Proposition 35
California Public Policy Paper
The Bill:
The bill I chose for this paper was proposition 35. This proposition was proposed in the fall election of 2012. Proposition 35, also known as “Californians against Sexual Exploitation Act”, was primarily about increasing the penalty for sex trafficking. The bill would increase prison sentences for human traffickers, require convicted human traffickers to register as sex offenders, require all registered sex offenders to disclose their internet accounts (such as Facebook), require criminal fines from convicted human traffickers to pay for services to help victims, and lastly mandate law enforcement training for identifying human trafficking. The fiscal impact of this bill was estimated and uncertain, but would place some additional costs on state and local governements. The cost for the increase of jail time for traffickers would not be expected to exceed a couple of million dollars. The cost for training law enforcement was estimated at up to a few million dollars but would be a onetime occurrence. The revenue from the fines of those convicted was undetermined but would increase state revenue.
History behind the bill:
Prop 35 was proposed with the intent of lowering the number of victims of sex trafficking in California. Four of the top fourteen cities where sex trafficking occurs were in California. Sacramento and Los Angeles were in the top five. San Francisco and San Diego were among the fourteen as well. Due to the high levels of sex trafficking in California the creators of Proposition 35 felt compelled to do something about it.
Changes to the original law:
The whole point of this proposition was to increase the punishment for sex trafficking and labor trafficking. The first change was expanding the definition of human trafficking. It would amend the definition that was under California’s state law before the proposition was passed. By changing the definition it would classify more activities as crimes,
The Bill:
The bill I chose for this paper was proposition 35. This proposition was proposed in the fall election of 2012. Proposition 35, also known as “Californians against Sexual Exploitation Act”, was primarily about increasing the penalty for sex trafficking. The bill would increase prison sentences for human traffickers, require convicted human traffickers to register as sex offenders, require all registered sex offenders to disclose their internet accounts (such as Facebook), require criminal fines from convicted human traffickers to pay for services to help victims, and lastly mandate law enforcement training for identifying human trafficking. The fiscal impact of this bill was estimated and uncertain, but would place some additional costs on state and local governements. The cost for the increase of jail time for traffickers would not be expected to exceed a couple of million dollars. The cost for training law enforcement was estimated at up to a few million dollars but would be a onetime occurrence. The revenue from the fines of those convicted was undetermined but would increase state revenue.
History behind the bill:
Prop 35 was proposed with the intent of lowering the number of victims of sex trafficking in California. Four of the top fourteen cities where sex trafficking occurs were in California. Sacramento and Los Angeles were in the top five. San Francisco and San Diego were among the fourteen as well. Due to the high levels of sex trafficking in California the creators of Proposition 35 felt compelled to do something about it.
Changes to the original law:
The whole point of this proposition was to increase the punishment for sex trafficking and labor trafficking. The first change was expanding the definition of human trafficking. It would amend the definition that was under California’s state law before the proposition was passed. By changing the definition it would classify more activities as crimes,
Cited: 10, October. "No on Proposition 35." Los Angeles Times. Los Angeles Times, 10 Oct. 2012. Web. 03 Apr. 2013. "The Bay Area Reporter Online |." Bay Area Reporter. Bay Area Reporter, 20 Sept. 2012. Web. 03 Apr. 2013. "California General Election." Proposition 35 Analysis. Voterguide, n.d. Web. 02 Apr. 2013. "California Proposition 35, Ban on Human Trafficking and Sex Slavery (2012)." - Ballotpedia. Ballotpedia, n.d. Web. 03 Apr. 2013. Chronicle Recommends." SFGate. San Fransisco Chronicle, 8 Oct. 2012. Web. 03 Apr. 2013. "Editorial: Yes on Prop. 35 (human Trafficking)." The Orange County Register. The Orange County Register, 25 Sept. 2012. Web. 03 Apr. 2013. "Endorsements." The Sacramento Bee. Ed. The Editorial Board. The Sacramento Bee, 24 Sept. 2012. Web. 03 Apr. 2013. Frank, Brian. "Human Trafficking Initiative Backed by Former Facebook Exec Qualifies for November Ballot | Ballot Measures | Ballot Brief | KCET." KCET. KCET, 10 May 2012. Web. 03 Apr. 2013. "Human Sex Trafficking." FBI. FBI, n.d. Web. 02 Apr. 2013. "Los Angeles News Group Endorsement: Yes on Prop. 35 -- Fight Human Trafficking in California with Tougher Penalties." Presstelegram.com. Long Beach Press-Telegram, 11 Oct. 2012. Web. 03 Apr. 2013. Melvin, Joshua. "Victims Advocates Oppose Proposition 35 Human Trafficking Measure." InsideBayArea.com. Inside the Bay Area, 21 Sept. 2012. Web. 02 Apr. 2013. "Proposition 35. Human Trafficking. Penalties. Sex Offender Registration. Initiative Statute: Oppose." California Council of Churches IMPACT. N.p., n.d. Web. 03 Apr. 2013. "The Problem." Courage Worldwide RSS2. Courage Worldwide, n.d. Web. 02 Apr. 2013. "Sex Trafficking Stats | Run For Courage." Sex Trafficking Stats | Run For Courage. Run For Courage, n.d. Web. 02 Apr. 2013.