It's the "and other actions" language of Prop 12 that makes me support it, actually.

Almost no one seems to understand that what Prop 12 does is restore the law in Texas to its status before Lucas v. Texas, 757 S.W.2d 687 (Tex. 1988), in which then-Justice William Kilgarlin led the charge to declare unconstitutional a tort-reform "cap" on damages that the Texas Legislature had passed in 1977. Because the then-activist Supreme Court did so by purporting to read into the Texas Constitution language that clearly isn't there, it takes a constitutional amendment to undo this mischief.

Were you without remedies in 1987? Did all, or any, of the harms being shouted by the anti-Prop 12 forces now exist then? Ummm ... well, no.

But this seems to be too subtle, for some reason. The pro-Prop 12 forces insist on making this into a fight about doctors and such, because that's just as big a scare tactic as the ones the plaintiffs' personal injury bar is using.

So basically, both sides fueling the propaganda are lying to you, or at a minimum, obscuring the real issue and exaggerating and spinning like crazy.

Oh well. At least the tickets to watch this circus are free.

I wish the pro-Prop 12 people would stop calling me EVERY DAY.