But what appears to be the most common form of eminent domain in the U.S. is typically an appalling assault on liberty. As Justice Sandra Day O’Connor argued in her dissent in 2005’s Kelo vs. New London, it’s commonly used for reverse Robin Hood purposes — taking land from the poor (or poorly connected) and giving it to wealthy, connected developers.

Now we may be on the brink of eminent domain takings in California that would be uniquely odious. I wrote about it in U-T San Diego in reaction to Judge Michael Kenny’s finding that the state didn’t have a legal business plan, sufficient environmental reviews or authority to issue any more bonds for its high-speed rail project:

“These are immense obstacles. Yet instead of acknowledging their seriousness, rail authority board Chairman Dan Richard depicted them as predictable ‘challenges,’ and a spokeswoman said the authority would proceed with its plans to seize land for the project in the Central Valley via eminent domain.

“This is in keeping with Richard’s full-speed-ahead bravado. But is also unconscionable — disrupting the lives and livelihoods of Central Valley residents for a project that is now an extreme long shot solely to create an apparition of progress.

“Before this happens, it’s time for a ‘have you no shame?’ intervention in Sacramento. If Jerry Brown won’t take Richard to the woodshed, then it’s time for some senior Democratic leader to take Brown to the woodshed.

“A decade ago, when he was attorney general, Treasurer Bill Lockyer ripped the ‘puke politics’ of Gov. Gray Davis. Taking away folks’ homes and farms for political theater is politics at its pukiest. In coming days and weeks, we hope Lockyer, Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom, Sen. Dianne Feinstein or some Democrat of stature has the decency to make this point.”

As with Kelo ruling, backlash could be huge

In 2005, principled believers in property rights were very pleasantly surprised at the sharp backlash against eminent domain triggered by the 5-4 high court Kelo vote to continue to allow land grabs to help local governments increase tax revenue.

I think there’s a chance that if the rail authority starts seizing productive ag lands and neighborhoods of middle-class homes in the Central Valley for a project that appears dead, there would be another backlash, and not just in California.

It wouldn’t just be an obnoxious assault on the property owners facing land grabs. It would be a hateful assault on American norms of fairness and honesty.

We’ll see.

By Chris Reed

News that state Treasurer Bill Lockyer will retire when his current term expires in January 2015 has produced plenty of tributes to Lockyer’s smarts and tenacity, and plenty of pushback from people who say he’s just a part of the Democratic establishment that’s mismanaged the state since Pete Wilson left Sacramento in 1999.

I think the latter critique is pretty strong. Still, I did write a newspaper editorial endorsing him in 2006 that offered some faint praise.

“The Democratic candidate for treasurer, Bill Lockyer, has displayed a vicious partisan streak in his eight years as attorney general, using his powers to sandbag initiatives he doesn’t like and to file frivolous lawsuits solely to score political points with unions and environmentalists. In his previous job, as Senate president, he was the epitome of the pay-to-play Sacramento culture, famously blocking a law meant to keep criminals out of California casinos and card clubs after taking hundreds of thousands of dollars in donations from the gambling industry.

“Incredibly enough, we have no choice but to endorse him. His Republican opponent, Board of Equalization member Claude Parrish, is simultaneously flippant, uninformed and unfocused. Lockyer may be the devil, but he’s a smart devil. Were Lockyer treasurer, it is incomprehensible that Californians might someday wake up to learn that the state had lost billions of dollars because he made complex financial decisions without due diligence. That is not the case with Parrish.

“We set out to give Lockyer the most grudging election endorsement in the history of the printed word. We hope we have achieved our goal.”

‘Puke politics’ call was one for the ages

Still, while Lockyer has for the most part played the role of loyal partisan, what he did in 2003 remains a high point in modern California politics. He denounced the “puke politics” of then-Democratic Gov. Gray Davis and later admitted to voting for Arnold Schwarzenegger in the recall.

That is the Lockyer I’d like to see over the next 19 months: someone who is brutally honest about his party. The New York Times reported in April that President Obama wishes he could go rogue in his speeches and tell the truth about the political world, as Warren Beatty did in 1998 as an unhinged, suicidal senator in the movie “Bulworth.” Lockyer could play that role with little of the downside that Obama would face for being honest about his fellow Dems. It’s not like he’s pushing a legislative agenda as California treasurer.

Lockyer could be true to his history by continuing to depict Republicans as heartless reactionaries, as he loves to do. But he could also point out that the CTA and CFT see public schools more as an adult jobs program than a way to help kids get ready for life. That affluent urban greens simply don’t care if heavy regulation leads to high unemployment. That touting “social justice” is a convenient veneer for a Democratic Party that cares far more about its share of the middle class and wealthy — public employees, trial lawyers, greens and socially liberal urban professionals — than about poor people.

And if Lockyer would go Bulworth on Jerry Brown — specifically Jerry Brown and the bullet train — that would be awesome.

C’mon, Mr. Treasurer: Tell the truth about the bullet train

California is on the brink of spending billions of dollars on a Central Valley bullet train link with no prospects of funding for the links that would actually reach the Bay Area and Los Angeles. The word for this is insane.

The gap between the self-image Brown cultivates himself of frugal, careful brainiac and the absurdity of his championing of the bullet train project is the size of the Grand Canyon.

C’mon, Bill! Candor time! Get back in your “puke politics” mode!

By Chris Reed

Democratic lawmakers have been a bit more likely to discomfit the status quo and show high expectations than normal this year. A Senate committee report strongly suggesting that school districts were stealing federal school lunch funds for inappropriate uses used to be the best example. But this week’s decision by a freshman Democrat assemblyman to embarrass a veteran Democratic pol over her poor performance in statewide office is without recent precedent. Here’s Brian Joseph’s account in the Orange County Register:

“Brought before legislators to explain a six-week backlog of business filings in her office, Secretary of State Debra Bowen offered this week a small window into state operations.

“It was not, as Assemblyman Tom Daly, D-Anaheim, said afterwards, encouraging.

“She explained how the her agency’s Sacramento office building, constructed in 1995, has ‘maxed out’ on available electrical outlets and how the state’s tortured procurement process virtually ensures that whatever software she orders will be obsolete by the time it’s delivered.”

It’s 2013, and a lack of electrical outlets is used to explain a major shortcoming at a state agency. Feel free to laugh, groan, guffaw or cry. Or all four simultaneously.

“She blamed budget cuts, staffing shortages and a generally unresponsive and inefficient government system for embarrassing delays that businesspeople say is costing them money.

“‘I almost needed smelling salts the first day I took a tour of the Secretary of State’s office,’ said Bowen, a former Marina Del Rey legislator who was first elected California’s chief elections officer and business records clerk in 2006. ‘It was just so incredibly paper-driven.’

“Bowen’s office has taken heat in recent days after it was revealed that her staff was taking 43 days to process business filings. As Assembly Budget Committee staff reported, this backlog delays businesses from starting up or hiring employees and postpones business tax payments.

“New York processes such documents in seven days, committee staff found. Texas, five days.

“‘There is a scoreboard,’ Daly said, referring to the other states’ better turnaround times. ‘At some point, the time for excuses is over.'”

How un-Sacramento: Expecting competence, rejecting excuses

This is a “wow” moment, given how Sacramento has worked for years. But it shouldn’t be. Lawmakers shouldn’t go easier on statewide officials just because they’re in the same party.

Especially now that Democrats’ power has reached hegemonic levels, taxpayers have to hope Dem lawmakers will make like Tom Daly going forward.

As for Bowen, I got to know her a little bit a dozen years ago when she was a state senator during the 2000-01 blackout crisis/debacle/scandal. I found her and another Democratic state senator, Joe Dunn, to be impressive and smart. I find it confounding that as secretary of state, she’s been so low-key and passive.

But maybe she just harbors hopes of following the Bill Lockyer route, moving from powerful statewide office to powerful statewide office without ever going for the governor’s job.

But at least Lockyer occasionally makes waves and gives a middle finger to the Democratic status quo.

By Chris Reed

Call it “The Tales of Two Tax Hikes.”

So the pro-Proposition 30 campaign starts running dishonest ads that make it sound like there are strong protections guaranteeing its additional revenue for education won’t be hijacked by “Sacramento politicians.” It has no such protections, and “Sacramento politicians” control what it is used for. Ridiculously enough, this phony spiel is a carbon copy of the central pitch for Prop. 38, which actually does try to ensure its additional tax revenue doesn’t go to teacher pay raises. So Prop. 30 is trying to piggyback on Prop. 38 ads and create voter confusion.

Unsurprisingly, Prop. 38 sponsor Molly Munger says this is lame and promises TV ads that lay out the differences between the two measures.

And the Prop. 30 folks say, “Shame, shame, shame!” This is from the L.A. Times:

“If you launch these Prop. 30 comparison attack ads, you will be the second Munger spending millions against our students and schools,” the letter states. “In the end, the Munger family could be known as the millionaires who destroyed California’s schools and university.”

Munger has invested $31 million of her own money for the Yes on 38 campaign. Her brother, Charles Munger Jr., has dumped $22 million into a committee aimed directly at taking down the governor’s tax-hike plan.  

I was relieved to see Molly Munger wasn’t buying this garbage. Instead of holding the moral high ground, the pro-Prop. 30 campaign is pure puke politics, as Bill Lockyer would say if had one of his occasional candid spells, and he was willing to take on the CTA, not a lousy governor on the verge of being recalled.

But, really, what else are Prop. 30 folks going to do? They can’t tell the truth about California, or anything close. So what do they do? They lie. And they take school kids as hostages. Classy bunch.