Penalties for theft, drug offenses

Jump to section

What would it achieve?

Proposition 36 would classify some minor theft and drug offenses as serious felonies.

The measure would also create a new category of crime – a “treatment-requiring felony.” People who plead no contest to the charges could complete drug treatment instead of going to jail, but if they don't complete treatment, they still face up to three years in prison.

Why is it on the ballot?

Ten years ago, voters approved Assembly Bill 47, which was designed to reduce prison overcrowding in California by making some theft and drug offenses misdemeanors. Since then, prosecutors, police and major retailers have blamed the law for a rise in property crimes and homelessness. Now, Assembly Bill 36 is trying to undo Assembly Bill 47.

During the pandemic, shoplifting and commercial burglary rates have skyrocketed, particularly in Los Angeles, Alameda, San Mateo and Sacramento counties. The Public Policy Institute of California found that statewide, reported shoplifting of goods valued at $950 or less has increased 28% over the past five years, the highest level since 2000.

By combining shoplifting with commercial burglaries, the institute's researchers found that the total number of reported thefts was 18% higher than in 2019.

A hand drawn illustration of hands with handcuffs

Take the props quiz

Find out whether or not you agree with Proposition 36 to influence your 2024 election →

For

$6.2K raised

Proponents of Bill 36 tout it as a way to combat homelessness, which has increased by more than 50% since the passage of Bill 47. The reason, supporters say, is that drug addiction is driving people to the streets, and increasing penalties for drug possession is the only way to force people to seek treatment.

Supporters also say Prop. 36 is a good compromise between California's tough-on-crime policies, which pushed prison capacity to the limit, and the last decade under Prop. 47, which they say “created loopholes in state law that criminals exploit to evade responsibility for fentanyl trafficking and repeat shoplifting.”

Supporters

Walmart, Target, Home Depot
California District Attorneys Association
California Correctional Peace Officers Association
Republican Party of California

Against

$1.3 million raised

Opponents say there are no studies on criminal justice or homelessness to support the belief that harsher penalties – or the threat of harsher penalties – prevent crime or get people off the streets.

Prop. 36 will consume hundreds of millions of dollars in court and prison costs, they say, without measurably reducing crime or poverty. In the meantime, schools, health care and other essential services will be neglected.

Opponents of the measure argue that Proposition 36 would represent a return to the war on drugs, which California voters rejected a decade ago with Proposition 47.

Opponent

Governor Gavin Newsom, House Speaker Robert Rivas, Senate President pro tempore Mike McGuire
Alliance for Security and Justice
ACLU of Northern California
Democratic Party of California
The San Francisco Foundation

Members fund this unbiased, independent CalMatters Voter Guide. Donate to our nonprofit newsroom today.
Members fund this unbiased, independent CalMatters Voter Guide. Donate to our nonprofit newsroom today.

Penalties for theft, drug offenses

Jump to section

What would it achieve?