Hi there! I wrote that piece, and I'd like to say that I know it is not rigorously factually correct, as indicated by my use of the word "hyperbolic" in the title, as well as the inclusion of things like fantastical bullet train hobos.

That said, while you are absolutely correct as far as what AB-1889 did, the very existence of AB-1889 proves my point, which was that the first and largest problem with Prop 1A is that it was "VERY POORLY WRITTEN" and "COULD NOT BE AMENDED VIA LEGISLATION".

This is 100% correct because Prop 1A was not a referendum, which CAN be amended or repealed by legislators, it was an initiative that modified the state Constitution, and which can't be amended or repealed by legislators unless the initiative says they can, and Prop 1A doesn't. This is extra dumb, because Prop 1A was written by state legislators as AB-3034, and you'd think they would know better.

The language added by Prop 1A to the California Streets and Highways Code is basically written in stone and cannot be changed or removed without another ballot initiative/Constitutional amendment.

See Section 10(c) of the California Constitution

AB-1889 would not have been necessary in the first place if Prop 1a had not been "VERY POORLY WRITTEN". Because the state legislature cannot amend the state Constitution, AB-1889 is therefore not an amendment, it is NEW legislation that adds NEW stuff to the sections of the Streets and Highways Code that were added by Prop 1A.

Also, yes, the 220 MPH thing was 100% hyperbole - I will absolutely accept that you know more than I do about the actual speed limit restrictions north of San Jose.