Ballot Breakdown: No on Prop 36 – The Prison Spending Scam
While proponents have masked Prop 36 as an anti-retail theft and anti-homelessness measure, the law is primarily focused on new and severe penalties for drug possession [1]. There are legitimate concerns around crime and violence in our communities. Rather than investing in mass incarceration, we need to focus on the health and economic challenges that drive people to commit crime. Prop 36 represents an extraordinarily expensive step backwards for public safety.
Our stance: Vote No
AAPI FORCE and our Steering Committee are endorsing a “No” position on Proposition 36, the “Allows Felony Charges and Increases Sentences for Certain Drug and Theft Crimes” Initiative.
What would Prop 36 do? [2]
Proposition 36, increases punishment for certain drug and theft crimes in the following ways:
turns some misdemeanors into felonies,
lengthens some felony sentences, and
requires some felonies be served in prison.
In addition, Proposition 36 will create a new process allowing people who possess illegal drugs to be charged with a “treatment-mandated felony,” instead of a misdemeanor, in some cases. Those who finish treatment would have their charges dismissed. Those who do not finish treatment could serve up to three years in state prison. This change undoes some of the punishment reductions in Proposition 47.
Lastly, it requires courts to warn people convicted of selling or providing illegal drugs to others that they can be charged with murder if they keep doing so and someone dies.
How did we get here?
In 2014, California voters passed Prop 47, which reduced penalties for various low-level crimes and redirected savings to mental health and drug treatment, school truancy and dropout prevention, and victim services. In the years since, the law has saved the state more than $800 million by keeping people out of jails and prisons. Prop 47 reentry programs have been exceptionally successful; while around 44% of people who left prison in California returned with a new conviction in three years, that recidivism rate was only about 8% for people who completed a Proposition 47 reentry program [3].
Reactionary forces are stoking fears about theft and crime in an attempt to repeal Prop 47 and recriminalize our communities. Law enforcement and large retailers, such as Walmart, Target, and Home Depot, have combined forces to spend millions to ensure thousands more Californians, most of whom are people of color, are put behind bars. They don’t want to make our streets safer – they want to get rich off our backs.
How will Prop 36 make our communities less safe?
While proponents have masked Prop 36 as an anti-retail theft and anti-homelessness measure, don’t be fooled; the law is primarily focused on new and severe penalties for drug possession. This measure represents a return to the failed War on Drugs that incarcerated millions and ravaged communities of color. It would send as many as 65,000 new people to state prison and county jail each year, over two-thirds of which would be Black and brown.
Prop 36 will massively increase prison spending. While the Legislative Analyst Office estimates the measure costing hundreds of millions per year, Californians for Safety and Justice has tagged Prop 36 at $4.5 billion a year, an estimate that includes increased state costs, county costs, and unfunded costs for intervention. This comprehensive analysis suggests the law would initiate the largest spending increase in CA history. While imposing billions in new costs to lock up thousands more Californians, the measure would cut $750 million in funding for existing Prop 47 programs that make our communities safer. By defunding our state’s most successful efforts to reduce crime, combat homelessness, invest in education and increase employment, Prop 36 will do precisely the opposite of what it promises.
Undoubtedly, there are legitimate concerns around crime and violence in our communities. Rather than investing in mass incarceration, we need to focus on the health and economic challenges that drive people to commit crime. Instead, Prop 36 represents an extraordinarily expensive step backwards for public safety.