Suhani Gupta

Prop 47’s weak punishment of crime reduces the effectiveness of the rehabilitation policies it makes available and exacerbates the plight of homelessness.

California is facing the nation’s largest battle against homelessness. Despite throwing billions of dollars at the issue, the state government has not addressed core issues that hinder aid to the homeless. Proposition 47 has aggravated this predicament.

Enacted in 2014, this piece of California legislature turns some theft and drug possession felonies into misdemeanors and reclassifies defendants currently facing felony charges to create rehabilitation for convicts. Before it was passed, 33 California prisons held around 155,000 inmates in total, twice as many as they were designed to. The proposition reduced costs of the prison system and lowered recidivism rates. However, Prop. 47 has been a highly contentious part of California law as it came at the cost of increased homelessness and crime.

Prop. 47’s goals of decreasing California prison populations has increased the burden on both civilians and the homeless. The proposition’s weak punishment of crime reduces the effectiveness of the rehabilitation policies it makes available and exacerbates the plight of homelessness.

Although keeping up with the increased costs of prosecution and maintaining rehabilitation facilities will be expensive for the Californian government, homelessness is the state’s responsibility to solve. Without the prosecution of criminals, rehabilitation facilities are less effective and less used. 

Concerns about theft and drug use have been rising rapidly since the Covid-19 pandemic, and steps need to be taken to solve these societal issues. The California Government should reverse Prop. 47’s policies in order to decrease irremediable homelessness and increase participation in drug courts to reduce drug usage.

However, Prop. 36’s push for the repeal of Prop. 47 and the reduction of relief institutions will not help either. Without both concrete punishments for illegal behavior and aid to mitigate recidivism and drug relapse, homelessness in California will not be solved. 

Los Angeles County District Attorney George Gascón released a memo to his office about not prosecuting various crimes, including drug possession and trespassing, in 2020. The refusal to prosecute for misdemeanors has spread to other areas in California, like San Francisco, as well. The arrest rate for misdemeanors dropped by 31.2% while most crime has gone up from 2019 to 2022: aggravated assault by 25.3%, homicides by 33.9%, and auto theft by 1.6%.

A lack of misdemeanor arrests means there are tenuous consequences for committing many crimes, causing increased petty theft. Indeed, theft is so under regulated that many stores around California lock up products. 

Supporters of Prop. 47 cite its effective drug and homelessness rehabilitation policies, which truly do help those who receive the aid. However, these programs are ineffective towards the overall homeless population, who still have the highest unsheltered rate at 68%.  Both unwillingness to pursue these optional programs and plummeting participation in mandated drug courts has driven up deaths from opiates.

A 2022 survey found that 66 percent of homeless in California report some kind of mental health condition, and 35 percent reported using amphetamines, opioids or cocaine regularly. Mental health issues and drug addictions lead to higher violence and reoffense rates as well. Giving effective drug rehabilitation is needed in order to reduce crime.

Homelessness, which is up more than 50 percent since Prop. 47 passed, can also be correlated with the prevalent substance abuse issues. Research shows that around one third of homeless have issues with substance use, and 2/3rd have experienced drug use disorders. Additionally, illicit drugs on the streets are much more dangerous, as homeless have a 600% higher chance of death from overdose. Solving the rampant drug issue in California would protect the homeless population.

To solve homelessness, we need tighter control on illicit substances, which would both reduce the homeless population and keep them safer. Proactive treatment of drug addicts who do not have incentives for counseling like family would ameliorate the addicted homeless. Authoritative action is needed, like more incentivized drug courts for perpetrators of crime under the influence which would greatly help in the fight against homelessness

Ultimately, mandates like Governor Newsom’s orders for state agencies to aggressively remove homeless encampments are ludicrous. Without the proper aid for those who truly need it, these solutions are band-aid solutions and are not sustainable. Without both rehabilitation for those who require it and strengthening deterrents by actively prosecuting misdemeanors, directly combatting homelessness puts the horse before the cart, as no systems exist to accommodate those affected.