This is an archive of a past election.|
See http://www.smartvoter.org/ca/state/ for current information.
Three Strikes Law. Repeat Felony Offenders. Penalties
State of California
Initiative Statute - Majority Approval Required
Pass: 8,447,576 / 69.3% Yes votes ...... 3,750,222 / 30.7% No votes
Index of all Propositions
|Results as of Dec 3 10:07pm, 100.0% of Precincts Reporting (24491/24491)|
|Information shown below: Summary | Fiscal Impact | Yes/No Meaning | Official Information | Arguments ||
Should California law be amended to provide that a life sentence should not be imposed for a third felony conviction unless the third conviction is for a serious or violent felony?
Secretary of State
Who contributes? What is spent?
League of Women Voters of California Education Fund
Pros & Cons Meetings
|Arguments For Proposition 36||Arguments Against Proposition 36|
The Three Strikes Reform Act, Proposition 36, is supported by a broad bipartisan coalition of law enforcement leaders, civil rights organizations and taxpayer advocates because it will:
• MAKE THE PUNISHMENT FIT THE CRIME
Precious financial and law enforcement resources should not be improperly diverted to impose life sentences for some non-violent offenses. Prop. 36 will assure that violent repeat offenders are punished and not released early.
• SAVE CALIFORNIA OVER $100 MILLION
Taxpayers could save over $100 million per year—money that can be used to fund schools, fight crime and reduce the state’s deficit. The Three Strikes law will continue to punish dangerous career criminals who commit serious violent crimes —keeping them off the streets for 25 years to life.
• MAKE ROOM IN PRISON FOR DANGEROUS
Prop. 36 will help stop clogging overcrowded prisons with non-violent offenders, so we have room to keep violent felons off the streets.
• LAW ENFORCEMENT SUPPORT
Prosecutors, judges and police officers support Prop. 36 because Prop. 36 helps ensure that prisons can keep dangerous criminals behind bars for life. Prop. 36 will keep dangerous criminals off the streets.
• TAXPAYER SUPPORT
Prop. 36 could save $100 million every year. Grover Norquist, President of Americans for Tax Reform says, “The Three Strikes Reform Act is tough on crime without being tough on taxpayers. It will put a stop to needlessly wasting hundreds of millions in taxpayers’ hard-earned money, while protecting people from violent crime.” The California State Auditor projects that taxpayers will pay millions to house and pay health care costs for non-violent Three Strikes inmates if the law is not changed. Prop. 36 will save taxpayers’ money.
• TOUGH AND SMART ON CRIME
Criminal justice experts and law enforcement leaders carefully crafted Prop. 36 so that truly dangerous criminals will receive no benefits whatsoever from the reform. Repeat criminals will get life in prison for serious or violent third strike crimes. Repeat offenders of non-violent crimes will get more than double the ordinary sentence. Any defendant who has ever been convicted of an extremely violent crime—such as rape, murder, or child molestation—will receive a 25 to life sentence, no matter how minor their third strike offense.
With the passage of Prop. 36, California will retain the toughest recidivist Three Strikes law in the country but will be fairer by emphasizing proportionality in sentencing and will provide for more evenhanded application of this important law.
Please join us by Voting Yes on Proposition 36.
Learn more at www.FixThreeStrikes.org
HERE’S WHAT THE SUPPORTERS OF PROPOSITION 36 DON’T TELL YOU:
“If Proposition 36 passes, about 3,000 convicted felons serving life terms under Three Strikes could petition for a reduced sentence . . . ”
“Third strikers who are resentenced under this measure would become eligible for county community supervision upon their release from prison, rather than state parole . . . some of them could be released from prison without community supervision.”
“Judges and Prosecutors don’t need Proposition 36. In fact, it reduces our ability to use Three Strikes to target dangerous repeat felons and get them off the streets once and for all.”
We urge you to SAVE Three Strikes. Please Vote NO on 36.
In 1994 voters overwhelmingly passed the Three Strikes law—a law that increased prison sentences for repeat felons. And it worked! Almost immediately, our state’s crime rate plummeted and has remained low, even during the current recession. The reason is pretty simple. The same criminals were committing most of the crime—cycling through our courts and jails—over and over again. The voters said enough—Three Strikes and You’re Out!
In 2004, the ACLU and other opponents of tough criminal laws tried to change Three Strikes. The voters said NO. Now they are back again with Proposition 36. They couldn’t fool us last time and they won’t fool us this time.
Just like before, Proposition 36 allows dangerous criminals to get their prison sentence REDUCED and then RELEASED FROM PRISON! So who does Proposition 36 apply to?
After all that, Proposition 36 would let those same criminals ask a DIFFERENT Judge to set them free. Worse yet, some of these criminals will be released from prison WITHOUT PAROLE OR ANY SUPERVISION!
Here’s what the Independent Legislative Analyst says about the early release of some prisoners under Proposition 36: “Some of them could be released from prison without community supervision.”
No wonder Proposition 36 is OPPOSED by California Police, Sheriff’s and law enforcement groups, including:
What do you think these newly released hardened criminals will do once they get out of prison? We already know the answer to that: They will commit more crimes, harm or kill more innocent victims, and ultimately end up right where they are today—back in prison. All of this will cost taxpayers more than keeping them behind bars right where they belong.
No wonder Proposition 36 is opposed by victim rights groups, including:
At the time Three Strikes was approved by the voters, some thought it might be too harsh or too costly. Voters rejected that view in 2004. But even if you believe that the Thee Strikes law should be reformed, Proposition 36 is not the answer. Any change to the sentencing laws should only apply to future crimes committed—it should not apply to criminals already behind bars—cutting their sentences short. It is simply not fair to the victims of crime to have to relive the pain of resentencing and early release of these dangerous criminals. We kindly ask you to VOTE NO ON PROPOSITION 36.
Don’t believe the scare tactics used by opponents of Prop. 36.
Here are the facts:
Today, dangerous criminals are being released early from prison because jails are overcrowded with nonviolent offenders who pose no risk to the public. Prop. 36 prevents dangerous criminals from being released early. People convicted of shoplifting a pair of socks, stealing bread or baby formula don’t deserve life sentences.
Prop. 36 is supported by law enforcement leaders, including:
They know that Prop. 36: