Bill implementing Prop. 36 got a hearing. Are Democrats supporting it? | Opinion
Based on their behavior at California’s Capitol on Tuesday, you would never have known that Sacramento Democrats tried to kill Proposition 36, the tough-on-crime reform targeting drug dealers and thieves that was overwhelmingly approved by voters last November.
Crucial legislation to implement the sentencing reforms approved in Proposition 36 got a first hearing on Tuesday, and suddenly, Democrats were nothing but agreeable.
Senate Bill 28 by Tom Umberg, D-Santa Ana, unanimously sailed out of the Senate’s Public Safety Committee without a peep of opposition from lawmakers. It’s a strong signal that leading Democrats in Sacramento aren’t eager for a fight with the voting public on whether repeat drug offenders deserve treatment as an option to jail.
Proposition 36 was supported by more than 68 percent of voters last year. It reversed a previous initiative that never elevated repeat petty thefts (items costing less than $950) to a sentence stiffer than a misdemeanor. Umberg’s focus in his legislation was on how Prop. 36 also required drug treatment as an option for a repeat user instead of a stiffer sentence.
The McClatchy California Editorial Board opposed Prop. 36 out of concern of spending additional funds on jails and prisons and how county-managed drug treatment programs throughout California were not prepared for a jump in caseloads. But this is a democracy. The voters have spoken. And now Umberg is right to call to question the Democrat-controlled Legislature’s will to implement a law it didn’t agree with.
SB 28 is short and straightforward. It states that treatment court programs are to be available everywhere in the state. And it spells out the evaluation process to determine whether an offender is eligible for treatment.
“It is so critical to identify those with substance use disorders to get them the help they need,” testified Mareka Cole of Sacramento, who has become a vocal activist for more treatment after losing her son to a fentanyl overdose.
Organizations critical of the bill expressed concern at Tuesday’s hearing that more court-based treatment programs may not result in more treatment and only higher costs. But none of the six senators on this committee voiced any opposition to this measure. This was a far cry from the behavior of Democrats last year, when a similar bill of Umberg’s last year wasn’t afforded the courtesy of a hearing in the California Assembly.
“I appreciate what you’re trying to do….” said state Senator Anna Caballero, D-Merced, to Umberg. “You have to come up with a plan after the fact.”
Umberg’s emerging challenge to implement Prop. 36 appears to center more on money than a policy dispute. His legislation has yet to identify the funding sources for the additional court treatment programs SB 28 requires. He will have to identify those funding mechanisms soon, as the bill now heads to the guardians of finance at the senate Appropriations Committee.
For now, what a difference a year, and a clear mandate from voters, can make in Sacramento.
This story was originally published March 26, 2025 at 5:00 AM with the headline "Bill implementing Prop. 36 got a hearing. Are Democrats supporting it? | Opinion."