Commit to Peace: Reflection on State Election Results
As we grapple with the far-reaching consequences of the federal elections, we also have much to learn from the outcomes at the state and local level. We want to take this opportunity to share our reflections on key propositions and explore how we can unite to drive meaningful change for a safer, more just Los Angeles.
Prop 6
Prop 6 would have banned “involuntary servitude”—aka forced labor—in prisons and jails as a form of punishment. Unfortunately, the measure failed. Regardless of the circumstances that got them there, people in jails and prisons have hopes, dreams, and families who love them, just like everyone else. Prop 6 was an attempt to center people’s humanity, promote rehabilitation, and free our state from a vestige of slavery. While it failed, we cannot abandon these goals.
Background
About one third of incarcerated people in California prisons work, sometimes against their will, often making less than $1 per hour. Prop 6 would have banned this practice, but it unfortunately failed, meaning people can still be forced to work in prisons and can be punished if they refuse. People in prisons are sometimes unable to work due to health conditions or educational commitments, and a requirement to work with the threat of punishment can get in the way of rehabilitative programming.
Prop 6 was introduced by a reparations taskforce, which was created to study the lasting, harmful effects of the legacy of slavery on African Americans in California. The taskforce identified actions the state government can take to repair those harms and help heal historic wounds. Prop 6 was one of fourteen recommendations they put forth, as slavery and involuntary servitude were banned in the U.S. Constitution by the thirteenth amendment, “except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted.” This amendment allowed White Americans to weaponize the criminal justice system against Black Americans and other groups and use it as an extension of slavery.
The failure of Prop 6 demonstrates a deep need to center the humanity of people who are incarcerated, further educate the public, and to continue to work to dismantle racist systems that are akin to modern-day slavery.
Prop 36
Prop 36 will increase mass incarceration and strip vital funds away from care-first strategies such as mental health, drug treatment, and housing. The money will go back into prisons as the population grows. The proposition rolls back key aspects of Prop 47, which was passed in 2014 and changed certain low-level crimes from felonies to misdemeanors while redirecting money from prisons into community-based services. Prop 36 passed with nearly 70% of the vote.
Prop 36 will strip away over $1 billion in vital funding over the next ten years, including diverting $750 million from successful drug treatment and homelessness prevention programs, $300 million from services for survivors of crime, and $10 million from school-based prevention programs.
The measure will also accelerate mass incarceration by increasing punishments for crimes that were previously categorized as misdemeanors, such as some drug sales and shoplifting. It could lead to 1.5 million more jail admissions and over 100,000 prison admissions over the next ten years.
How did we get here?
Perhaps more than in any other state, the heavy hand of mass incarceration has harmed vulnerable Californians for generations. The War on Drugs and infamous Three Strikes Law exploded our prison population. From 1980 to 2006, the number of people held in California’s prisons grew more than sevenfold—from about 25,000 in 1980 to a peak of more than 175,000 people in 2006. The state went from 11 to 33 prisons, and the share of corrections’ spending in the state budget tripled.
Total California Prison Population (1970 - 2023)
Source: Vera Institute of Justice, Incarceration Trends - California (Jail and Prison Incarceration, Total Population), Found at: https://trends.vera.org/state/CA
In 2009, a panel of three federal judges ordered the state to reduce its prison population to 137.5% of design capacity—a reduction of almost 40,000 prisoners—due to inadequate medical and mental health services. This means prisons were so overcrowded that a reduction of 40,000 people would still have the population be 37% ABOVE maximum capacity. The state was also experiencing severe economic hardship due to the Great Recession and was questioning its massive spending on prisons. This resulted in a series of reforms aimed at reducing prison and jail populations and capturing cost-savings to fund vital services.
One of the most prominent of these measures was Prop 47—The Safe Neighborhoods and Schools Act—passed by California voters in 2014. The proposition reduced charges for drug possession and low-level property crimes from felonies to misdemeanors and recaptured hundreds of millions of dollars for preventive services. The crimes addressed by Prop 47 included drug possession and five property crimes if losses were less than $950. The California’s Legislative Analyst’s Office estimated that some 40,000 people are convicted of these crimes in California each year, and that the measure would save over $100 million annually. These cost savings were reinvested into mental health, substance use programs, employment services for people returning from prison, and school dropout prevention programs, as well as support services for crime survivors.
From Prop 47 to Prop 36 – 10 years later
By most measures, Prop 47 was a success. It reduced incarceration and invested hundreds of millions of dollars into vital programs with limited to no negative effects on crime rates, particularly violent crime. Despite this, the measure has long been a target of police lobbying groups and the right wing media. Corporate interests and the stress and aftermath of the pandemic finally led the public to roll back key parts of this measure.
Urban Peace Institute recognizes that people first and foremost want to feel safe, and it is what we strive for every day. Unfortunately, crime increased after the pandemic, particularly property crime, and Californians continue to feel the effects of the housing and substance use crises all around us. Meanwhile, media coverage focused on attention-grabbing robberies—amplified beyond the larger property crime trends—and Donald Trump and giant retail corporations further fueled anxieties about crime and disorder. Big box retailers poured $17 million into the Yes on Prop 36 campaign—although their claims about profit losses due to theft have been called into question.
After the post-pandemic spike, we saw that community-based strategies were effective at bringing down crime in Los Angeles, particularly violence. Despite that, people understandably felt frustrated and wanted to see change. Voters expressed this loud and clear, passing Prop 36 with huge margins. Unfortunately, in that frustration, the same measure will strip away funding from the very strategies that have been proven to prevent crime and create long-term safety.
So, what can we do?
Now, as always, we must work together to make sure everyone feels safe in their communities, while also recognizing that mass incarceration destabilizes communities who are already experiencing stressors such as poverty, housing instability, and substance use. Join us in advocating for real solutions.
1. Expand effective off ramps from the criminal legal system that address root causes
UPI has been a long-time advocate for diversion, which provides people with an offramp from the legal system and connects them to supportive services to address the underlying issues that led them there in the first place. This includes programs such as LEAD diversion, which supports people whose unlawful behavior stems from unmet mental health and substance use issues, and the Department of Youth Development’s (DYD) diversion programs. UPI’s Justice Transformation team advocates to expand these programs and supports their growth by training diversion program providers.
We do this because we know these programs work. A recent evaluation found that DYD’s youth diversion programs had the greatest impact on youth referred for more serious offenses. 95% of youth referred to diversion for alleged felonies did not recidivate six months after participating in the program, compared to 84% of youth who were not diverted and went through the traditional legal system. The evaluation also found that diversion produces approximately $40,000 in net savings to the County for each youth served by DYD. This shows we need MORE diversion opportunities to support our youth and generate community safety and well-being.
Among other changes on the ballot, LA County also voted in a new District Attorney, Nathan Hochman, who ran against the progressive policies of his predecessor George Gascón. While there is cause for worry that his policies will increase incarceration for low-level crimes, Hochman has also stated that the “goal is ultimately to deter them from committing the crimes in the first place,” and that filling prisons to the breaking point is a “failure of the system.” In that spirit, we urge Mr. Hochman to continue the DA Office’s support for effective programs such as youth diversion and restorative justice.
2. Call on our elected leaders to invest in community health and safety
We know programs that invest in community health—such as housing, drug treatment, and jobs programs—and community-based safety strategies, such as community violence intervention (CVI) and unarmed crisis response, effectively reduce violence while uplifting vulnerable communities.
Unfortunately, the results of the election at the national and state level threaten the future of these programs. In California, despite promising funding for treatment, Prop 36 will strip away hundreds of millions of dollars from vital programs that have helped people turn their lives around for at least a decade. And, at the national level, a Republican-led Congress means federal funding for CVI could be under threat after the field received historic levels of federal investment under the Biden administration.
We need to hold our elected officials from every level of government accountable for securing funding to support vital community-based services. We also need philanthropy to increase their support of these programs to strengthen community organizing so we can build power and secure ongoing public investment.
3. Join our movement, sign the Peace Pledge
To rise to these difficult times, we need to be even more resolute in our efforts and make sure elected officials hear from us as constituents, so they support the community initiatives that we need.
UPI is calling on our community to sign the Peace Pledge!
Join us by signing the pledge, and receive alerts about concrete, meaningful actions you can take to protect the health and safety of your community. Even simple tasks, like signing a petition or calling the office of your local elected official, can make a HUGE difference in what we are able to build and protect.
This work is far from done and this election has impassioned so many of us. Join us in the fight for a safer, more just future—together, we can make a powerful difference!
At Urban Peace Institute, we are committed to uplifting the voices and needs of our communities. Regardless of the challenges ahead, we stand united with our community partners to advocate for investment in community safety and policies that promote equity, justice, and peace, ensuring that the concerns of those most affected by these political shifts are heard and addressed.