A Californian Vote

As a native Californian, I couldn't resist voting absentee in my home state for my very first election. While the ballot question in MA this year are extremely gripping and interesting, I still felt it was in my best interest to cast my vote in the Golden State.

One of the most buzzed about prop questions on the Californian ballot this year is Prop 35, a vote for new anti-sex-trafficking laws. Amanda Hess, a staff writer for Slate is voting for the first time in California this year. She discusses the consequences of prop voting in California, and admits that most people are likely unaware of them.

The official summary of the prop is as follows:

"Increases criminal penalties for human trafficking, including prison sentences up to 15-years-to-life and fines up to $1,500,000. Fines collected to be used for victim services and law enforcement. Requires person convicted of trafficking to register as sex offender. Requires sex offenders to provide information regarding Internet access and identities they use in online activities. Prohibits evidence that victim engaged in sexual conduct from being used against victim in court proceedings. Requires human trafficking training for police officers."

The Los Angeles Times, which endorses a NO vote on Prop 35, notes, that ending sex-trafficking, while important, is not necessarily possible with the proposed prop. It says that the prop fails to create the correct approach in all of this.

"Voters must ask more than whether they would like to see those cruelties come to an end. They must be satisfied that the particular, far-reaching and inflexible penalties and procedures that would be enacted by this measure would help; that they are the best approach to solving an actual problem; and that actual progress would dwarf any unintended consequences."


Hess worries that most voters are not equipped to "focus on the intricacies of the law."

She notes that critics' concerns lie in "bloating" of the sex-offender industry and that more prominent types of forced labor in California would be overlooked as a result of the passing of Prop 35.

The SAGE project, a San Francisco based advocacy group for victims of sex-trafficking, initially stood behind the prop, but have since "rescinded" their support, and are no longer in favor of the passing.

What does this tell you about the flawed prop?

To all of you California voters, don't discount the information available for you on each prop. Do your research to make the most informed decision. Surely we know human-trafficking isn't a good thing, and of course many would like to see an end to it, but it is important to understand what Prop 35 would actually impose - racial and gender profiling especially. Also, the bankrupt state would see an increase in costs of at least a couple million dollars annually to enforce this law.

I'll be keeping up with my home state as the polls close on the West Coast. Happy Election Day to you all! Hope you've all done your civil duty by voting!