Prop. 57 pushes the criminal justice pendulum too far in favor of dangerous felons. Inaptly described as a “public safety” measure, Prop. 57 aims to save taxpayers money by granting early parole for dangerous felons. However, the voters are being misled by the campaign in favor of Prop. 57. Proponents say it only applies to prisoners who committed nonviolent crimes, but there is an eight-page list of violent crimes that fall outside of a legal, technical definition of “violent.” Some of these so-called nonviolent felonies include rape, domestic violence, arson, human trafficking, vehicular manslaughter, gang crime, and assault with a firearm. Furthermore, Prop. 57 allows prison bureaucrats the constitutional power to grant sentence reductions for all felons — including those who committed violent felonies — without any input from voters, legislators, or judges.
In 2007 California’s prison population ballooned to over 170,000 inmates. Since then the Legislature adopted Prison Realignment, the voters approved Prop. 36 and Prop. 47, and the prison system has enacted its own policies. Due to those changes, the inmate population is down to below 130,000. After this massive, unprecedented release of prison inmates back into our communities, crime has started to go back up. Now is not the time for a misguided, far-reaching change in the law that will allow dangerous criminals to get released early from prison.
Proposition 57 will make tens of thousands of dangerous inmates eligible for significantly earlier release. Proponents claim that only “rehabilitated” criminals will receive early release. In principle, the concept of rehabilitated felons returning to our neighborhoods sounds great. However, Prop. 57 fails to mention how prisons — with their already well-established lousy record of rehabilitation — will accomplish this and, more importantly, how the prison system will pay for new rehabilitation programs.