Skip to content

Frequently Asked Question

This Question was emailed to No On Prop from a voter today:
“I frankly don’t understand any of the opposition’s arguments against Prop 35 WHY you feel Prop 35 endangers your son?

I have thoroughly read the entire contents of the Legislative Analysis of Prop 35, and nowhere does the text address either of he following:

1. The relatives, friends, associates, roomates, or dependents of anyone who gives Erotic Services.

2. Any of the above, in #1, who are in anyway financially supported by anyone who gives Erotic Services, whether the services are legal or not.

How can your son, who receives financial support from the earnings of your business, be considered as engaging in something illegal???”

Name redacted.

Here’s My Response:
Thanks for your inquiry. Its such a hot button issue and its been largely rubber stamped by many political bodies like the California State Democratic Party. the California Republican Party and the California Federation of Labor without hearing the opposition.

The legislative analysis report doesn’t have a clear understanding of how human trafficking laws are enforced in California or through out the United States. Therefore, their analysis is highly flawed. You can see legislators asking for more staff clarification from the legislative analysis office in this video during the informational hearing on Prop 35 in front of the Joint Public Safety Committee on August 14th 2012

So please allow me to explain how prop 35 will target the innocent.

Prop 35 creates brand new terms that are not in the federal human trafficking statue-“commercial sex act” is just one. In Section 6(2), Prop 35 defines it as “anything of value given or received”. This new made up term clearly broadens who will be targeted for arrest for doing “commercial sex act” to cover both the illegal and legal sectors of the sex industry and beyond.

This new definition in combination with Section 7 of prop 35 -naming existing codes for prostitution related offenses 647(a) and (b)…says we’re all victims, a naming we, resist.

These definition changes in combination with the definition of who can be convicted for sex trafficking and have to register as a sex offender for the rest of their life are listed in the 12 codes named in Section 6 of Prop 35- one of which is 266(h) that states that any body ‘who is supported in part or in whole from the earnings of a prostitute’ or now some “commercial sex act” is how my son or other innocent people will be entrapped, intended or not.

The possibilities of application of these new terms will go even further….

Here are the links to criminal law specialist for California Attorneys for Criminal Justice, Attorney Stephen Munkelt’s assessment of how Prop 35 will be abused in his testimony in front of the Joint Public Safety Hearing August 14th, 2012
his op ed in the Sac Bee who too oppose prop 35

We see how current enforcement by both the FBI and local law enforcement targets domestic relationships now as a common practice in prostitution sting operations which is the primary means to identify trafficked victims All of which is failed policy now, but will be expanded under prop 35.

This is the reality of the how young men who have sex with young women end up on the sex offender registry now. Under prop 35, you won’t even have had put your hands on anyone to be put on the sex offender registry for life; leading to the unintentional consequence of frightening the public and weakening the usefulness of that registry as a public safety tool.

Here too is a good analysis of how prop 35 will effect the young people which as a mother is really concerning. Prop 35-Turning all consensual sex acts into trafficking

So finally we see how the new expand definitions under prop 35 in combination with the new financial and political incentives -Section 8(d) whereby the proponents and endorsers will receive all the new high fines and fees: 30% to law enforcement to provide “rescue” What ‘Rescue’ really looks like: Sex Trafficking Myths Reconsidered by the Open Society Foundations and 70% to the government to fund non profits who provide ‘services’ yet to be undisclosed (usually goes towards salaries).
This is how prop 35 is contrary to how the human trafficking laws are now. All the monies go to the victims directly in this law Gov. Brown just signed last month. this law Gov. Brown just signed last month
And then
4 other laws passed last year dealing with this issue.

This is why we and other victims groups are opposed to Prop 35.

“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

“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

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.

Hope this answers your questions-Vote NO On 35
You are always welcome to give me a call.

Leave a Reply