Proposition 6 would require new state spending on various criminal justice programs, as well as for increased costs for prison and parole operations. This funding would come from California’s General Fund, reallocating funds currently spent on K-12 Education, Higher Education, Health and Human Services, Business, Transportation and Housing, and Environmental Protection. Deems any youth 14 years or older who is convicted of a “gang-related” felony as unfit for trial in a juvenile court, thus, prosecuting these youth as adults. Necessitate that all occupants who are recipients of public housing subsidies submit to annual criminal background checks. If any occupant did not pass this criminal background check, the entire family would be removed from their housing.
lbpost.com columnists Jerlene Tatum, Dennis C. Smith and Daniel Brezenoff help us make sense of Prop 6 today.
Jerlene Tatum
Vote No on Proposition 6, also know as the “Safe Neighborhoods Act: Stop Gang, Gun and Street Crime.
Proposition 6 is a Hook’em and Book’em Strategy. Approximately $950,000,000 will be dumped into the California penal system than into the future of our youth. Proposition 6 will call for 14-year-olds to be sentenced as adults, therefore more 14-year-olds in prison, versus given an opportunity to become productive citizens. Long Beach Unified spends an average of $6559 per student per year (LBUSD 2005-06 data), where as, in the State of California it cost approximately $46,000 per prisoner per year. State prisons are currently overcrowded and the state is expecting an increase in prisoners. Well with the additions of new laws, that Prop 6 will create, what can they expect? Wouldn’t it be great if our colleges were overcrowded? So, where would you rather have your money go?
In the last year the city of Long Beach has received two sources of funding for gang suppression, prevention and intervention; CalGRIP (California Gang Reduction, Intervention & Prevention Program) and Weed & Seed Grant; the passage of Proposition 6 will not give us an opportunity to see the outcomes of these funded programs.
By voting yes on Prop 6 we are throwing away the future of your youth. In addition there is just too much stuff bundled into Proposition 6 … read it… all 12 pages.
Invest in Children, Not Prisons
Read about Weed
Read about CalGRIP
*
Dennis C. Smith
Prop 6: Police and Law Enforcement Funding. Criminal Penalties and Laws. Initiative Statute. Adds almost $1 billion in state funding each year for police and local law enforcement. Buried later in the language is “and for corrections operating costs.” That would be the prison guards, their union has gotten enough out of Sacramento the past several years I am not in favor of a bond issue to give them more. While funding for local law enforcement like LBPD would be great, what strings would that come with that would take away local control to get state funds? Another billion dollars? My vote is No on Prop 6.
*
Daniel Brezenoff
What it does: Spends a cool billion on law enforcement, with an emphasis, ostensibly, on combating gangs. Money is mandated for 30 years.
Pros: Might see a few hardcore sociopaths disappear from the streets.
Cons: Violates the Constitution of the United States at least twice, and won’t significantly reduce gang activity.
How I’m voting: NAY.
Bleeding heart liberal that I am, not to mention being a social worker (king daddy of bleeding heart liberals) I see gang violence as primarily a social problem with social solutions. I prefer interventions in the economic, educational, medical, and urban planning realms to the blunt force of police power.
Still, there is no doubt, in dealing with the reality of gangs, police power is needed as one element of a multifaceted social response. There are surely men whose souls have become twisted beyond our society’s current ability to offer healing or forgiveness of any kind. There are men who live on murder. Police can protect u from these men sometimes. Good.
But escalation of force and the punitive element of social intervention is not always helpful or just. Sending children to adult court makes juvenile court look obsolete (it isn’t). Increasing sentences for drug users misses the point entirely. Expanding the use of hearsay violates the Sixth Amendment, and forcing gang members to register themselves violates the Fifth. Does that matter anymore? Because if we’re just going to ignore the Constitution, I’d like to know about it; I like to know where I stand. Besides, if we’re not using the Bill of Rights, there are a few countries that might like to borrow it.
There are some good things in this anti-gang bill. I’d definitely like to see parole officer caseloads reduced; I work with PO’s and they are beleaguered. I’d like to lock away a few felons who use guns. But the approach represented by this bill has come to dominate our social philosophy, and it isn’t working with gangs any better than it is with drugs. In fact, the approach represented by proposition 5 could really help make the prop 6 approach less necessary.
Will it pass? Likely.
Trivia: Gang members are just like you and me, except with scary tattoos, cool names…and shorter life expectancies.