WSSN Stories

By Quinci LeGardye | California Black Media 

As cities across California take a closer look at unfair practices in the criminal justice system, Proposition 25 offers a statewide policy that could aid their efforts: getting rid of cash bail.

The ballot measure, which is based on SB 10, a bill former Gov. Jerry Brown signed into law two years ago, would replace cash bail with risk assessments for suspects awaiting trial. 

Currently California uses a cash bail system that allows suspects to pay a cash bond to be released from jail with the promise to return to court for trial, at which point the cash bond is repaid. If Prop 25 passes, cash bail would be replaced with a risk assessment system that categorizes suspects as low risk, medium risk, or high risk, with suspects for misdemeanors exempt from needing a risk assessment. 

Under the new system, suspects who are categorized as low risk and likely to appear in court – and are also a low risk to society — would be released from jail before trial, and those deemed high risk would remain in jail. The state Judicial Council would decide what the risk assessment tools would be, with the proposition mandating that “tools shall be demonstrated by scientific research to be accurate and reliable.” 

The California Legislature approved SB 10 during the 2018 session, and former Gov. Jerry Brown signed it into law on Aug. 28 that same year. The next day, opponents filed a referendum to overturn the bill, which prevented the law from being scheduled to take effect in 2019. Opponents gathered enough support to move it to a 2020 ballot initiative, which means the decision to overturn or uphold Prop 25 now falls to voters on Election Day next week. 

Supporters of Prop 25 argue that the cash bail system is inherently unfair, where wealthy people can pay their way out of jail and poor people with the same likelihood to appear or not appear for trial have to stay imprisoned. They say that the risk assessment system will make public safety the guiding factor to determine which suspects have to stay in jail before trial. They also argue that they system will allow more poor people to go free before awaiting trial, which would save money for local jails. 

Supporters also argue that the cash bail system is deeply inequitable. They say that people who cannot afford bail are more likely to take a plea deal after months of sitting in jail while possibly losing their jobs and homes. Those who can afford it, can avoid or minimize jail time and be less impacted by the implications of their arrest. 

Supporters include the California Democratic Party, the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and the California Medical Association — as well as Gov. Gavin Newsom and U.S. Congresswoman Karen Bass (D-CA-37). 

“For years, California has proudly led the way on fundamental civil rights and criminal justice reform but, as we’ve witnessed firsthand across our country, there’s more we must do to root out racial inequity and structural bias and to embrace proven reforms that work. This November, 

state voters will once again have the opportunity to make California a national leader in the unfinished fight for equity and justice,” said Newsom. 

Opponents of Prop 25 argue that the risk assessment system could be potentially worse than cash bail, with a high possibility that racial profiling could be used in the assessment process. Also, they argue that implementing the system would be too expensive, as the proposition’s fiscal impact statement says it would cost “possibly in the mid hundreds of millions of dollars annually” for the new system. 

Opponents include the Republican Party of California, the ACLU of Southern California, the California Business Roundtable and the California Black Chamber of Commerce. 

Prop 25 is also opposed by the commercial bail bond industry, which would be disrupted if the proposition is passed. The American Bail Coalition organized the political action committee Californians Against the Reckless Bail Scheme that filed the veto referendum in 2018. Representatives of the bail industry argue that risk assessments are no better than cash bail, that they are potentially more costly and that more people who go free before trial may commit more crimes before trail. 

“This legislation is a reckless attempt at changing the state’s bail system and is fundamentally bad for California. While we all agree that bail reform is necessary, this costly, reckless plan will use racially biased computer algorithms to decide who gets stuck in jail and who goes free. That’s not right,” said Jeff Clayton, spokesperson for Californians Against the Reckless Bail Scheme.

By Quinci LeGardye | California Black Media

The legal push-and-pull over whether ride-hailing company drivers in California will maintain their status as independent contractors or become W-2 employees continued last week. 

On October 22, the First District Court of Appeal in San Francisco upheld the injunction issued against Uber and Lyft last August that those companies’ app-based drivers are employees. 

In its ruling, the court said there was an “overwhelming likelihood” that Uber and Lyft are violating AB 5. The law that has driven a wedge between opponents and supporters across the state requires that employers classify workers who meet certain criteria as employees instead of independent contractors. It also states that those hiring firms must provide all worker benefits to employees that California’s labor laws mandate. 

If voters approve the ballot measure, which Uber and Lyft are sponsoring, the gig economy companies will be able to continue classifying their employees as independent contractors. The injunction resulted from a lawsuit that California Attorney General Xavier Becerra filed in May in conjunction with the city attorneys of San Francisco, Los Angeles and San Diego. The suit argued that Uber and Lyft violated AB 5 by classifying drivers as independent contractors after AB 5 took effect in January.

The injunction resulted from a lawsuit that California Attorney General Xavier Becerra filed in May in conjunction with the city attorneys of San Francisco, Los Angeles and San Diego. The suit argued that Uber and Lyft violated AB 5 by classifying drivers as independent contractors after AB 5 took effect in January. 

“Uber and Lyft have used their muscle and clout to resist treating their drivers as workers entitled to those paycheck and benefit protections. The courts saw right through their arguments. It’s time for Uber and Lyft to play by the rules,” said Becerra in a statement after the ruling. 

Uber, Lyft and other gig economy companies have been fighting against AB 5 since Gov. Newsom signed it into law in August 2019. While the state’s lawsuit has worked its way through the courts, Uber and Lyft, along with other gig economy companies, have pumped nearly $200 million into the Yes on Prop 22 campaign so far. 

Lyft spokesperson Julie Wood said in a statement, “This ruling makes it more urgent than ever for voters to stand with drivers and vote yes on Prop 22.” 

The gig economy companies are also facing another legal battle. On Oct. 22, a group of California gig workers sued Uber for penalties totaling up to $260 million. The workers argue that Uber’s use of aggressive in-app messages urging the workers to support Prop 22 violated their employment rights. They are seeking an injunction to prevent Uber from showing any more Prop 22 messages in the app. 

“Uber’s threats and constant barrage of Prop 22 propaganda on an app the drivers must use to do their work have one purpose: to coerce the drivers to support Uber’s political battle to strip them of workplace protections,” said attorney David Lowe of Rudy, Exelrod, Zieff & Lowe in a statement announcing the lawsuit. 

There have been numerous reports on social media of the Uber app’s messages, which read “Prop 22 is progress” and “Prop 22 will provide guaranteed earnings and a healthcare stipend.” Drivers then had to click either “Yes on Prop 22” or “OK” to proceed in the app. Uber spokesman Matthew Wing said that specific language is no longer used, and now drivers are occasionally shown a pop up that says “Drivers deserve better” and offers the option to click through to see more facts. 

An Uber spokesperson called the lawsuit “without merit, filed solely for press attention and without regard for the facts.”

WASHINGTON, D.C.— Kornisha McGill Brown has been elected as the 27th National President of Jack and Jill of America, Incorporated. 

With more than 245 chapters nationwide, representing more than 40,000 family members, Jack and Jill of America is the nation’s oldest African American family organization. Founded in 1938, Jack and Jill boast the specific mission of nurturing future African American leaders. 

Newly elected National President Brown has served as a member of the organization for more than 13 years, fulfilling roles and responsibilities that include 2017-2019 Regional Director of the Southeastern Region, 2015-2017 Southeastern Regional Secretary, Regional Nominating Committee member for 2 terms, and Regional Chair of Rules and Regulations. In 2015, Brown was recognized as “Chapter President of the Year” by the Southeastern Region during her term as President of the Columbus, GA Chapter. 

“As mothers, we unite together in Jack and Jill with the primary purpose of seeing our children and all children succeed in every way,” Brown said. “Together, we are committed to ensuring Jack and Jill remains revered and prepared for the future.  I am committed to keeping our children as a top priority.” 

A native of Thomaston, GA, Brown resides with her family in Columbus, GA. She is married to Dr. Darius K. Brown, Sr., and they are the very proud parents of two children —Jordan Janay Brown and Darius Brown, Jr.

Brown is an educator, servant leader, small business managing partner, and philanthropist. She is a member of The Links, Incorporated-Columbus, GA Chapter, Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority, Inc., and Board of Directors of the Boys and Girls Clubs of the Chattahoochee Valley. She holds a Bachelor of Arts degree in Political Science from Spelman College and a Master of Education Degree in Social Science Education from the University of Georgia.

By Lou Yeboah

“After all I’ve done for you. I have loved you, with an everlasting love [Malachi 1:2], but instead of receiving Me with delight, you receive Me not. [John 1:11]. You stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart people. I have spread out my hands all day unto a rebellious people; A people that provoketh Me to anger continually to My face’. [Isaiah 1:4-6; Jeremiah 7:17-20 Jeremiah 25:7-11; Ezekiel 8:17-19; Deuteronomy 31:29; 2 Kings 22:16-17 Hebrews 3:7-9, 12, 15].

You Ingrates! Don’t you know, that My grace is love which you do not deserve, but yet are given? Don’t you know, that it is My grace that is keeping you alive? [Ephesians 2:1-2]. Prostituting My grace. Taking My goodness for granted. [Romans 6:23]. Listen, and listen good. I WILL NOT allow you to become complacent or neglectful concerning Me. I WILL NOT allow you to take Me for granted. Think lightly of the riches of My kindness, tolerance, and patience, and repent quickly, before I bring My wrath upon you, for my patience is at its limit!” [Romans 2:4-5; 2 Peter 3:8-10].

I want you to know that when God learned of how Israel had betrayed His love and taken His grace for granted, God became furious, and brought His wrath upon Israel. [2 Kings 17:18]. And before they had satisfied their craving, while the food was still in their mouths, the anger of God rose against them, and he killed the strongest of them and laid low the young men of Israel. [Psalms 78:31]. “What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid! [Romans 6:2,15] Know that God’s long-suffering will eventually ends. It ended in the days of Noah [Genesis 6:8]. It ended for Sodom and Gomorrah in the days of Abraham. [Genesis 19:1-5]. And, it eventually will end for all of us. [2 Peter 3:10]. “One final appeal, and this is it! This is the final call, says the Lord. Repent before I bring My wrath upon you!”

I admonish you to receive Him while you are able. He is a gracious and compassionate God, [Romans 2:4-5; 2 Peter 3:8-10], but He has His limits. For the Lord said in [Genesis 6:3] “My Spirit will not always strive with man. I will proceed no longer in this way, but pass and execute the sentence of condemnation on you…” No one is excluded from Jesus’ demand to repent..” All is included.  Don’t delay! The need is urgent! [Acts 17:30]. For Jesus said, “Unless you repent, you will all likewise perish.” [Luke 13:3]. “The men of Nineveh will rise up at the judgment with this generation and condemn it, for they repented at the preaching of Jonah, and behold, something greater than Jonah is here” [Matthew 12:41].

Jesus, is warning us of the judgment to come, and offering escape if we will repent. If we will not repent, Jesus has one word, “Woe unto you.” “Repent, and turn from all your transgressions, so that iniquity will not be your ruin” [Ezekiel 18:30; Acts 3:19]. The Bible commands it, our wickedness demands it, justice requires it, Christ preached it and God expects it. Don’t let the verdict be for you as it was for Israel. They saw all the evidence. They heard all the teaching. They saw the miracles. But they refused to repent.

Know that, “If you do not obey Me [take Me for granted and treat Me neglectfully], and do not observe all these commandments, and if you despise My statutes, or if your soul abhors My judgments, so that you do not perform all My commandments, but break My covenant, I also will do this to you: I will even appoint terror over you, wasting disease and fever which shall consume the eyes and cause sorrow of heart. And you shall sow your seed in vain, for your enemies shall eat it. I will set My face against you, and you shall be defeated by your enemies. Those who hate you shall reign over you, and you shall flee when no one pursues you. ‘And after all this, if you do not obey Me [if you still take Me for granted and if you still neglect Me], then I will punish you seven times more for your sins. I will break the pride of your power; I will make your heavens like iron and your earth like bronze. And your strength shall be spent in vain; for your land shall not yield its produce, nor shall the trees of the land yield their fruit. ‘Then, if you [still take Me for granted] and walk contrary to Me, and are not willing to obey Me, I will bring on you seven times more plagues, according to your sins. I will also send wild beasts among you, which shall rob you of your children, destroy your livestock, and make you few in number; and your highways shall be desolate. ‘And if by these things you [still take Me for granted] are not reformed by Me, but walk contrary to Me, then I also will walk contrary to you, and I will punish you yet seven times for your sins. And I will bring a sword against you that will execute the vengeance of the covenant; when you are gathered together within your cities I will send pestilence among you; and you shall be delivered into the hand of the enemy. When I have cut off your supply of bread, ten women shall bake your bread in one oven, and they shall bring back your bread by weight, and you shall eat and not be satisfied. ‘And after all this, if you do not obey Me [if you still are complacent and you continue to neglect Me and take Me for granted], but walk contrary to Me, then I also will walk contrary to you in fury; and I, even I, will chastise you seven times for your sins. You shall eat the flesh of your sons, and you shall eat the flesh of your daughters. But, “If you turn your heart around; if you accept your guilt and change [repent], I will remember My covenant. [Leviticus 4-29; Deuteronomy 28].

They continue in their foolishness. [Proverbs 26:11].

Yet you have not listened to Me, declares the Lord, in order that you might provoke Me to anger with the work of your hands to your own harm. [Jeremiah 25:7].

Hear, O earth: behold, I am bring disaster on this people, the fruit of their plans, because they have not listed to My words, and as for My law, they have rejected it also. [Jeremiah 6:19].

By Jacqui Lyons, Divisional Merchandise Manager, Seafood and Seasonal Meat, Walmart

When it comes to grocery, the weekend before Thanksgiving is typically a busy one as shoppers across the country begin to prepare the holiday meal. This year has brought rapid and constant change in every facet of our daily lives, and we know Thanksgiving celebrations will be no exception. The sprint to Thanksgiving is likely going to be spread over a greater number of days, and the largest turkey in the freezer is less likely to be the star.

In fact, demand for turkey will undoubtedly look different this year, and at Walmart, we made early shifts to ensure our customers would find the items they want for the Thanksgiving meal.

Here’s how we’re preparing for ‘center of plate’ this Thanksgiving.

COVID-19 continues to reshape how people shop, and in turn, it’s sure to reshape traditions this holiday season. In fact, according to Butterball, the number of consumers who plan to host extended family and friends for Thanksgiving has dropped from 30% during a typical year to 26% this year while those who plan to celebrate only with immediate family has risen from 21% in a typical year, to 31%.

With more customers planning for smaller groups, we anticipate a higher preference for smaller turkeys. As always, we’ll have plenty of whole turkeys, but this year, we’ve increased our assortment of bone-in and boneless turkey breasts by 20-30% in stores across the country.

We also learned a lot from our customers this past Easter. To avoid crowds, shoppers stocked up earlier than ever. That’s going to continue this holiday season. It’s no longer about catering to a single peak the weekend before Thanksgiving. This year, Walmart customers can take advantage of everyday low prices on a range of turkeys beginning earlier in the season on November 2.

Following Easter, ham sales continued to peak even into summer as people were inspired to cook differently at home. We expect that trend to continue right into Thanksgiving dinner. With Walmart customers planning smaller gatherings and prioritizing convenience, ham will be in the spotlight and we’ve increased our inventory accordingly.

We know this year has been difficult for our customers and their families. We know they’re busy and burdened, and we know they want to make the holiday special. Regardless of how they plan to celebrate Thanksgiving, we’re committed to ensuring our customers can find what they want earlier in the season, all at affordable prices. From turkey and ham to all the sides, our merchants have been busy preparing for a season unlike any other so that our customers can take comfort in knowing the items will be here in our stores and available for online pickup and delivery, ready when they are.

By Charles Ellison, b|e note

At some point, the leftovers conversation about Black male voters was bound to catch up with us. A week of apoplexy over the self-absorbed political leanings of Big Chain rap icons Ice Cube then 50 Cent led to widespread social media and pop Black discourse condemnation about the electoral behavior of Black men overall. Once again, an entire classroom of the well-behaved was punished for the “spit balling” antics of the very few in the back of the classroom. 

Many people, particularly those in the Black academic, political and media space, carried on a careless, angry exchange since 2016 focused on the contemptible Black male voter. According to exit polls, a small, yet noticeable, collection of activated Black male voters (13 percent) supported Donald Trump for president. That led to a bizarre, irresponsible and very knee-jerkish rejection of Black men voters as a whole and conveniently aligned with a Trump Era-timed celebration of Black women voters as the only known hope to restore any semblance of Black political power. Ignored was the fact that the overwhelming majority of Black men voting had sense enough to support Hillary Clinton, 82 percent. Still, Black women voters scrambled to save the world that ill-fated night four years ago (I wrote the headline). But, Black male voters, on the other hand, felt wiped from the electoral map after 2016: disgraced, dishonored and alienated even as the majority of them did the right thing.

Those sentiments had consequences, particularly for the next Generation Z of young Black men who should have spent much of the past several years looking forward to participating in their first election. Instead, they’ve been hearing commentary on their electoral worthlessness. Their presence was mad invisible in key election cycles since then. Now, as 2020 looms, the political world needs them – but, just how psychologically battered and bruised are they? Stressed Democrats looking for a convincing leg-room margin for Joe Biden-Kamala Harris against incumbent Donald Trump-Mike Pence are now begging for Black male votes. Democratic Party leaders fret privately and publicly that much of the Black male electorate has tapped out. But, where was all this clamoring for brothers over the past several years? Much of the sudden focus seems a day late and a dollar short. As a result, we’re seeing troubling pro-Trump and “not voting” Black voter numbers like these …

This is compared to overall Black voter breakdowns in 2016 … 

During the Alabama U.S. Senate race concerns arose that the Black male vote either did not exist or would not show up – because of, once again, that knuckleheaded 13 percent in the back of the classroom. Yet, the Black male vote did show up. It certainly took a back seat to Black female voter performance in terms of pure numbers, representing 11 percent of the overall state electorate while the “sister vote” represented 18 percent of it. But, Black male presence at the polls was equally significant and decisive.

In 2018, Black male voters once again, voted mostly in their community’s best interest: 88 percent voting for Democrats to retake the House versue 12 percent voting for Republicans. Granted, that didn’t match the support shown by Black women (92 percent), but it was still a significant majority …

It’s a delicate conversation. Observers tiptoe gently around the subject out of fear that it will be misinterpreted as an act of political chauvinism. It’s a cautious assessment, but a real and valid one: no conversation on Black vote behavior should be divisive, least of all from the perspective of Black people engaged on the topic. Any analysis should be thoughtful and respectful, with great care not to diminish the verypowerful, essential and decisive role Black women played in that race and many others before it — as they will continue to do.

Indeed, when it comes to Black voting trends and Black political efficacy, Black women do indeed lead. That has been the case for quite some time.

However, any discussion on Black voter behavior and patterns should be holistic and unifying; in the case of Alabama (U.S. Senate) and Virginia (Governor) in 2017 and the 2018 Congressional midterms, there is a sense that mainstream discussion on that Black vote has not been as complete as it should be. It would be difficult to ponder Black Electorate effectiveness if the zeitgeist and Democratic Party planning focused disproportionately on one half of the equation. No Black voting bloc — no voting bloc for that matter — is totally effective without coordination of all parts. For example, registered Black African and Caribbean migrant communities, which are mainly clustered alongside Black American communities, must be taken into account when mobilizing modern Black voting blocs. The same must, naturally, occur with the Black vote in its entirety; there is no whole or pluralistic Black vote without both Black women and men factored in.

While the commentary on Black female voter power is welcome, aspects of it are being presented by mainstream media discourse as something that existed alone, by itself, in the context of overall Black voter participation.

Black thought leaders should have approached and assessed that conversation with caution. Many did not … and are still getting trapped in it. 

Both Black women and men have experienced brutal oppression over several hundred years, with white supremacist male-dominated constructs also placing great emphasis on the emasculation and destruction of Black men. Is the exclusion of mainstream media conversation on Black male voter presence and effectiveness in these election cycles deliberate? What we do know is that mainstream media institutions have long been extensions of white supremacist thought and action – and that same thought and action puts heavy focus on eliminating Black men. 

Back to Alabama: Black male voters were not as numerically superior (11 percent) as Black female voters (18 percent). However, with all ballots counted, Black male presence was double digits and support for Democratic nominee and now Senator Doug Jones was 93 percent. That’s a sharp 5 percentage points less than Black women’s support for Jones, but it is nevertheless impressive and well above the 90th percentile range. It should have been recognized and factored in for future planning on Black voter mobilization efforts. That should have been a story.

Interestingly enough, during the 2008 election, Black Alabama male voter support for then-Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama actually surpassed Black Alabama female voter support for Obama by 4 percentage points — 100 percent of Black men voters in Alabama supported Obama compared to 96 percent of Black women. Still, Black Alabama men only accounted for 11 percent of the state electorate.

In 2012, that turnout dropped by 1 percentage point. But, they voted to re-elect President Obama at 96 percent compared to Black women voters in the state at 95 percent.

Black male voters have not yet been forgiven (by some) for increased support of Democratic nominee Bernie Sanders during the caustic 2016 Democratic primary and what was considered, later on in the general, an unusually higher number of Black male voters who voted for Republican candidate Donald Trump. Observers have pointed to sexism as the culprit influencing the decisions of some Black male voters.

In contrast, Black women voters were fairly focused and unified in their opposition to Trump in 2016. While accounting for 7 percent of the overall U.S. electorate, they voted 94 percent for Clinton versus only 4 percent for Trump and 2 percent “other.” 

Still, 2016 aside, Black male voters prominently figure in any race without question. Commentators, particularly those in the Black thought leadership space, would be wise not to completely discount or casually dismiss the Black male voter, especially at a time when conversation must encourage greater turnout from them in 2020. Yet, they still are. Is it too late? With Black male voters so invisible from the conversation during all those key moments of Black electoral enthusiasm and reflection, there was always a high risk of psycho-social alienation that would show itself in reduced Black male voter turnout in future elections. At this stage, Black people will need all the voter turnout they can get – from both Black women and Black men. You can’t half-step a Black vote. 

The Biden for President Victory Fund invites the public to join Senator Kamala Harris, Maya Harris, Andrew Young, and special guests for “A Celebration” on Saturday, October 24, 2020. The time will be announced upon registration. 

Special guests include Margaret Cho, Connie Chung, David Henry Hwang, Padma Lakshmi, Lucy Liu, Aasif Mandvi, Kumail Nanjiani, Ravi Patel, Lou Diamond Philips, Maggie Q, Lea Salonga, and George Takei. 

Video calls will also be provided to all confirmed guests 24 hours prior to the event. To register, please visit https://secure.joebiden.com/a/aapi-celebration?attr=103876375.

For more information, please contact Sreyashe Dhar at sdhar@joebiden.com.  RSVP is REQIRED. 

By Lou Yeboah

“For I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot; I wish that you were cold or hot, but because you are lukewarm, I’m about to spit you out of My mouth. And because you say, “I am rich, and have become wealthy, and have need of nothing,” and you do not know that you are wretched, miserable, poor, blind and naked, be zealous and repent, so that you may live and not die, [Galatians 5:19-21] and pray that you are found worthy to escape the tribulation that is coming upon the whole world. [Galatians 5:19-21]. I tell you, the night is fading away, the sun is peeking over the Eastern horizon, and I am coming soon!” [Romans 13:11]. He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. [Revelation 3:15-22].

God’s message to each of us is as it was to Hezekiah, “SET THINE HOUSE IN ORDER FOR THOU SHALT DIE AND NOT LIVE.”  Just as Isaiah did not have anything else to say, neither do I. Isaiah delivered his message and left. Why? Because the message was plain enough that it did not need to be explained.  

Getting “our house in order” MUST become a priority in all of our lives. The Bible declares that there will be a 2nd coming of Christ. When? We do not know. But when He do come, He will be coming as Judge this time.

I can only hope and pray that today is the day that you put into action, the steps needed in getting your house in order. This is our finest hour!  The present shaking that we are experiencing is proof positive that God’s Kingdom is advancing on the earth and the hour of His return is near.  Be vigilant.  Be focused.  The present world as we watch it is undergoing shaking. Governments who are previously unmovable are trembling. Kings and Rulers who are untouchable in the past are being removed from their glorious palaces. [Haggai 2:6-7, 21-22] Therefore let us not sleep, as others do, but let us watch and be sober.” [1Thessalonians 5:6].

“A watchman stood on the city wall and warned the people… [Ezekiel 3:17].

Put to death therefore what is earthly in you: sexual immorality, impurity, passion, evil desire, and covetousness, which is idolatry. On account of these the wrath of God is coming. In these you too once walked, when you were living in them. But now you must put them all away: anger, wrath, malice, slander, and obscene talk from your mouth. Do not lie to one another, seeing that you have put off the old self with its practices …y. [Colossians 3:5-10].

“He who testifies to these things says, “Surely I am coming quickly.” Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus!” [Revelation 22:20].

By Quinci LeGardye | California Black Media  

California voters will decide whether or not to go tougher on crime through a November ballot initiative that makes changes to previous propositions and bills designed to reduce the state’s prison population.  

California’s Proposition 20 proposes expanding the list of offenses that disqualify incarcerated persons for parole. It also calls for upgrading several theft-related fines from misdemeanors to felonies. It would also require law enforcement to collect the DNA of people who commit certain misdemeanors. 

If Prop 20 passes, vehicle theft, firearm theft, unlawful use of a credit card and other specific types of theft and fraud crimes will be chargeable as “wobblers,” which means the prosecutor will decide whether to charge them as misdemeanors or felonies. Under the current criminal code, these crimes are considered misdemeanors.  

Prop 20 would establish two new types of crimes: serial crime and organized retail crime, and it would increase penalties for repeat shoplifters.  

Changing the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation’s (CDCR) parole review program, Prop 20 would reclassify 51 crimes and sentence enhancements as violent in order to exclude them from the program, which is only available to nonviolent offenders. It would also require that an incarcerated person’s entire criminal record is taken into account before becoming eligible for parole, instead of only looking at that individual’s most recent offense. It would also allow prosecutors to request a review of the parole review board’s final decision. 

The initiative makes critical adjustments to 2011’s AB 109, 2014’s Proposition 47, and 2016’s Proposition 57, all of which were California legislative responses to the 2011 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that declared overcrowding in California’s prisons violated the Eight Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment. Together, those measures changed several crimes from wobblers to misdemeanors, increased parole chances for incarcerated people convicted of nonviolent crimes and shifted the imprisonment of non-violent and non-sexual offenders from state prisons to local jails. 

Prop 20 is supported by the Republican Party of California, the California Grocers Association, police and peace officer associations, Crime Victims United and Crime Survivors, Inc. Supporters argue that the previous criminal justice reforms were misguided and caused significant public safety problems, and that Prop 20 would close loopholes that let out violent offenders. 

They also say that the proposition would rightfully reclassify crimes as violent that are currently considered nonviolent, including felony assault with a deadly weapon, human trafficking of a child and rape of an unconscious person. 

“Prop. 57 was misleading because it promised that only nonviolent inmates would be released from prison early,” said Citrus Heights Police Chief Ron Lawrence, former president of the California Police Chiefs Association. “But under California law, a number of violent crimes are classified nonviolent.” 

Opponents of Prop 20 argue that tough-on-crime stances do not reduce crime, and that Prop 20 would only increase the state’s spending on prisons and tear families apart. They also highlight that the criminal justice system disproportionately incarcerates Black and Brown people, and that the proposition would only deepen the devastation mass incarceration has caused in Black and Brown communities. 

Groups that oppose Prop 20 include the ACLU of California, the California Labor Federation, the California Teachers Association, Equality California, the Public Defenders Association, Crime Survivors for Safety and Justice and the National Center for Crime Victims.  

Gov. Gavin Newsom and former Gov. Jerry Brown also oppose it.  

Brown, who signed AB 109 and developed Proposition 57, said, “Proposition 20 is supported by a very narrow group of people who don’t accept even the modest prison reforms that I was able to achieve. It’s driven by ideology and, in some cases, by a total lack of understanding of human nature and no sense of redemption or allowing people to put their lives on track.”