Restorative Justice Center on California Proposition 36.
Prop 36 has emerged as one of the most high-profile measures on California ballots this November. Introduced by a coalition of district attorneys and big-box chains like Target, Home Depot, and Walmart, Prop 36 will impose stricter sentencing laws on drug possession and retail theft. This initiative rolls back the achievements of Prop 47, which passed in 2014 by an overwhelming margin as a part of a larger movement to address the disproportionate impact mass incarceration has had on communities of color. Amidst the flurry of multi-million dollar marketing from the Yes on 36 campaign, it is crucial to frame dialogue around Prop 36 in a Restorative Justice framework, which is critical of the belief that punishment is synonymous with accountability and that harm can be separated from the context in which it occurs.
Greg Totten, the current president of the California District Attorneys Association has been at the forefront of tough-on-crime legislation for his entire career. In the mid-1990s, he led the District Attorneys Association to adopt the three-strikes-and-you’re-out Proposition 184, a key measure behind the exponential growth of the prison population in California. In 2014, he staunchly opposed Prop 47 and used his position as Ventura County DA to campaign against it. Now, he is a driving force behind a coalition of prosecutors that “see a ‘constellation of issues’- homelessness, drug addiction, retail theft, and fentanyl- as inextricably connected and wanted to craft a measure that addresses all four” through Prop 36. (Politico) Rather than boiling down issues to something that can be addressed by the catchall “solution” of incarcerating everyone, a restorative justice framework asks what impact Prop 36 will have on addressing the circumstances that theft, homelessness, and addiction are symptomatic of.
Advocates of No on 36 point out that Prop 36 would surely suck up funding that California recently approved for mental health care, a key factor contributing to the housing crisis. Additionally, it would take funding away from programs that are successful in reducing recidivism by bringing trauma recovery services to crime victims. Other advocates point out that Prop 36 could result in more deportations of those who are not U.S. citizens, including long-time permanent residents, green card holders, and DACA recipients. This does nothing to address the underlying causes that perpetuate theft and addiction, including lack of full access to social programs and poverty.
Polling shows Prop 36 is widely supported by voters, who have identified crime and public safety as a subject of top concern this election cycle. The Restorative Justice Center urges students and community members to look deeply into the different factors that perpetuate harms such as theft, homelessness, and addiction, and interrogate if Prop 36 will truly address these factors.
