Proposition 36 is possibly the most contentious measure on the November ballot in California, Courthouse News reports. It has three main prongs, said Caitlin O’Neil, principal fiscal and policy analyst with the Legislative Analyst’s Office. First, it would increase punishments for some theft and drug crimes. Certain misdemeanors would rise to felonies, some felony sentences would increase, and prison, not a county jail, would be required for specific convictions. Second, the initiative would create a new court process for certain drug crimes. Some convictions would require the offender to undergo treatment. Lastly, courts would have to warn people in some circumstances that if they sell drugs in the future, and someone dies, they could face a murder charge. According to O'Neil, alterations to state law are expected to result in increased incarceration rates and a greater burden on the courts, thereby escalating annual costs by tens of millions of dollars. Proposition 36 is anticipated to contribute to a rise in the number of individuals incarcerated, which would reduce the funding available for those services.
At a hearing of the joint Assembly and state Public Safety Committee of the Legislature, the District Attorney of Napa County Allison Haley told California legislators that her fathers decisions as an addict wreaked havoc on his surroundings, and propelled her into a prosecutorial career. It also cemented her conviction that justice must be equitable and just in its application. This conviction is partly why she endorses Proposition 36. Proposition 36 would repeal provisions of Proposition 47 — a 2014 ballot initiative approved by voters that reduced penalties for certain drug and property crimes. Proposition 47 has drawn the ire of many, including Republicans in the Legislature, who claim that it’s fueled the state’s retail theft crisis. Its supporters say they don’t want to undo criminal justice reform that Proposition 47 brought to California and oppose its repeal.
Comentários