Proposition 35 forces voters to ask themselves a challenging question: Does sex trafficking need to be addressed at the ballot box, or are there better ways of fixing the problem? No on Proposition 35 Daily Californian Nov. 2, 2012
We voters are the wrong people to ask. We have no way to evaluate this proposal objectively. Prop 35 will certainly pass in a landslide, because it gives voters the illusion they’re striking back at horrible miscreants; who wouldn’t want to do that? But this initiative has no business being on your ballot. That is why I oppose Prop 35. It is ballot abuse. Legal of Women Voters of the Los Altos and Mountain Veiw Area
No ON Proposition 35 California Civil Rights Coalition
Establishing penalties for criminals is best left up to the lawmakers. There are too many unexpected consequences with initiatives and taking away someone’s freedom is an arena where mistakes should be limited. Prop. 35: Human trafficking — NO Santa Monica Daily Press Oct 31, 2012
Stand Against Global Exploitation, a Northern California-based group that works with victims of trafficking, rescinded its endorsement. The group’s board of directors said it had a change of heart after careful review of the measure and asked that the group’s name be removed from the Proposition 35 website. From a yes to a no on Proposition 35 LA Times Oct 30, 2012
We’ve Changed Our Minds about Prop 35, but NOT about Sex Trafficking We’ve Changed Our Minds San Diego Free Press Oct 28 2012
But civil awards to survivors of trafficking are not that rare; my colleagues representing trafficking survivors have collected wages-owed, restitution, and additional damages for clients in San Francisco, Santa Clara, Los Angeles, and elsewhere. Prop 35: The tragedy of what could have been Retired San Jose Human Traffic Officer Oct 29, 2012
Vote No On California Proposition 35: Human Trafficking Daily Kos Oct 28, 2012
Prop 35 requires prosecuted traffickers to pay up to $1.5 million dollars in fines to unidentified governmental agencies and non-governmental service providers, in addition to existing criminal fines. Yet the law does not set aside any of this money for the actual victims of trafficking Prop. 35 CASE Act Undermines Victims’ Rights By Law Professor Kathleen Kim, Kevin Kish and Cindy Liou Oct. 25, 2012
Prop 35’s approach to human trafficking is short sighted. Besides its failure to address the complexities of the human trafficking industry, the measure does little to increase the protections for victims of human trafficking and sexual exploitation.
No on Prop. 35: The wrong tool for a good cause Center for Juvenile Criminal Justice Oct 23, 2012
This provision essentially eliminates the ability of registrants to engage in anonymous online speech and imposes a substantial burden whenever a registrant wants to use a new online platform to speech, infringing on registrants’ First Amendment right to free speech. ACLU Northern California
“Coercion” is defined as including “abuse or threatened abuse of the legal process.” Therefore you could be charged with sex trafficking if you were to say to an independent contractor, “If you do not perform the scene as agreed to in writing, I’ll sue you for every penny you are worth.” This is potentially “threatened abuse of the legal process,” since you could not actually get more than the actual damages incurred. Free Speech Coalition 2012
Please vote NO on Proposition 35 to protect the privacy of more than 100,000 citizens! California Reform Sex Offender Laws Oct 23, 2012
Prop 35 would increase penalties on human trafficking, but could push this inhumane practice further underground. We need collaborative, victim-centered solutions that protect the rights and safety of trafficked victims. This measure is not a comprehensive solution to the problems of sex and labor trafficking. Eastbay Alliance For a Sustainable Economy
BWW Analysis: Black Women for Wellness fully understands the devastating impact that human trafficking has on our families and our communities. However proposition 35 is not the answer. This measure seeks to increase sentences for human traffickers and sex offenders, however because of the broad definitions of this law, many young black and brown women and men are at risk for unnecessarily being targeted. How? Because of the loose definitions of trafficking, under this proposition, an 18 year old who take his/her partner out for dinner and a movie and then engages in sex could be seen as a trafficker. In addition, it could punish anyone who associates with minor sex workers, even if their only intent was to buy him/her food or give he/she a ride to the store. Yes the odds of this seem rare, but knowing many communities of color relationships with law enforcement, it’s not much of a reach to imagine a California in which this happen if prop 35 passes. Furthermore, this law punishes all people prosecuted as sex offenders to have their internet usage monitored for life. Yes this even includes the 18 year old we mentioned above. Black Women for Wellness wants to address trafficking, however not at the expensive of young people of color.Vote No ON Prop 35 Black Women for Wellness
These groups have clearly made a mistake by not soliciting the No On Prop 35 when it endorsed this bait and switch ballot measure. We call on them to take responsibility and admit they didn’t act democratically when they endorsed Prop 35 Rubber Stamping Criminalizing Human Trafficked Victims In Prop 35 Oct 24, 2012
Vote No On Proposition 35: Human Trafficking Oct 20, 2012
Proposition 35 is a state-wide ballot initiative that would basically rewrite legal conceptualizations of pimping, pandering (solicitation), and prostitution as human-trafficking. In other words, if this initiative passes, all the players in what’s commonly referred to as “the world’s oldest profession” would become human traffickers in some way. PVV on Prop 35 Dr. Chantalle Tibbals sociologist, Oct 20, 2012
Voting NO on 35 does not mean you support human trafficking. It does not mean that the suffering of trafficking victims is not important to you. It does not make you a bad person and it does not make you side with the bad guys. The power of this proposition is by lumping a variety of punitive measures under a headline that carries a huge moral weight. Don’t fall for it.
Law Professor Hader Aviram Oct 14, 2012
“The state law is good enough,” Lee said. “Proposition 35 looks good on the surface, but anyone supporting this proposition does not understand and does not work with children of sex trafficking.”An organization that works with victims of child prostitution also opposes the measure, saying it will be ineffective. Dr. Lois Lee, founder of Children of the Night, a Van Nuys-based organization that helps child prostitutes. Redland Daily Oct 13, 2012
From the Bay Area Freedom Socialist Party newsletter:
Proposition 35: Increases the Penalties for Human Trafficking-Vote NO
As socialist feminists, we abhor human trafficking of laborers and sex workers. However, this initiative statute poses a threat to civil liberties, has an overly-broad net that could impact any sex worker–trafficked or not–and duplicates current laws while doing little for victims.
“Well-intentioned or not, adopting new criminal laws and sentencing guidelines through initiative is the wrong way to go. Vote no on Proposition 35”Editorial Prop 35 Dubious-Propositions Santa Cruz Sentinel Editorial Board October 10, 2012
“Voters should not be lulled into believing that by approving this measure they will be taking effective action against slavery and sexual exploitation. Even if well intentioned, this initiative falls well short of the mark. The Times urges a no vote.” No on Proposition 35 Los Angeles Times October 10, 2012
“State’s laws against sex trafficking could be strengthened, but this proposition is not the way to do it. We urge a no vote with an eye toward the future, when stricter enforcement can be worked out through a legislative process that will allow full vetting of the proposed remedy.” Prop. 35 has right idea, wrong approach SF Examiner October 9,2012
Even non-sexual offenders will have to register as sex offenders for life. Humboldt Herald Oct 9, 2012
Proposition 35 a good idea, but too flawed Merced Sun Star October 8, 2012
“Sex trafficking is a repugnant crime that needs to be prevented and punished. State lawmakers have a responsibility to beef up the laws against it and keep them current. We recommend a “no” vote on Proposition 35 while standing firmly against any form of human trafficking.”Initiative not best approach to human trafficking Modesto Bee October 7, 2012
“Human trafficking is an egregious and horrible act. California law, as well as federal law, prohibits it, and the penalties are appropriately harsh.
But Prop. 35 — like so much else on the state ballot, the spawn of one rich person with a cause — wouldn’t just crack down on the worst people in the sex industry. It would expand the ability of state and local authorities to harass and arrest consensual sex workers and would lead to more people serving more time in prison for victimless crimes”.San Francisco Bay Guardian No on Proposition 35 10.3.2012
“It’s difficult to oppose Proposition 35, a measure that purports to stop a crime as despicable as human trafficking. But the proposition is overbroad and misdirected”.Sacramento Bee-Endorsements: ‘No’ on flawed, well-intended Proposition 35Monday, Sep. 24, 2012
“Perla Flores, a program manager at Community Solutions, said the measure’s training requirements are negligible and the hefty fines could provoke convicted traffickers into seeking revenge on victims or their families. Also, there is nothing in the measure, she said, to encourage nonprofits, police, city services and victims to work together.” Victims advocates oppose Proposition 35 human trafficking measure Asian Pacific Islander Legal Outreach & Community Solutions September 21, 2012
“CA has a good record, not a failing one, in enforcement of all manner of human slavery prosecutions. This proposition will undermine much of that work “ Prop 35 Recommendation: OPPOSE California Council of Churches-August 29, 2012
Bernal Heights Democratic Club
“The Star doesn’t oppose higher fines in themselves, but we believe the dollars should not be segregated in such a self-serving way. The money’s best use should be decided through the normal budgeting and legislative process.” Editorial: Prop. 35, human trafficking law, not good enoughSeptember 5, 2012
Proposition 35: A shotgun approach to a complex issue John Vanek is a consultant on anti-human trafficking efforts. He retired in the rank of lieutenant from the San Jose Police Department, where he managed the Human Trafficking Task Force program from 2006-2011.