The political committee behind Proposition 36, which has touted the anti-crime measure’s support from top local Democratic leaders, donated $1 million to the California Republican Party in recent weeks.
The donation not only indicates the confidence that Proposition 36 proponents have about the measure passing in the Nov. 5 election, but it also shows a partisan allegiance that appears to defy the efforts to portray the campaign as bipartisan.
The California GOP endorsed Proposition 36 and, according to state campaign finance reports, has spent more than $1 million in favor of the measure. The California Democratic Party, along with Gov. Gavin Newsom and the California Legislature’s Democratic leadership, oppose the proposition.
“It’s surprising and perhaps unprecedented to see a campaign giving away some of its funds before all the votes are cast,” said Thad Kousser, a political science professor at the University of California, San Diego. “I think this is a sign of supreme confidence by the campaign that they’re on track for victory.”
A solid majority of likely California voters support Proposition 36, the November ballot measure that would impose stricter penalties for retail theft and crimes involving fentanyl, according to a recent UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies poll co-sponsored by The Times.
Read more: Your guide to Proposition 36: Stiffer penalties for some drug and theft crimes
“This initiative has been categorized by a lot of bipartisan support,” Kousser added. “You have local support from Democratic mayors. So the fact that the campaign would give money directly to the party could be eyebrow-raising.”
The primary organization backing Proposition 36, called Californians for Safer Communities, gave two payments of $500,000 each on Sept. 20 and Oct. 1 to the California Republican Party, state campaign finance records show.
The committee has raised more than $13.3 million as of Oct. 11, according to campaign finance reports filed with the secretary of state. The opposition campaigns reported collecting $5.9 million by the same date, the most recent reports showed.
The campaign for the ballot initiative is backed by a group of local prosecutors, including many who are politically conservative, and bankrolled in large part by Walmart and other big retailers.
Proposition 36 has been endorsed by hundreds of local elected officials and a handful of Democratic mayors from big cities including San Francisco, San José, and San Diego, who have praised it as a bipartisan effort. But opponents of the measure, notably criminal justice reformists, progressives and Newsom, have called that a guise for what is actually a Republican-led effort to return California to the draconian, tough-on-crime policies of the past.
Read more: Californians broadly support Prop. 36 to get tough on crime, new poll finds
Backed by major California law enforcement organizations, Proposition 36 would impose harsher sentences for drug possession and retail theft and would turn some crimes involving fentanyl and repeated shoplifting that are currently misdemeanors into felonies.
Becky Warren, a campaign spokesperson for the Yes on 36 campaign, said that the donations are part of an outreach effort to voters across all political parties.
“Our voter contact plan allocates resources to educate Democrats, Republicans and independent voters about Proposition 36 in proportion to their representation in the electorate,” Warren told The Times.
The contributions to the state GOP were the only donations made by the committee, however, state records show.
Ellie Hockenbury, a spokesperson for the California Republican Party, told The Times that the money would be used for voter education.
“The California Republican Party has an almost two-thirds win record for ballot initiatives in which we’ve taken a position since 2019, and voter education is a contributing reason why,” Hockenbury said in a statement to The Times. “On November 5, voters will reject Gavin Newsom and support Prop. 36 to make California a safer state in which to live, work and raise a family.”
The $1 million the California GOP spent in support of Proposition 36 was primarily for campaign mailers and communications with party members, state records show. A spokesperson for the GOP confirmed the money was spent advocating for and in coordination with the Yes on 36 campaign and the state Republican Party.
Marva Diaz, a political strategist and publisher of the California Target Book, a comprehensive political database, said that ballot initiatives have donated to both the Republican and Democratic parties in past election cycles.
Read more: Newsom appears unlikely to campaign heavily against Proposition 36 but cautions voters
Newsom and other top Democrats in California have repeatedly urged voters to reject Proposition 36, which they say will disproportionately incarcerate Blacks and Latinos.
Democrats who have come out in support of Proposition 36, however, said the initiative will help provide mass treatment of individuals who abuse drugs and repeatedly commit thefts.
“There is no place for partisanship when it comes to addressing California’s trio of public safety epidemics,” said Mayor Matt Mahan of San José, who helped form a separate fundraising committee backing Proposition 36. “We can all unite around common-sense solutions to address retail theft, homelessness, and drug overdose deaths,” he said.
If passed, Proposition 36 would dismantle parts of Proposition 47, a 2014 ballot measure that was overwhelmingly approved by Californians.
Proposition 47 aimed to reduce the number of individuals serving prison sentences for low-level, nonviolent theft and drug offenses, recognizing that these practices cost the state millions of dollars each year.
Proposition 36 seeks to reclassify certain misdemeanors back into felonies for these offenses. It would also give the option to eligible Californians who routinely commit drug crimes to receive substance abuse treatment, although questions have been raised on where counties will receive funding for treatment.
According to legislative analysts, this change could ultimately lead to a significant increase in state expenses while also contributing to rising prison populations.
This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
