• Listen to this segment

• Listen to the entire program

Californians have a chance this November to amend their controversial “Three Strikes Law” with an upcoming ballot measure known as Proposition 36. Civil rights groups, as well as Los Angeles Police Chief Charlie Beck and several District Attorneys have all hailed Prop 36 as a way to temper an overly harsh law that is costing taxpayers millions of dollars.

The original Three Strikes Law was passed by Californians in the aftermath of two 1994 murders committed by convicted felons. The law defined a strike as a felony conviction and stipulated that a person found guilty of a third felony, regardless of the nature of that felony, must be sentenced to between 25-years-to-life. Critics of the law found that the Three Strikes Law led to an uneven distribution of justice, as murderers sometimes received more lenient sentences than a person convicted of petty theft. Legal scholars have argued that the law infringes on the Eighth Amendment, which protects against “cruel and unusual punishment” and civil rights groups have found that it disproportionately affects people of color. While there is little evidence to conclude that the Three Strikes Law leads to any noticeable decrease in crime statistics, there is proof that it is adding to California’s prison overcrowding problems.

In 2004 efforts were made to reform the three strikes law with a new initiative called Proposition 66. Prop 66 stated that only violent or serious third-strike crimes should result in life sentences and not petty offenses. Before the election, a deceptive, aggressive media campaign led by former Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger ensured the ballot’s failure. The measure was rejected by 52.7% of the voters.

If passed, Prop 36 would impose life sentences only if a third felony conviction was “serious or violent” and would allow 3,000 non-violent offenders currently serving life in prison to petition the court for re-sentencing. Proponents are estimating that the State could potentially save up to $200 million dollars a year if the Proposition were to pass. Those standing against the proposition include Mike Reynolds co-author of the original three strikes bill, and the California Republican Party who feel that crime will increase due to shorter sentences. According to recent polls, 65% are in favor of amending three strikes, 20% opposed, and 14% undecided, although as the election draws close support for the bill appears to be waning.

GUESTS: Sue Reams is an activist whose son is incarcerated under CA’s 3 Strikes law for 25 years to LIFE for being 30 feet away from a $20 drug sale. Sue is also a member of Families to Amend California’s Three Strikes (FACTS)

Visit www.facts1.org for more information.