Gov. Gavin Newsom and Democratic legislative leaders have strongly opposed the bill, but they are being ignored by California voters, who overwhelmingly support the proposal.
Maybe voters don’t know the governor, or maybe they don’t care. They’re following their gut and thinking California is going too soft on the bad guys again.
The pendulum on crime and incarceration is clearly swinging from the left back to the center. Thirty years ago, California was leaning to the right with its war on drugs and harsh three-strikes sentences for repeat felons. Public opinion continues to swing.
A remarkable number of supporters for a bill sponsored by the California District Attorneys Association, the bill would increase penalties for property and hard drug crimes and require necessary treatment for repeat offenders who are addicted.
The initiative leads by an astonishing 45 percentage points, 71% to 26%, with just 3% undecided.
That’s unprecedented for a controversial ballot measure.
Well, it’s controversial among politicians anyway, but not among voters, it seems.
“I was surprised by the level of support,” said Mark Baldassare, a pollster at the Public Policy Institute of California.
But he adds a warning: “Proposals aren’t like elections; the bottom can fall out, and the campaign for or against Measure 36 hasn’t even started yet. It’s easy to say ‘no’ to a proposal instead of ‘for’ it, especially when someone comes along and points out its fatal flaws.”
Sure, but don’t bet on it. Opponents will have a very tough road to overcome Prop. 36.
He leads every demographic group, including Democrats by a huge margin, 63% to 33%, and self-described liberals, 56% to 41%.
Baldassarre noted that polling shows voters consider Proposition 36 by far the most important of the state’s 10 ballot measures.
Another independent poll conducted last month by the University of California, Berkeley’s Institute of Government also showed the measure leading by a large margin, with 56% in favor, 23% opposed and 21% undecided.
IGS pollster Mark DiCamillo said the “high visibility” of retail thefts, either caught on camera or witnessed firsthand by voters, is why he strongly supports Proposition 36.
“For voters, what they’re seeing is outrageous,” he said. “And they’re linking that to approving Prop. 47.”
The bill, passed unilaterally by federal judges facing increasing pressure to ease overcrowding in prisons and jails, reduces some felonies to misdemeanors, including shoplifting where the stolen goods are worth less than $950.
Making arrests for minor offenses became more difficult because officers had to either witness the crime or have a judge’s warrant. Either way, judges began releasing minor offenders. So officers stopped responding to shoplifting complaints. Store owners stopped reporting crimes. And robberies increased.
PPIC researchers recently reported on a year-long study of Proposition 47’s impacts.
“Under Proposition 47, prison and jail populations plummeted after certain crimes were reclassified from felonies to misdemeanors, and arrests for drug and property crimes also plummeted,” the report said.
But the pandemic also contributed to the decline in arrests, the researchers said: As people stayed home to prevent the spread of COVID-19, “there were fewer encounters with police and, consequently, fewer arrests,” they argued.
Either way, public pressure grew on Sacramento Democrats to do something, but they did nothing for several years, perhaps thinking that the growing backlash against Proposition 47 would die down. But it didn’t.
Newsom has been one of Proposition 47’s earliest and most vocal supporters and staunch defender.
“We don’t need to go back to the failed policies of the last century,” he argued. “Mass incarceration has been proven ineffective and is not the answer.”
Governor Newsom’s initial response included a heavy-handed attempt to remove Proposition 36 from the ballot, but that failed in an untimely manner, leaving state legislative leaders faltering against the governor.
Proposition 36 would repeal parts of Proposition 47, aiming to reduce retail theft without making any major changes to Proposition 47. But he concocted a bizarre “poison pill” bill that would automatically nullify the Democrats’ own anti-crime bill if Proposition 36 is approved by voters.
The goal was to force the proponents of Proposition 36 to surrender and accept the Legislature’s proposal, but Democrats rebelled against the Governor’s bizarre plan and refused to include the lethal drug in the bill.
Governor Newsom and Democratic lawmakers are hoping to fulfill voter demands for California to step up efforts to combat robbery and shoplifting.
“The bill they passed has some good points, but overall it’s a half-baked bill,” said Gregory Totten, executive director of the California District Attorneys Association. “Our law (36) says we have to increase penalties for theft.”
The bill would also impose tougher penalties for the sale of the deadly drug fentanyl and treat it like other hard drugs like heroin and cocaine, meaning some people caught possessing hard drugs might only need treatment.
Outside of Sacramento, leading Democrats have listened to their constituents, read the polls and support Proposition 36. These include San Francisco Mayor London Breed, San Diego Mayor Todd Gloria and San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan.
But Sacramento Mayor Darrell Steinberg, a former state senate leader who has dedicated his life to creating treatment for the drug-addicted, homeless and mentally ill, opposes Proposition 36.
He argues that Measure 36 makes “false promises” about treatment. Steinberg predicts the bill will fall short because it focuses on law enforcement and not on treating people with addictions.
But so far, Governor Newsom and Sacramento Democrats have not led anyone away from Proposition 36. Voters are moving in the opposite direction.
