It’s as if Proposition 36, the sentencing reform initiative overwhelmingly accepted by voters in November, by no means occurred.
It seems that California’s main Democrats desire to perpetuate the dependency on lethal medicine than to adjust to an initiative that they opposed.
“The Governor’s budget not only fails to add dedicated funding for Proposition 36—it actually cuts funds currently being used to implement it,” mentioned Steve Jackson, president of the Chief Probation Officers of California. “This forces counties to do more with less, undermining public safety and making it harder for people to access the accountable drug treatment voters overwhelmingly supported.”
Handed by greater than 68% of voters, Prop. 36 elevated the punishment for 2 high-profile offenses, repeat petty thefts and repeat use of laborious medicine akin to cocaine, fentanyl, heroin, and methamphetamines.
As an alternative choice to an extended keep in jail or jail, Prop. 36 “will provide drug and mental health treatment.”
Opponents additionally pointed to the shortage of adequate drug remedy packages to deal with a surge in caseloads.
But proponents mentioned the specter of higher punishment was a wanted incentive to steer customers into remedy. And voters, fed up with photos of retailer looting and open-street drug use, have been clearly prepared to attempt Prop. 36 over an unacceptable established order.
It didn’t assist that Prop. 36 didn’t specify exactly the place the cash would come from to broaden remedy packages.
However it was completely authorized for the initiative to go away that matter to the governor and the Legislature. But up to now, the governor and the Legislature are punting.
“Probation departments remain committed to meaningful change, but we need the state to stop cutting essential funding and start investing in the outcomes Californians expect and communities deserve,” Jackson mentioned.
Granted, the state finances is beneath stress.
It’s an odd political place for Democrats to be in opposition to extra drug remedy as a instrument to fight dependancy. Breaking the cycle of dependency is among the most humane issues a society can do.
But it seems that the intentional hunger of native remedy packages is a method of limiting the implementation of this initiative. No drug person can face a stiffer sentence if remedy isn’t an alternate.
But who wins right here?
This concern isn’t going away.
Tom Philp is a columnist at The Sacramento Bee. ©2025 The Sacramento Bee. Distributed by Tribune Content material Company.
