Provides people with drug problems an incentive to go to drug counseling instead of jail.  It also creates disincentives for criminal behavior by holding criminals accountable for the damage they do to others.

BEWARE of MISLEADING CLAIMS
‍
Voting yes or no based on the TITLE of a ballot proposition is like voting based on the saying on a bumper sticker or “Click Bait” on an internet site.  They are designed by very talented people to attract your attention and to entice you to follow their way of thinking to convince you to do something. 

Make no mistake, we want you to do something too.  We want you to see both sides and make a decision based on evidence and facts and not emotion.  

We believe the Ballot Title for Prop 36, which was written by State operatives, is misleading. The official title says: ALLOWS FELONY CHARGES AND INCREASES SENTENCES FOR CERTAIN DRUG 

As written above, we believe the emphasis should be on preventive measures – give the person arrested for drugs the option of going to a drug rehab course or going to jail. The alternative is corrective behavior in jail for causing harm to others. 

Please give us a moment to explain. 

Ten years ago, Prop 47 passed by a vote of the people. Just like this proposition (Prop36), the 2016 proposal (Prop 47) had an innocuous title: “Criminal Sentences. Misdemeanor Penalties.”

If the title is a headline or “click bait” we need to think: What does it mean? 

Back in 2016, police chiefs, sheriffs, and law enforcement associations including Fontana POA, warned that Prop 47 would be an incentive to 

• Increase in thefts and drug use
• Theft would eventually get out of control because there would be no consequences
• Drug use and homelessness would increase because alternatives would be limited and there would be no consequences for drug use

Fast forward to 2024, the results of Prop 47 have been worse than we thought. A significant number of business owners, politicians, and legal professionals believe Prop 47 caused significant increases in:

• Theft
• Drug use
• Homelessness
• Business closures
• Shuttered stores  

This is not a politically left or right issue. It is not Democrat or Republican. It is about common sense and love of our state. 

There is a sizable number of high-profile elected officials on the left who have had enough the chaos and support Prop 36. Some of those include mayors London Breed of San Francisco, Todd Gloria of San Diego, Bobbie Singh-Allen of Elk Grove, and Matt Mahan of San Jose.  

The intent of Prop 36 is to reverse the worst parts of the Prop 47 disaster.  

‍First, it focuses on treatment instead of jail for drug possession crimes. If Prop 36 passes, drug treatment services will be expanded, because a person convicted of a drug crime will have the choice to complete a drug treatment program or go to jail. Before Prop 47, drug crimes included a drug treatment option, but it was effectively eliminated when Prop 47 passed. Prop 47 eliminated the incentive to go to a rehab program. 

‍Second, courts must warn people who are convicted of selling or providing illegal drugs, that they may be charged with murder if someone dies because of their continued selling / providing drugs. This is very important in light of the deadly drug fentanyl problem. NPR recently reported, “Most of the illicit fentanyl coming across the U.S.-Mexico border is smuggled through official ports of entry” (NPR, Aug. 7, 2023).

‍Third, it increases punishment for some crimes. A recent flurry of bills signed by Gov. Newsom addressed some of the problems created by Prop 47, but the newly signed bills have a “poison pill.”  If Prop 36 passes, the ten bills will be nullified. Why? If the legislation is good enough to sign into law, why put in a poison pill to nullify them if Prop 36 passes? 

Many news outlets have speculated that the reason is pure politics. We don’t know, but it is an important question to ask. Let’s shift back to 2016 and look at Prop 47’s sister initiative: Prop 57. Both 47 and 57 passed in Nov. 2016.

To give us an idea of how horrible Prop 57 has been, this is a list of crimes which were re-classified under Prop 57 as non-violent: 

• rape of an unconscious person
• pimping a child for sex
• domestic violence
• hate crimes
• assault with a deadly weapon, and 
• drive-by shootings, to list some of the most egregious.  

How can one possibility associate assault with a deadly weapon and rape as a non-violent crime? We believe California voters would have never voted for Prop 57 if they knew it contained that language. It is time to find a balance and restore some semblance of sanity to California. 

Vote YES on Prop 36.

Sources: Prop 36 (2024); Prop 47 (2016) Prop 57 (2016), Calif. Attorney Gen.; Calif. Legislative Analyst; Sac Bee; Cal Matters; KQED NPR Sacramento; ABC News Bay Area; Fox40 Sac; Shouse Law Group Channel; Vera Institute; OC Register; USA Today; KRCA Sac.