I think you can have a favorable opinion about the intent of AB5 but also realize that it was a sloppy law that had caused lot of collateral damage when it was passed. Its sponsor even had a dispute on Twitter with a journalist affected where she said, basically, hey, we had to get it done and we didn't have time to get the details right.
I suspect this is not the end of this fight but hopefully if it comes up again, the legislature will be more thoughtful about crafting a bill.
Prop 22 is written such that it can only be modified by 7/8 vote of the legislature in the future. Its funders made sure to protect their "investment" from the normal political process of push/pull/debate/change.
In the words of one political science professor:
> “I’ve looked at a lot of ballot measures over the years,” said Moylan, adding that a two-thirds majority is common.
> But a seven-eighths “super, super, super-duper majority,” she said, “is new as far as I’m aware.”
Your article states Prop 22 gives the legislature more power than normal.
> By default, a law enacted by ballot measure can only be changed by another law enacted by ballot measure.
The exception to that rule: If crafters of the initiative explicitly say otherwise.
No surprise, many ballot measures do not say otherwise. Compared to that default, Prop. 22’s high bar for amendments actually gives the Legislature more influence than the norm.
Most Propositions in CA can't be modified by the legislature at all.
So, while 7/8th is a very high threshold, it still means that it is theoretically possible for the legislature to draft new labor laws that override Prop 22.
Uber and Lyft are betting that 7/8 threshold will never be hit organically, but they can buy a 7/8 share of the legislature ensuring that this measure can only develop in one direction.
I suspect this is not the end of this fight but hopefully if it comes up again, the legislature will be more thoughtful about crafting a bill.