Introduction
Among several notable
propositions appearing on the the November 2004 California ballot is Proposition
66, which would limit California's "Three-Strikes" law
dealing with sentencing for felony crimes. Proposition 66 would require that
a felony triggering the second and third "strike" be a violent or serious crime
instead of any felony, as the current "Three-Strikes" law provides. The "Three-Strikes" law, itself an initiative measure, appeared on the November 1994 ballot
as Proposition 184* and was approved
with 72 percent of the vote.
Whether there is
a relationship between the "Three-Strikes" law and California's ballooning prison
costs and inmate population is a hotly contested issue. The California prison
system is the biggest in the U.S., with a budget of over $5.3 billion dollars
a year (see California
Enacted Budget) and housing over 161,000 inmates. Proponents of Proposition
66 claim that more than half of the people punished under the "Three-Strikes"
law are convicted of non-violent offenses, clogging the prisons and costing
millions of dollars annually. Opponents of the law cite lowered crime rates
and concomitant savings in police and trial court costs.
*Ballot arguments and the Attorney General's
official title and summary can be found in the California
Ballot Propositions Database
"Three-Strikes" Background
In 1994, the atmosphere
in California was politically charged on the issue of violent crime, with the
public outraged over several highly publicized murders. In June 1992, 18 year
old Kimberly Reynolds was shot and killed by two repeat felons with long arrest
records. Kimberly's father, Mike Reynolds, started a ballot initiative called
"Three-Strikes and You're Out," to subject repeat felons to long mandatory sentences.
Then, in October 1993, 12 year old Polly Klaas was kidnapped at her Petaluma
home, and found murdered months later. Eventually, Richard Allen Davis, a repeat
violent offender, was convicted for her murder. Polly's father, Marc Klaas,
and the powerful California Prison Guards Union
added their considerable support to the "Three-Strikes" initiative, and propelled
the measure to victory on the November 1994 ballot as Proposition
184.
Proposition 184 substantially
lengthened prison sentences for persons who had previously been convicted of
a violent or serious crime. Specifically, a person who committed one prior violent
or serious offense and who committed any new felony could receive twice the
normal prison sentence for the new felony (the "second strike"). A person who
committed two or more prior violent or serious offences and then committed any
new felony would automatically receive 25 years to life in prison (the "third
strike").
An identical legislative
version of the Proposition 184, AB
971, was
introduced in the Assembly in March 1994 by Assembly member Bill Jones. The
law quickly passed the legislature, and Governor Pete Wilson signed it into
law on March 8, 1994. When Proposition 184 passed in November 1994, its status
as a voter approved measure gave it special protection from legislative revision.
Although challenged in the courts, Proposition 184's constitutionality was affirmed
in two March 2003 U.S. Supreme Court decisions, Lockyer
v. Andrade and Ewing
v. California. The two cases involved repeat offenders who were sentenced
to prison terms of 25 years and longer after stealing golf clubs and videotapes.
Criticism of Proposition
184 has centered on its cost. Large increases in the prison population and prison
expenditures followed the law's implementation. By September 1999 almost 50,000
inmates were imprisoned as second and third strikers, according to a report from
the Legislative Analyst. From 1983 to 2004 the prison system budget increased
from $1 billion to nearly $6 billion, a fact that many consider at least partially
attributable to Proposition 184. Critics of the law also note that the majority
of persons imprisoned under the law are second strikers who have committed non-violent
felonies such as property crime and drug offences, and that the system has led
to excessive incarceration rates. Some claim that the law was written to give
the impression that its focus was violent offenders and didn't fairly convey
its impact on all felons.
Assessments of Proposition
184's impact on the crime rate vary. Some conclude that major crime in California
has decreased by 50% or more since the law's implementation, making it an obvious
success. They say the law is effective against repeat criminal activity because
it keeps dangerous habitual criminals behind bars. They say further that by
reducing repeat criminal activity, the law reduces public expenditures on law
enforcement and criminal justice. Opponents claim that crime rates decreased
nationally for reasons other than the "Three-Strikes" law, such as a stronger
economy in the 1990s and increased incarceration under other laws. They also
say that the law unfairly sentences minor felons and costs California billions
of dollars every year that could be better spent in other areas.
-
Background
Reading
- Schmertmann,
Carl P.
"Three-Strikes and You're Out
: demography analysis of mandatory prison sentencing," Demography,
Vol. 35, no. 4 (Nov. 1998).
- Skolnick, Jerome
H.
"Wild pitch: 'Three-Strikes, You're Out'
and other bad calls on crime," The American prospect, No. 17
(spring 1994).
- Jones, Bill.
Crime is down 38% after five years of Three-Strikes. Sacramento, CA : California
Secretary of State, 1999.
- Zimring, Franklin
E.
Crime and punishment in California : the impact of Three-Strikes and You're Out.
Berkeley : Institute of Government Studies Press, University of California,
1999.
- Males, Mike
A
Striking Out : the failure of California's "Three-Strikes and You're
Out" Law. San Francisco, CA : Justice Policy Institute, [1999 or 2000].
- "Three-Strikes
and You're Out" law's impact on state prisons : an update. Sacramento,
CA : Legislative Analyst's Office, 1999.
- DiCamillo, Mark.
Overwhelming support for "Three-Strikes and You're Out" initiative
/ by Mark DiCamillo and Mervin Field. San Francisco : Field Institute, 1994.
Proposition 66
Proposition 66, an initiative statute, made it to the ballot in a climate
of concern over problems inside the California prison system and alarm over
record state budget deficits. It was spearheaded by Citizens Against Violent Crime, a California
political action committee whose chairman, Joe Klaas is the grandfather of Polly
Klass, whose murder helped ignite the support for Proposition 184 in 1994. Proposition
66 is also backed by Sacramento businessman Jerry Keenan whose son Richard is
serving time for manslaughter after crashing his car while driving drunk and
killing two passengers.
Proposition 66 would
limit felonies that trigger the second and third strike to violent or serious
crimes. It would eliminate residential burglary from the list of serious felonies
that qualify as strikes, except when prosecutors prove someone was in the home
at the time of the burglary. It would also allow prosecutors to count only one
strike per prosecution instead of one strike per conviction, as current law
requires, and it would increase penalties for child molesters. Proponents contend
that Proposition 66 restores the "Three-Strikes" law's original intent to keep
serious and violent criminals in prison.
Opponents of Proposition
66 include Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, Attorney General Bill Lockyer and
several crime victims advocates groups. They contend that Proposition 66 could
allow as many as 26,000 inmates back on the streets. They also accuse the main
financial backer of Proposition 66, Jerry Keenan, of trying to change the law
to get his son out of prison early.
Public opinion on
"Three-Strikes" legislation may be undergoing a significant shift. Proposition
184 passed with over 70 percent of the vote. A July 1996 Los Angeles Times
poll found
that 75 percent of the respondents viewed the "Three-Strikes" law as a "good
thing." However, a June 2004 Field Poll
found 76 percent of the respondents in support of Proposition 66. An Los Angeles Times poll on Oct. 19 found 62% of the respondents in support of Prop. 66.
In July, opponents of Prop. 66 filed suit against the sponsors of the initiative,
over language which claims that Prop. 66 would "restore the original intent"
of the Three-Strikes law passed in 1994. Proponents announced that they would
counter-sue over the language in their opponents arguments. On August 10, a
Sacramento Superior Court Judge ordered both sides in the Prop. 66 debate to
make changes in the language they use in their arguments. Judge Raymond Cadei
required opponents to cite a different illustration of a criminal whose sentence
might be shorter if the initiative passes, targeting the use of violent offenders
as examples. However, he did allow opponents to quote from a California District
Attorney's estimate that as many as 26,000 felons could be released from prison
if the law is enacted. He also required proponents to clarify that approving
the changes would not release criminals currently serving sentences for violent
offenses though they could have been previously convicted of those crimes.
Official
Voter Information
Via the California
Secretary of State. The text, legislative analysis and ballot arguments are
from the Official
Voter Information Guide. Campaign finance data is from the Cal-Access
database of campaign receipts and expenditures.
Text
Legislative
Analysis and Ballot Arguments
Campaign Finance:
Individual Campaign Committees
Total Contributions and Expenditures (select "Nov. 2004 election" and "Prop. 66" in dropdown boxes)
Key
Web Sites
Public Interest Sites
League of Women Voters of California Education Fund
Impartial analysis of Proposition 60: In
Depth and Pros
and Cons
California Journal
Ballot
propositions: Analysis of the November propositions by California Journal
editors in the October issue.
Advocacy Sites
Citizens Against Violent Crime
Pro Prop. 66 political action group
[Website archived in UCLA Online Campaign Literature Collection]
Crime Victims United of California
Anti-Prop. 66 web-site.
Protect Public Safety
Anti-Prop. 66 website.
[Website archived in UCLA Online Campaign Literature Collection]
Three-Strikes and You're Out:
Stop Repeat Offenders
Anti Prop. 66 web site by Mike Reynolds.
Public
Opinion
"Late-breaking surge of No votes on Prop. 66 (three strikes limits) puts outcome in doubt. Declining support for Prop. 62 (open primary). Heavy No vote on two Indian gambling measures.," Field Poll, Oct. 30, 2004. (Release
#2146).
Field
Poll
"Los Angeles Times Poll Excerpts," Los Angeles
Times Poll, Oct. 20, 2004.
Responses to questions on Propositions 63, 66, 67, and 71.
Los Angeles
Times Poll
"Large majority continues to favor Prop 66, to limit "Three
Strikes" law; Plurality intends to vote no on Prop. 64, tort reform, although
many remain undecided," Field Poll, Oct. 13, 2004. (Release #2141).
Field
Poll
Selected
Newspaper/Journal Articles, Editorials and Polls
The following citations
include links to full-text online when available. For more info, see Tips
for Finding Full-Text Articles.
Mathews, Joe.
"How prospects for Prop. 66 fell so far, so fast:
Three-strikes revamp looked likely till Pete Wilson, the governor and a billionaire joined to defeat it," Los
Angeles Times, Nov. 7, 2004.
NewsBank
(UCB)
Martin, Mark.
"Efforts to reform 'three strikes' law likely to be on ballot again," San Francisco Chronicle, Nov. 4, 2004.
San
Francisco Chronicle
Salladay, Robert and Garvey,
Megan.
"Prop. 66 in tough fight: Schwarzenegger steps up campaign against proposed
changes to the three-strikes law. Backers plan new ad to counter his influence,"
Los Angeles Times, Nov. 1, 2004.
NewsBank
(UCB)
Martin, Mark.
"3-strikes measure loses ground in poll," San Francisco Chronicle,
Oct. 30, 2004.
San
Francisco Chronicle
Slater, Eric and Nichols,
Peter.
"Battle Over 3-Strikes Measure Heats Up: Foes of Prop. 66, which would
curb sentencing law and is ahead in polls, scramble to defeat it," Los
Angeles Times, Oct. 29, 2004.
NewsBank
(UCB)
Martin, Mark.
"Schwarzenegger steps up opposition to Prop. 66," San Francisco
Chronicle, Oct. 29, 2004.
San
Francisco Chronicle
Furillo, Andy.
"Prop. 66 foes prepare TV campaign:
South state billionaire may join governor, prison officers union in giving funds," Sacramento Bee, Oct. 26, 2004.
NewsBank (UCB)
Mecoy, Laura
"Governor leads ballot issue fights: first new target is Prop. 66, which wuold alter 'three strikes' law," Sacramento Bee, Oct. 21, 2004.
NewsBank (UCB)
Garvey, Megan
"Three-Strikes Debate Centers on Early-Outs:
Prop. 66 backers say 4,000 inmates would be eligible. Opponents say it's more like 26,000," Los Angeles Times, Oct. 21, 2004.
NewsBank (UCB)
Garvey, Megan.
"Voters Favor Scaling Back 3-Strikes Law: A decade after passing strict
sentencing rules, most want changes. They also support a stem cell research
measure, one of 16 on the ballot," Los Angeles Times, Oct. 20,
2004.
NewsBank
(UCB)
Furrillo, Andy.
"Area law officials oppose Prop. 66," Sacramento Bee, Oct.
20, 2004.
NewsBank
(UCB)
Kravets, David.
"Three-strikes measure might free many more prisoners," San Francisco
Chronicle, Oct. 14, 2004.
San
Francisco Chronicle
Martin, Mark.
Ballot measure to limit '3 strikes' sentencing supported broadly: Nonviolent
crimes would be exempt from extended terms," San Francisco Chronicle,
Oct. 13, 2004.
San
Francisco Chronicle
Martin,
Mark.
"'3 strikes' faces test of scope on Nov. 2: Prop. 66 addresses debate --
is the law effective or cruel?" San Francisco Chronicle, Oct.
12, 2004.
San
Francisco Chronicle
Mintz, Howard.
Prop. 66 campaign unleashes emotion," San Jose Mercury News, Oct.
11, 2004.
NewsBank
(UCB)
Fukrillo, Andy.
"Voters get 2nd chance at 'three-strikes' law," Sacramento Bee,
Oct. 11, 2004.
NewsBank
(UCB)
Leedy,
Matt.
"Klass kin backs Three-Strikes limit: Slain girl's grandfather campaigns
in Fresno for Proposition 66," Fresno Bee, Oct. 8, 2004.
NewsBank
(UCB)
Martelle, Scott.
"Jones urges no change in 3 strikes: The GOP candidate for U.S. Senate, who wrote the law, opposes an initiative that would require a third strike to be violent or serious," Los Angeles Times, Oct. 7, 2004.
NewsBank (UCB)
"Emotions high on proposed three-Strikes revision: Prop. 66 backers call life sentences for nonviolent crimes unfair: opponents fear flood of criminals," The Press Democrat, Oct. 4, 2004.
NewsBank (UCB)
Hoffman, Nathaniel.
"Authorities warn of Prop. 66's wake," Contra Costa Times,
Sept. 29, 2004.
NewsBank (UCB)
Furillo, Andy.
"Don't change '3-Strikes' law, Brown warns," Sacramento Bee,
Sept.
28, 2004.
NewsBank
(UCB)
Garvey, Megan.
"Initiative fight puts focus on felons: Proposition 66 would make fewer
offenders subject to Three-Strikes law," Los Angeles Times, Sept.
27, 2004.
NewsBank
(UCB)
Smith, Dan.
"The buzz: correctional officers union still an election player,"
Sacramento Bee, Sept.
25, 2004.
NewsBank
(UCB)
Domanick, Joe.
"They changed their minds on Three-Strikes: can they change the voters'?
Ten years ago, these men wanted
to see Three-Strikes become the law in California, now they're leading the fight
to reform it," Los Angeles Times, Sept.
19, 2004.
Newsbank
(UCB)
Ainsworth, Bill.
"Soros, 2 others give financial boost to Three-Strikes ballot measure,"
San Diego Union-Tribune, Sept.14,
2004.
San
Diego Union-Tribune
Delsohn,
Gary.
"Grieving parents fight '3-Strikes' change," Sacramento
Bee, Sept.
8, 2004.
Sacramento
Bee
[Editorial]
"Putting a face on Three-Strikes injustice," Los Angeles Times,
Aug. 23, 2004.
Newsbank
(UCB)
Wells, Annette.
"Proposition could help the mentally ill," Inland
Valley Daily Bulletin, Aug.
21, 2004.
Newsbank
(UCB)
Delsohn, Gary.
"Fieldp poll: softening '3-Strikes" still popular: new survey added
a question to try to ensure that voters understand Prop. 66," Sacramento
Bee, Aug.
14, 2004.
Newsbank(UCB)
"Propositions 66
and 64: voters appear disposed to put limits on state's "Three-Strikes" law," Field Poll, #2129, Aug.
14, 2004.
Field Institute
"When passion, not reason rules," San Francisco Chronicle,
Aug.
10, 2004.
San
Francisco Chronicle
Thompson, Don.
"Judge
orders changes to 'Three-Strikes' voter guide," San Francisco Chronicle,
Aug.
9, 2004.
San
Francisco Chronicle
"Three-Strikes
measure in court," Long-Beach Press-Telegram, July 31, 2004.
NewsBank
(UCB)
[Editorial]
"A rare escape from 3-Strikes Law," San Francisco Chronicle,
July 26, 2004.
San
Francisco Chronicle
Poochigian, Chuck. [Opinion]
"Should voters change 'Three-Strikes' law this fall?: No, the law's a big
deterrent for repeat cases," Sacramento Bee, July 25, 2004.
Sacramento
Bee
Ainsworth,
Bill.
"'3 Strikes' campaign splits Klaas family victim's grandfather, father strongly
differ on Prop. 66 changes," San Diego Union-Tribune, July 14, 2004
NewsBank
(UCB)
Wiegand, Steve.
"Governor spells out his ballot views: he signs arguments opposing two
gambling initiatives and Prop. 66,
but favoring Prop. 69," Sacramento Bee, July 8, 2004.
NewsBank
(UCB)
Ainsworth, Bill.
"Poll finds broad support for limits on `3 Strikes' law," San Diego Union-Tribune,
June 10, 2004
Newsbank
(UCB)
"Large majority supports
easing of Three-Strikes law. Telephone surtax to fund emergency services and
Open Primary Law also favored, but by narrower margins," Field Poll,
#2121, June 10, 2004.
Field Institute
Schmidt, Steve.
"Troubled state correctional system gets a hard look," San Diego Union-Tribune,
May 21, 2004.
Newsbank (UCB)
"California
survey: politics and issues," Los Angeles Times Poll, July 1996.
Questions 56 and 57 refer to "Three-Strikes law."
Los Angeles
Times
Wilkie, Dana.
"Prop. 184: '3 strikes' already on books: foes say its passage only bolsters
a bad law," The San Diego Union-Tribune, Oct. 12, 1994.
Newsbank
(UCB)
Kersher, Vlae.
Klaas family criticizes 'Three-Strike law'," Daily News of Los Angeles,
Mar. 10, 1994.
Newsbank
(UCB)
Chavez, Ken
"3-Strikes felony bill now state law," Long Beach Press-Telegram, Mar. 8, 1994.
Newsbank
(UCB)
