California voters pass Proposition 36, taking tougher stance on retail theft, crime
Californians easily passed Proposition 36 Tuesday night, with more than two-thirds voting to strengthen penalties for retail and drug crimes that were downgraded a decade ago.
Supporters said tougher consequences were needed to reduce homelessness, drug use and thefts across the state. Opponents argued the measure will again move California’s criminal justice pendulum, in this case backward, to a time when stricter sentences led to prisons overflowing with incarcerated people.
The result, said Yolo County District Attorney Jeff Reisig, an outspoken advocate for the measure, “sends a message that it is time for an adjustment to the trajectory on some of our crime policies.”
To the outside, the easy win might seem like a surprise in a state dominated by Democrats.
In reality, it’s just the latest example of California voters showing their complicated feelings about crime and punishment.
They’ve rejected two ballot measures since 2012 that would have ended the death penalty but — with little protest — have let Gov. Gavin Newsom keep a moratorium on executing inmates.
They overwhelmingly voted in 2016 to allow the state prison system to release people earlier and reduce the sentences of inmates who achieve educational milestones and show good behavior. Yet they appeared lukewarm about Proposition 6, another ballot measure this year, which would prevent the system from forcing inmates to work. Early returns Tuesday showed Prop. 6 falling short of passing.
And voters in some of the state’s most Democratic-leaning counties have elected prosecutors in recent years who are pushing to change the criminal justice system, including how much time people spend locked up. One, Chesa Boudin, was recalled before finishing his first term in San Francisco. Early returns showed two other DAs — Pamela Price in Alameda County and George Gascón in Los Angeles —losing Tuesday in races to keep their jobs.
“The caricature is that we’re all left coast liberals,” said David McCuan, a political science professor at Sonoma State University. “But when you look at California what you actually see is a Jekyll-and-Hyde voter.”
In 1994, Californians approved a ballot measure that required a minimum sentence of 25 years to life for three-time repeat offenders. The so-called Three Strikes and You’re Out policy passed with more than 71% support. The state’s prison population was about 125,600 at the time. By 2006, it had shot up over 173,000.
Overcrowding was so bad that the U.S. Supreme Court in 2011 ordered California to drastically cut its inmate population because the health care inside of its prisons was unconstitutional.
Proposition 47 helped the state drop its jail and prison numbers. The 2014 measure required certain drug and theft crimes to be charged as a misdemeanor instead of as a felony and allowed people previously accused of those offenses to be resentenced. It received almost 60% of the vote and has directed hundreds of millions of dollars for school programs, drug and mental health treatment and victims services.
“I think voters have been dissatisfied with the status quo in criminal justice for a long time,” said Cristine Soto DeBerry, executive director of the Prosecutors Alliance of California. “Prop. 47 gave them the opportunity to say: ‘We would like more intervention than prisons, especially when we’re dealing with low-level offenses.’”
In 2020, more than 60% of California voters rejected a ballot measure that would have, in part, reversed changes that were made under Prop. 47.
But as the COVID-19 pandemic continued, the state’s homicide rate increased and videos of people ransacking businesses spread across social media and filled television screens. Rates of violent and property crimes rose, though they remained well below levels seen in the 1980s and 1990s. Still, the perception that crime was a problem in the state spiked, according to polling from the Public Policy Institute of California, a non-partisan research organization.
“The public sees it every day and it’s really about how people feel,” said Sacramento County Sheriff Jim Cooper, who also served in the state Legislature from 2015 to 2022. “And I think a lot of politicians don’t take that into account.”
It is clear they are closely watching now and aware of voter frustrations. Newsom and Democratic leaders in the Legislature opposed Prop. 36, but decided to not forcefully campaign against it. They believed a package of new theft-related laws approved by state lawmakers this year was a better approach.
Democratic Mayors in San Jose, San Francisco and San Diego supported Prop. 36.
So does Tuesday’s result indicate voters have dramatically changed their views on criminal justice?
“Prop. 36 is not a wide swinging criminal justice policy,” said Greg Totten, CEO of the California District Attorneys Association. “We believe very strongly that it’s a thoughtful and strategic measure to address some of the most significant public safety and community issues that are facing all Californians today.”
Matt Mahan, San Jose’s mayor, also downplayed any suggestion of a large shift in voter sentiment.
“I think it’s a practical way to fulfill the original promise of (Prop.) 47,” he said, “which I think we have to admit has not been realized, even though, philosophically, it was the right idea.”
One aspect of Prop. 36 would, in some cases, allow people who possess illegal drugs to avoid incarceration, and have their charges expunged, if they successfully complete a treatment program. Supporters say the measure has a treatment-focused approach. But it comes with no new funding, raising questions about how many people will actually be diverted.
“The reason why Prop. 36 passed is because it was masquerading as a reform,” said Tinisch Hollins, executive director of Californians for Safety and Justice. “The proponents of this measure really used language that would lead a voter to believe that they had an intention to solve these issues.”
The Legislative Analyst’s Office, which advises California leaders on policy and fiscal matters, estimated that Prop. 36 could add hundreds of millions of dollars in annual costs just for the state and increase the prison population by a few thousand people. It currently sits at around 91,900.
Sam Lewis, executive director of the Anti-Recidivism Coalition, predicts Californians will revisit the changes they approved Tuesday.
“I think voters in the near future will look back and say ‘we need to fix that.’”
This story was originally published November 5, 2024 at 9:59 AM.
