Californians Vote in Favor of Proposition 36 Measure

California voters have approved Proposition 36, setting the stage for stronger penalties in drug and theft-related crimes.

At a Glance

Californians voted for Proposition 36 to increase penalties for theft and drug crimes.
The measure reclassifies some misdemeanors as felonies, focusing on repeat offenders.
Opponents, including Governor Newsom, argue it could lead to excessive incarceration.
The measure will cost the state hundreds of millions annually and is strongly supported by law enforcement.

Voter Decision

California voters have thrown their support behind Proposition 36, a contentious measure aiming to reverse parts of Proposition 47 from a decade ago, and outlets have projected its passage. This move is expected to impose stiffer penalties for thefts and drug-related crimes, especially targeting fentanyl dealers. The shift marks a significant pivot in California’s stance on crime and punishment, reflecting voters’ growing concerns about public safety and crime rates.

Proposition 36 also introduces a novel “treatment-mandated felony” category, allowing for treatment rather than incarceration for certain drug offenses. Support from organizations like the California Republican Party and major retailers has cemented its path forward, with campaign funding bolstered by substantial contributions from Walmart and others.

California's Proposition 36, which would increase penalties on certain crimes, is projected to pass.

The measure would make shoplifting a felony for repeat offenders and increase penalties for some drug charges, including those involving the synthetic opioid fentanyl.… pic.twitter.com/WGtaNLYhXQ

— ABC7 News (@abc7newsbayarea) November 6, 2024

Controversy and Opposition

Despite the measure’s approval, Proposition 36 has not been without opposition. Key figures like Governor Gavin Newsom warn that the measure could reignite mass incarceration practices reminiscent of the “War on Drugs.” Newsom has been vocal about his concerns, emphasizing the potential for escalating costs and insufficient resources for mandated drug treatments. He has critiqued the promise of mass treatment as unrealistic, arguing, “Prop 36 takes us back to the 1980s, mass incarceration—it promotes a promise that can’t be delivered.”

The measure’s opponents argue that the financial burden on the state could be monumental, potentially costing California hundreds of millions of dollars annually. Additionally, criminal justice reform advocates label it as merely a progression of the “War on Drugs.” These concerns are echoed by human rights activists and reform groups who believe the measure’s drastic approach could lead to unnecessary incarcerations.

Financial and Political Support

Proposition 36 has found significant backing not only from law enforcement agencies and district attorneys but also from large retailers worried about theft-related losses. Supporters argue that it is a necessary step to curb a surge in crime rates that has persisted over the past several years following the passage of Proposition 47.

“The passage of Proposition 36 reflects Californians’ strong desire for safer communities and meaningful solutions to our state’s rising crime, drug addiction, and homelessness crises,” The Yes on Proposition 36 campaign said.

Still, the divide between proponents and critics highlights a larger conversation regarding California’s future in dealing with crime, punishment, and rehabilitation. As the state moves forward with implementing the changes Proposition 36 promises, the broader repercussions on communities and the state’s resources remain to be fully seen.