California’s Crime-Fighting Prop. 36 Takes Early Lead After Polls Close

People vote at the San Francisco City Hall voting center on the final day of early voting ahead of Election Day, on Nov. 4, 2024. Loren Elliott/Getty Images

California’s Proposition 36, a grassroots crime-fighting initiative, held a strong lead as early results came in on Nov. 5.

The measure to increase sentencing for some drug and theft crimes garnered more than 70 percent of votes as 56 percent of the state’s precincts reported returns, according to unofficial preliminary results from the Secretary of State’s office.

Preliminary results of California's Proposition 36 on Nov. 5, 2024. Sophie Li/The Epoch Times

A yes vote on Prop. 36 would mean people convicted of certain drug or theft crimes could receive stronger punishment, such as longer prison sentences.

The bipartisan initiative creates tougher penalties for serial retail theft and smash-and-grab burglaries.

It also includes Alexandra’s Law—a measure to establish warnings for suspected drug traffickers when they are arrested. The warning would require law enforcement to warn them that if the drug they provide results in death, they could face murder charges.

In some cases, suspects who possess illegal drugs at the time of the arrest would be required to complete a treatment program or serve up to three years in prison.

A “no” vote would mean the punishment for drug and theft crimes would stay the same, in accordance with the state’s current Prop. 47 measure passed by voters in 2014.

The coalition behind the proposition—the California District Attorneys Association and California for Safer Communities—said the initiative would amend the controversial Prop. 47 and hold repeat retail theft and drug criminals more accountable. The group also claims the proposition would incentivize treatment over jail time for drug users and sellers.

Prop. 36 qualified for the general election ballot in June.

The initiative is one of 10 ballot questions voters faced in the general election.

Gov. Gavin Newsom opposed Prop. 36, despite apparent voter approval for the changes. A poll taken in September by the PPIC showed 71 percent of voters would vote “yes” on the proposition.

“It’s about mass incarceration ... and it would increase the costs to taxpayers,” Newsom said at a press conference on a different topic on Sept. 4. “That’s money we won’t have for other priorities in this state.”

The state’s nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office also said in a Sept. 10 report the passage of Prop. 36 could increase the state’s prison population. The current number of inmates is about 90,000. The legislative analysts’ report said that number could increase by a few thousand people.

Proponents asked lawmakers not to discourage voters from supporting the measure as public safety concerns continued to rise around the state.

Greg Totten speaks in support of the Homelessness, Drug Addiction, and Theft Reduction Act at a press conference in Sacramento, Calif., on June 12, 2024. Travis Gillmore/The Epoch Times

“This is a battle for the future of California, and it’s a battle for the future and health for the businesses of California,” Greg Totten, president of the group behind the ballot initiative, told The Epoch Times at a June 12 press conference in Sacramento.

Another supporter, Gina McDonald, cofounder of Mothers Against Drug Addiction and Deaths, said in a campaign filing that tougher punishment was needed to curtail the state’s drug trafficking.

“Fentanyl has killed too many people, yet traffickers can avoid the consequences,” McDonald said. “We need Prop. 36 because no parent should ever have to bury another child killed by fentanyl poisoning.”

Opponents, including Newsom, said the proposal goes too far.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom attends a press conference in Los Angeles on Oct. 27, 2024. Newsom is among those who opposed Prop. 36, saying it went too far and could increase the state's prison population. Mario Tama/Getty Images

“Retail theft and fentanyl are real problems. Californians deserve real solutions,” Cristine Soto DeBerry, executive director of the Prosecutors Alliance Action; Don Frazier, executive director of the Reentry Providers Association of California; and David Guizar, co-founder of Crime Survivors for Safety and Justice, wrote in an opposition statement.

“Prop. 36 is a false promise, not a fix…[and] will reignite the failed war on drugs, wasting billions on jails and prisons, and slashing crucial funding for crime prevention, treatment, victims, and rehabilitation.”

Unintended Consequences

Prop. 36 overturned some aspects of current crime law voters approved when they passed Prop. 47 in 2014.

Proponents say Prop. 47 resulted in some unintended consequences, such as increased and repeated organized retail theft, store closings, and the practice of stores locking up items to prevent theft.

Prop. 47—billed as the “Safe Neighborhoods and Schools Act”—has become increasingly controversial in California as retail crime, especially flash-mob style theft, has gone viral.

The crime law was passed after California was ordered to reduce prison overcrowding in 2009 by a federal court decision.

Democratic presidential nominee Vice President Kamala Harris speaks with reporters onboard Air Force Two at Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County Airport in Romulus, Mich., on Nov. 4, 2024. Jacquelyn Martin/ AFP via Getty Images

Under Prop. 47, prison and jail populations decreased sharply, as did arrests for drug and property crimes.

Certain offenses were reduced from felonies to misdemeanors, only requiring officers to issue tickets to offenders in some cases. The proposition has lowered prison populations and led to $800 million in savings for the state, according to the Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC).

The proposition took effect immediately after it passed on Nov. 5, 2014.

The law lowered the classification of shoplifting to a misdemeanor if the value of property stolen did not exceed $950. Grand theft offenses were also reduced to misdemeanors if stolen property did not exceed $950.

Receiving stolen property valued at less than $950 was also reduced to a lesser charge, as was forgery, fraud, writing a bad check, and the personal use of most illegal drugs.

Vice President Kamala Harris, who advocated for the passage of Prop. 47, when she was California’s attorney general, reportedly declined to reveal on Sunday how she voted on Prop. 36.

Changes were also added to California’s criminal law during the COVID-19 pandemic, which allowed prisoners to be released early.

The state’s Judicial Council, a body that creates policy for the state’s court system, adopted a statewide emergency bail schedule that set bail at $0 for most people accused of misdemeanors and lower-level felonies. Several counties instituted the zero-bail policy after the pandemic, choosing to make it a permanent policy.