Election 2024 - CA Prop 36
I don't buy the argument California needs to get tougher on crime
Prop 36 asks if Californians should increase penalties for theft and drug crimes. This amends the reduction in penalties from 2014’s Prop 47.
Theory is always a lot easier for me than empirics, which is why I do empirics for a living. So let me start with theory.
I don’t want to live in a society that punishes people for drug use. We should treat addiction as a public health emergency, not as a crime. Portugal decriminalized in 2001 and had initial success treating drug addiction as a disease, until the financial crisis led to funding cuts for their drug treatment systems. A world after the War on Drugs is possible. Prop 36 takes us further from such a world.
As far as theft, I can understand the theoretical reasoning behind high penalties - if it is no longer economically worth a criminal’s effort to break the law, they will rationally choose other uses of their time. I mean, okay, but by that reasoning you could justify execution as the penalty for all crimes. A just punishment for theft would mean restitution to the victim and fines for the costs of investigation and prosecution of the crime. Prisons, if they are to exist at all, should exclusively exist for violent criminals.
But you may not believe in any of that. Which is why we have empirics.
We find some evidence that Proposition 47 affected property crime. Statewide, property crime increased after 2014. While the reform had no apparent impact on burglaries or auto thefts, it may have contributed to a rise in larceny thefts, which increased by roughly 9 percent (about 135 more thefts per 100,000 residents) compared to other states. Crime data show that thefts from motor vehicles account for about three-quarters of this increase.
They also point out that even though there is an increase, the overall level remains low. This is best observed in a graph from Lofstrom and Martin in another Public Policy Institute of California article. Property crime has been trending down since the peak observed in the late 70s.
So there may be an increase in crime that looks like a high percentage if you pick a recent reference year, but the level of property crime remains low in California relative to the last five decades. For me, that is not sufficient to justify increasing penalties for theft.
The one bright spot in Prop 36 is the use of drug courts, where folks have the opportunity to go through rehab as an alternative to jail time when convicted of a drug-related crime. I question whether this is the best way to help addiction - as I do not believe drug use should be a crime - but it is less bad than jail.
On the whole, I do not see Prop 36 as taking our society closer to a safer, more just world.
Links: