Disclaimer: Opinions are those of the writer and do not reflect those of The Vanguard or its Editorial Staff. The Vanguard does not endorse political candidates and is committed to publishing all public opinions and maintaining an open forum subject to guidelines related to decency and tone, not content.
Crime has been historically low in the U.S. for the past 30 years, but you wouldn’t know it by how lawmakers and the media in California are pushing Proposition 36. This regressive measure threatens to undo the critical reforms of Prop. 47, which reduced penalties for certain low-level offenses. Now, Prop 36 seeks to recast the same harmful, racialized net over Black and brown communities.
I remember sitting in my prison cell in 2006, trapped by overcrowding with no access to rehabilitation or education programs. Officials said it was too dangerous to even open the cell doors, forcing us to endure constant lockdowns for years. Soon, California’s prison population would soar to its peak of 173,643. Incarcerated people were crammed into gymnasiums and triple bunks, prompting a federal court to intervene due to human rights abuses and medical neglect that caused one preventable death every week for years. Prop. 47, passed in 2014, was part of the solution to addressing California’s overwhelmed prison system. It reduced penalties for drug possession and petty theft while redirecting savings from lower incarceration costs into investments for rehabilitation, prevention, and housing programs. This wasn’t just about releasing people from overcrowded prisons; it was a targeted effort to fund the social support we know actually keeps people safer.
Fast forward to 2024, and fear-mongering headlines push for harsher penalties, driven by Republicans capitalizing on public fear. Donald Trump, on national TV, demonized Prop. 47 as evidence of lawlessness, while corporations like Walmart, Target, and Home Depot—many of which have boasted record profits—have funded Prop. 36. These corporations, who are in fact responsible for wage theft on a grand scale, now attempt to stoke panic around out-of-control retail theft—claims that have largely been proven to be overinflated.
Prop. 47 has been a success. Now, Prop. 36 seeks to undo these reforms, dragging California back into the days of mass incarceration. Familiar, racially charged narratives, like images of Black and brown people stealing from department stores flood social media. For many people who have been in the justice system, this talk is reminiscent of the “super predator” scare tactics of the 1990s.
The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) spends over $132,000 annually to incarcerate a single person. Over 70% of California’s prison population is made up of people of color, and Prop. 36 will exacerbate this disproportionality. It’s no coincidence that the California Correctional Peace Officers Association (CCPOA) is one of Prop. 36’s biggest donors; after all, filling prisons means job security and higher salaries for them. What is surprising is that they are doing this at the expense of their own officers’ health, since overcrowding prisons will decrease their employee’s wellness and life expectancy. Is this the California Model we’ve heard so much about?
Californians deserve to feel safe. The latest crime trends for 48 cities show large declines across almost every major crime category, including an 11% decline in theft and a 17% drop in burglary in the first three months of 2024, compared to the same period in 2023. Maybe people feel unsafe because our state has abandoned so many of its people to the streets?
Rather than expanding mass incarceration under the guise of “public safety,” we should focus on what’s proven to work: community-based solutions. Programs funded by Prop. 47 have successfully improved housing stability and increased employment opportunities for directly impacted people—all at a fraction of the cost of imprisonment. Addressing the root causes of crime, like poverty, mental health, and substance abuse, through accessible community care, reduces harm and builds stronger neighborhoods.
Prop. 36 doesn’t do anything in particular to combat retail theft except for introducing longer sentences. Its “mass treatment plan” is just mass incarceration in disguise, as it fails to provide a single dollar of funding for the treatment it would mandate. Prop. 36 will simply funnel more people into jails and prisons—continuing the failed policies of the War on Drugs. In contrast, Prop. 47 has saved $816 million and served over 50,000 Californians.
Many of us thought that after passing a historic Racial Justice Act bill and supporting a Reparations Task Force that identified systemic racism as a central problem in our criminal justice system, these old tactics would no longer persist. But here we are again.
Californians must reject Prop. 36. This measure will cost the state billions over the next decade while doing little to enhance public safety.
Why must we keep repeating mistakes of the past? We should continue building on the progress made by Prop. 47, which has proven that prevention, voluntary treatment, and reentry support are more effective and cost-efficient than incarceration. In fact, the state’s own nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office says we can safely close as many as five state prisons and save California billions annually. That’s a blueprint for a stronger California. We know what truly works: programs that address the root causes of harm and rehabilitate people in their own communities.
Steve Brooks is an award-winning journalist, currently incarcerated in San Quentin State Prison. Steve was the first incarcerated person chosen to participate in the California Local News Fellowship and currently writes for the Bay City News Foundation. He is also the former Editor-in-Chief of San Quentin News, a publication written and produced by incarcerated people. He is also a member of The People in Blue, a diverse group of incarcerated people working to help change the culture in California prisons. Steve’s mission is to use his voice to increase public safety and advance social justice.
There is no evidence that “three strikes” laws act as a deterrent to reduce crime. A comparison of crime rate trends between states with and without such a law shows no difference in those trends. It’s time to look for a different solution because this one isn’t working and only fills our prisons meaninglessly and increases our taxes.