Will California's Proposition 36 Unwind Progress or Take a Step Backwards?

California is on the cusp of making a decision that will have far-reaching consequences for its criminal justice system. Proposition 36 on the November ballot proposes to unwind Proposition 47, which made some drug and theft crimes misdemeanors instead of felonies ten years ago. But before making any decisions, let's take a closer look at what's at stake. Proposition 47 has saved taxpayers over $816 million through reduced incarceration costs, a statistic touted by Governor Gavin Newsom. However, the debate surrounding Prop. 36 has divided lawmakers, with some arguing that it's a step backwards towards mass incarceration. Can we really say that a system that locks up thousands of people for petty crimes is effective? Think about it this way: did Prop. 47 really solve the problems it set out to address, or did it just create new ones? What if instead of increasing penalties, we invested in treatment programs and support services for those struggling with addiction and homelessness? Would that not be a more effective and humane approach?

Here's what we know about Prop. 36: it would reclassify some misdemeanor theft and drug crimes as felonies, creating a new category of "treatment-mandated felony" where the person charged could go into treatment instead of prison. But what if treatment isn't completed? The person would face up to three years in prison. Isn't that just a slap on the wrist for a crime that would previously have carried a more severe punishment? Supporters of Prop. 36 argue that it would address three intertwined crises facing California: unsheltered homelessness, untreated drug addiction, and retail theft. But those against the proposition say it takes us backwards, cutting vital drug programs and anti-recidivism programs created by Prop. 47. Where are the treatment slots and beds for those struggling with addiction? Twenty-two counties don't have a single residential treatment facility. Are we really willing to punish our way out of these problems? So, what do we do now? Do we increase penalties or invest in treatment? Do we believe that locking people up will solve our problems, or do we think it's time to take a new approach?

Actions