Proposition 36 is a flawed crime-fighting plan that prioritizes punishment over justice

The 36th proposal, which is on the ballot for the November 5 elections in California, is presented to voters as a crime-fighting measure. It will make some crimes that are now considered misdemeanors felonies and impose longer prison sentences.

The three core moral values ​​of our Unitarian Universalist faith are love as a force that holds us together, justice where racism is eliminated, and equality where every human being is inherently valuable and has the right to thrive in dignity, love, and compassion. The no vote on Proposition 36 is consistent with these values.

Proposition 36 is unfair because it treats prior misdemeanor convictions as cumulative rather than “allowing the sentence to fit the crime.” For example, if a person has been previously convicted twice for thefts under $950, the third conviction will result in the crime being reclassified as a felony. Fairness means that the punishment should be appropriate to the crime charged; It does not mean that the sentence will be increased upon a third conviction for a relatively minor offence.

Idea

Because the misdemeanor arrest rate among poor people, and especially people of color, is two to five times that of whites for drug possession, theft, and vandalism, Proposition 36’s increased penalties will fall disproportionately, unfairly, and unfairly on those who can least afford it. fines, court costs and imprisonment.

Longer prison sentences are expensive. In California, this costs the state $133,000 per inmate per year. The recidivism rate in California prisons is around 40%. Incarcerating more people has never been the answer to solving our society’s problems. Hundreds of millions of dollars a year in higher costs would result from longer prison sentences and felony prosecutions that take longer and are more complex to carry out, according to the Legislative Analyst’s Office.

The additional tens of millions of dollars annually would likely result from net increases in county jail populations and local court-related workloads.

Where would this money come from? In 2014, California passed Proposition 47, which increased funding for mental health, drug treatment, truancy, dropout prevention, and victim services. Last year, the state saved $95 million by providing these preventive services, for a total savings of almost $1 billion! Proposition 36 would cancel some of these proven preventive services and divert money to punishment-focused programs.

Proponents of Prop. 36 cite issues of smash-and-grab thefts and drug trafficking that need to be addressed, especially regarding fentanyl. Opponents of Proposition 36 point to laws passed in the last two years. State leaders have increased funding for retail theft prosecutions and fentanyl trafficking, which has led to more convictions, and they say lawmakers continue to introduce strong new laws targeting retail theft rings, illegal online markets and fentanyl.

California does not need Proposition 36 because it is unfair, unfair, too expensive, would reduce proven preventive services, and does not recognize the work our elected lawmakers do to effectively deal with serious concerns about theft and drug trafficking.

Vote No on Proposal 36!

Pastor Tim Kutzmark, board president Ida Jones and social justice team co-chair Stephen Sacks are members of the Unitarian Universalist Church of Fresno