Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democratic presidential nominee, found herself in a precarious position on Sunday when reporters pressed her about her vote on California’s controversial Proposition 36. The ballot measure, which aims to increase sentences for certain drug and theft crimes, has become a divisive issue in Harris’s home state as major cities struggle with rising homelessness, addiction, and crime rates.
Speaking to journalists at a campaign rally in Detroit, Michigan, Harris artfully dodged the question, stating, “I am not gonna talk about the vote on that because, honestly, it’s the Sunday before the election and I don’t intend to create an endorsement one way or the other.” Her reluctance to take a firm stance on Prop 36 highlights the delicate balancing act she must maintain as a candidate with a complex history in law enforcement.
Harris’s Record as a Prosecutor Under Scrutiny
Throughout her tenure as San Francisco’s district attorney and later as California’s attorney general, Harris’s approach to criminal justice has come under intense scrutiny. Critics argue that she has a track record of shifting her position on key issues depending on the prevailing political winds. As the 2024 presidential race heats up, her opponents are likely to seize upon any perceived inconsistencies in her stance on crime and punishment.
The Implications of Proposition 36
If passed, Proposition 36 would enact several significant changes to California’s criminal justice system, including:
- Jailing individuals who fail to complete court-mandated drug treatment programs
- Increasing punishments for certain drug and theft offenses
- Elevating some misdemeanors to felonies
- Requiring courts to warn people convicted of selling or providing illegal drugs that they could face murder charges if they continue and someone dies as a result
According to the California legislature’s nonpartisan fiscal and policy adviser, the measure would lead to an increase in the state’s criminal justice costs. Some offenders who currently serve their sentences at the county level would be required to serve them in state prisons, and state court workloads would also rise. The adviser board estimates that Proposition 36 could increase local criminal justice costs by tens of millions of dollars annually.
A Contentious Issue in California’s Cities
The debate surrounding Prop 36 has grown particularly heated in San Francisco and Los Angeles, where elected officials are grappling with the challenges posed by high rates of homelessness, drug addiction, and associated crimes. San Francisco Mayor London Breed, a Democrat, faces a tough re-election battle against challengers who accuse her of allowing the city to spiral out of control during her six years in office.
Crime data from the Public Policy Institute of California reveals that shoplifting rates in the San Francisco Bay Area and Los Angeles steadily increased between 2021 and 2022. While statewide shoplifting rates also rose during this period, they remained lower than pre-pandemic levels in 2019. However, the study notes that commercial burglaries and robberies have become more prevalent in urban counties.
A Rollback of Earlier Reforms
Proposition 36 represents a partial reversal of an earlier ballot measure, Proposition 47, which sought to reduce prison overcrowding by downgrading some felonies to misdemeanors. Many law enforcement officials have attributed the rise in homelessness and crime in the state to the 2014 initiative. Notably, Harris also declined to take a position on Proposition 47 at the time.
Harris’s stance on marijuana legalization has also evolved over the years. In 2014, she reportedly laughed when asked if she would support legalizing the drug for recreational use. However, by 2018, she had reversed her opinion, stating, “I feel strongly people should not be going to jail for smoking weed.” In a recent podcast interview, she emphasized the need to legalize marijuana and stop criminalizing its use.
Navigating a Complex Political Landscape
As the 2024 presidential campaign unfolds, Harris will undoubtedly face continued scrutiny over her record as a prosecutor and her positions on criminal justice reform. Her reluctance to weigh in on Proposition 36 underscores the challenges she faces in navigating a political landscape where issues of crime, addiction, and homelessness have become increasingly polarizing.
While some may view her silence on the matter as an attempt to avoid alienating potential voters, others may interpret it as a sign of political expediency. As the election draws nearer, Harris will need to find a way to articulate a clear and consistent vision for addressing these complex issues while also demonstrating her ability to adapt to the evolving demands of the electorate.
Ultimately, the fate of Proposition 36 and its impact on California’s criminal justice system remains to be seen. As voters head to the polls, they will have to weigh the potential benefits of tougher sentencing against the costs and unintended consequences of such measures. For Kamala Harris, the outcome of this ballot initiative may serve as a bellwether for the challenges she will face as she seeks to convince the nation that she is the right leader for these troubled times.
