Rehabilitation over incarceration: Student groups advocate against Proposition 36

Two student organizations campaigned against Proposition 36 over the past few weeks — the tough-on-crime proposition on the California ballot that seeks to increase punishment for theft and drug crimes.

The proposition would make existing problems in the criminal justice system worse, according to members of Stanford’s chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Stanford Decarceration Collective (SDC). The groups called the policy “lazy” and “uncreative.”

The ACLU hosted a phone banking campaign on Oct. 22. Josie Barton ’25 and Grace Matthews ’25, members of SDC, spent Thursday afternoon tabling at White Plaza to persuade students to vote against the measure.

Proposition 36 would allow offenders of theft and drug crimes to be charged with felonies and be imprisoned for longer than currently required, according to the California Legislature Nonpartisan Fiscal and Policy Advisor. The proposition would also allow individuals possessing illegal drugs to be charged with treatment-mandated felonies instead of misdemeanors, in some cases. 

Members of the ACLU and SDC consider the proposition’s approach to be misguided. Although homelessness, drug use and petty theft are “very real problems” in California, proposition 36 is the wrong solution, Matthews said.

Barton and Matthews pointed to the flawed criminal justice system as the cause of the country’s record-high reoffense rates. A 2023 U.S. Department of Justice analysis in 24 states concluded that 82% of individuals released from state prisons were rearrested within 10 years of release. 

Matthews said proposition 36 would worsen this problem by diverting funding away from rehabilitation programs and crime prevention.

“We should be investing in mental health services, public education, diversion courts — solutions that actually tackle root causes of these issues, as opposed to just putting a band-aid on them,” Matthews said.

Implementing proposition 36 would lead to state criminal justice costs of up to $750 million dollars annually, along with local criminal justice costs likely in the tens of millions of dollars per year, according to the official California Voter Information Guide. 

Supporters of proposition 36, including the California District Attorneys Association and major U.S. brands like Home Depot & Walmart, point to the state’s ongoing struggle to control homelessness and drug addiction. According to Californians for Safer Communities, the measure would give prosecutors the necessary power to crack down on repeat shoplifting offenders and compel drug users to accept treatment by providing a “stick” of potential jail or even prison time.

“In San Francisco, we are making progress on property crimes, but the challenges we are facing related to fentanyl and organized retail theft require real change to our state laws,” San Francisco Mayor London Breed said in an interview with the Los Angeles Times. 

Breed said she “fully supports” proposition 36, and believes it will “make a meaningful difference for cities across California.”

Some students disagreed with potential implications of the measure.

“Putting more people in prison and extending prison times, especially for low-level crimes [like] drug offenses, [doesn’t] actually curtail crime or keep our communities safer,” said ACLU Stanford co-president Zoe Tweedie ’25. “What cures addiction is rehabilitation.” 

ACLU’s phonebanking event was successful in drawing members out to spread awareness of these issues with voters, said ACLU Stanford co-president Diego Maglione ’25.

However, the session was not without its hiccups.

“You can often get some hostile callers,” Maglione said. “Some people may just be tired and not in the mood to listen, while others are annoyed by political calls.”

Maglione said his solution is well-timed factoids, noting that he “I wouldn’t immediately say that they’re wrong.”

Instead, Maglione shares studies by researchers from Portugal and statistics from Pew Trusts, which concluded that rehabilitation does more to address drug dependency than incarceration.

“I listen to what they’re saying and tell them something they don’t know,” he said.

Barton and Matthews similarly observed how passersby were usually willing to engage in civil discussion at White Plaza, even when they had divergent viewpoints.

“Even if they’re not necessarily committed to voting ‘no’ with us, they’ve still said things like, ‘Oh, thank you for sharing,’ and ‘I’m going to keep looking into this before I vote,’” Matthews said.

Both organizations stressed the importance of approaching these discussions with empathy, given that many people are personally affected by issues such as crime and drug abuse.

“All they want is a solution,” Barton said. “You have to start putting yourself in their shoes… because otherwise they’ll often just disregard what you’re saying entirely.”

For Barton, the number of curious out-of-state students who wanted to learn more was a welcome surprise.

“[It’s] very heartening because this is just one problem that’s part of a much larger national system,” she said. “For anyone to bring this discussion back to their home state is a great thing, and for people to be engaged and willing to listen is awesome.”

Barton said the key to political change is to not overlook the importance of discussions with friends and family, creating a “network effect…, where they also take on what you’re passionate about,” she said.

The post Rehabilitation over incarceration: Student groups advocate against Proposition 36 appeared first on The Stanford Daily.