Prop 47 was the result of mass self-delusion; a willingness to believe in fairy tales and unicorns, and a studied unwillingness to consider any potentially negative outcomes. It was like passing a law eliminating fines for speeders on California highways and then being surprised when everyone speeds.
.
.
One definition of insanity is 'doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result'. California has been doing just that for several decades now, and somehow they think that just adding a little bit more money and "compassion" and everything will work out fine, even when they find themselves ankle-deep in human feces, used needles, and fentanyl-corpses. I call this "anti-gravity thinking", because it is the same as thinking that a brick released from a high window won't actually fall to the ground - if enough money and "compassion" is applied by the observers.
.
.
But now, in California, there is an entire economy based on this whole "compassion" idiocy, so there is a LOT of money riding on keeping the music going; all those NGO's with fat contracts to cater to the homeless - they know that actually solving the problem would put them out of business, while making the problem worse will allow them to get a fatter contract the next year. Guess what happens?
.
.
So, Californians are paying exorbitant taxes which go toward making the problem worse every day, and yet, they keep doing it. Not only that, but they will mob and/or cancel anyone who points out how idiotic all this is. And the real losers in all of this are the very people those exorbitant taxes are supposed to help, not to mention the fine citizens of L.A. and San Francisco who have to dodge muggers, car-thieves, fentanyl-corpses and shop lifters on their daily rounds - what a laugh!
That's what the current Prop 1 in California is about - more money for homeless "resources" - read activists that have no interest in or ability to solve the homeless problem, only grow it.
Well, he kind of admitted his error. He said he still thinks addicts should go to rehab vs prison. Going to rehab will not change anything when the person goes right back to their same environment that led them to addiction in the first place. Let's get the studies out on recidivism for rehab and challenge that idea. We know from studies that AA doesn't really work. There is a high recidivism rate and a low rate of staying clean. Continuing to do that same thing that doesn't work.
It's similar to the "defense of democracy" racket. Bases all over the place, new weapons systems, and Ukraine gets crumbs. Freedom's just another word for . . . salaries in my district.
"...not a drop of American blood." Not true. There have been American news people killed, as well as American fighters that volunteered, killed. And let's not forget why this war has dragged on, this Administration sat on their hands for a year.
Fair enough. The Administration stalled a forceful response long enough for Russia to develop glide bombs now devastating the Ukrainian front lines. It's shameful.
Thank you Frank for explaining what so many of us believe to be true! I was gonna add my two cents to the conversation but what you wrote, perfectly summarized the slow, miserable death of California and its people.
As a great former governor of California once said, the most terrifying words in the English language are “I’m from the government and I’m here to help”
Some of the laxness on drugs and other things has a constituency- among suburban wine moms.
These are women who have a soft spot in their heart for every sad story. They see persons of color as more like helpless pets than human beings. If their unemployed, alcoholic, drug addicted brother told them he needed $100 to buy food or gasoline to drive to a job interview, they'd hand over the money no questions asked.
These are the people who elect characters like Gavin Newsom and Joe Biden.
I didn’t vote for that stupid proposition. That was a Democrat initiative. Let the Dems pay to fix this. For cryin’ out loud, didn’t you see this coming????
Mandated, compulsory treatment is the only way. It will not be easy, these drugs are so powerful, that rational decisions can not be made by so many of the addicted and homeless, an overlapping population. Of course, our first responders will be tasked with the incredibly difficult process of getting our fellow citizens off the streets. They will need our support, understanding and assistance in this endeavor. Assuming this new proposition gets on the ballot and passes.
After 30 years in recovery I’ve heard years of excuses for their addictions, first and foremost comes consequences (jail ) for their actions just like a 3yo child show their bad behavior will not be tolerated.Second comes treatment if not build more jails because the law abiding citizens are not free to live a safe environment
homeless tent cities on public byways, restricting business access, shoplifting, assault are very often linked to drug use, addiction. Btw- they are all criminal activity.
Assuming you are not being intentionally dense, consider the difference between prosecuting laws enforcing what society lets you consume, and laws that prohibit specific actions like public intoxication.
There is a problem with either your logic or how you communicate it. "...prosecuting laws enforcing what society lets you consume." What laws "are enforced" for things "society lets you consume"? Is there a law that says we can drink water that is enforced? Soda, chips, burgers? Nope. If you are saying laws such as DUI for consuming too much alcohol vs laws such as public intoxication for drinking too much in the wrong place, then there is no difference between them. Society has said what is acceptable and what is not acceptable. Both, all, are governed by laws society has demanded.
If you’re in your apartment doing drugs, you’re never going to be pushed into compulsory treatment. The name of this site is Public - the problems and proposed solutions concern *public* problems. If you choose to camp in front of my house, do drugs all day, steal to support your habit, and use the sidewalk in front of my house to take a dump each morning, the issue is no longer individual liberties. Your behavior now encroaches on everyone else’s liberties and outweighs your right to individual expression.
There is simply no right to camp on the streets, deal and/or consume drugs and relieve oneself. Except perhaps in front of where you live. You can tell yourself it’s only bad behavior. It’s clear you haven’t thought through the issues. Perhaps you’re a member of the Homeless Coalition.
"Then prosecute..." You've posted that multiple times now. What do you think the entire conversation regarding horrible Dem polices is all about? The Dems have implemented laws that allow for behaviors most of society has deemed unacceptable or policies that circumvent law enforcement.
See, the flaw is thinking that the people who proposed and pushed for this *actually* care - about the addicts, the decimated businesses or the residents of California. They don’t. This kind of generated decline is the intent. It’s too obvious an outcome good it to be any other way.
If everything is in a shambles, stores closing, crime rampant, food deserts, (and Gucci deserts), people capping on your front lawn, babies are dying by accidental fentanyl poisoning... who do you turn to? Don’t you feel like you NEED a government? Gosh, especially since you can’t defend yourself....
It just has to be. It was clear from the beginning, but the number of times they've doubled down - rather than course-correct as reality got more and more dystopian and completely at odds with their stated values... there can be zero doubt.
None of us thought about it at the time, but this combination is devastating. Prop 47 allowed shoplifters and thieves to break the law with impunity, often to support their deadly drug habit.
In fact, MANY people saw this coming perfectly clear without the need for hindsight.
I don't really care that people are not in prison, jail, anywhere other than stealing for me and other working people like me, shoplifting while store employees are required to pave the way out the door and every field, closed business, etc. is now a collective of the homeless.
I used to but the line about homelessness being caused by mental issues but I don't anymore, or at least I don't believe that is the case currently. I drive through a mass of these zombies daily, have them in my neighborhood looking for anything left out, etc. These are not mentally ill people. They are mostly abled bodied, <40 people that have ruined their lives via their choices and addictions.
If they can be helped through rehab, great. If not, build more prisons. California has zillions of acres of land that nobody wants. Drive from the valley to Vegas. It's everywhere.
I am tired of my community being destroyed and become dangerous so we can tip toe over the fact that these people are destroying society.
Treatment is only effective when desired by the recipient. Compelled treatment has a historic proven record of failure because it is rejected and resented.
This, of course, is why this latest initiative will also fail. As a physician who has worked with this population for decades, most will slip back literally the day they get out of rehab. No one ever wants to face the facts about drug use or drug rehab. A motivated recipient can succeed...the fiction is believing that most of these people are motivated.
I have 15 years sober as a result of going to Federal prison where I was ordered to complete RDAP. Prior to prison I was not interested in sobriety. While there my thoughts and feelings changed and I no longer desire alcohol. After release I started college. First my AA then BA followed by Graduate Certificate. Became legal guardian of my younger brother and bought a home.
James, You are the reason that some of us still try. But your case is exceptional and wonderful. Sadly, in my experience it has not been the majority outcome. I am curious as to what you think the impact of going to prison as opposed to some "rehab" had on your taking this all seriously. It is a question we often debate, but have seen no good answers.
I don't know how well I can answer under this limited venue but will attempt. I was full of bitterness and resentment. Prison was a humbling experience that gave me time to think and intense exposure to a high concentration of others with like-minded problems and substance abuse. Many of us were past victims that had become perpetrators ourselves of different natures of course. Possibly a reactionary defense. Not justifying. I learned about thinking errors and how guilty I was of many and I didn't want to be that person anymore. Overcoming past shame becomes a daily chore and facing present challenges. Short stint rehab was insufficient for my individual needs and most others I have crossed paths with. It takes around 12-18 months to be effective in my experience. I witnessed the shammers and when caught they were expelled from the program. There will never be 100% compliance. People have historically used substance to escape and change conscience and as long as there is a demand someone will supply. Better to legalize and regulate.
Would you advise school tours of the incarcerated to clue in students how good drugs feel and how they take control? Based on views of the street the drugs must be pretty awesome.
Exactly. When was in grad school I worked at a state psych hospital. Most there were involuntarily committed and many were addicts. They’d go to their group sessions and talk about how great it was to be clean and how they’d never go back to that life, and then sit in the smoke room planning their huffing parties for the night they were released. Addicts are, above all else, manipulative.
"...We need to mandate rehabilitation, not prison, for people who repeatedly break the law to support their addiction. "
I have to disagree, Michael. ALL citizens and I must now say (given our open border) residents must be held accountable for their actions, especially if they "repeatedly break the law". Their drug use, which California basically protects, is not a pass for committing a crime. Should rehab be mandated for offenders? Absolutely - and they should work for at least some of the costs of their treatment. But except in very extreme examples, everyone should be treated equally under the law. Druggies are not snowflakes, and prison is where many have dried out in the past. If drugs are available in prisons, well, that's another issue that deserves our attention.
Next time think about unintended consequences before you vote and vote with your head rather than your heart. The incentives in Prop 47 were so clearly misguided that the outcome that this author laments was totally predictable, and in fact were predicted in advance by some of the opponents. When will many do gooders learn that their intentions are not an excuse for the harm that their misguided actions cause.
And one of the unintended consequences to Prop 1 will be everyone will be sending their mentally ill and/or addicted to California. Other states and family members…
This is just my opinion, but Newsom doesn't have anywhere near the brains or passion that Michael has. Newsom was also a terrible mayor who never made it a secret that he hated San Francisco and lived in Mill Valley during his tenure. I would bet the only neighborhood he visited was his own in Pacific Heights.
Newsom is a terrible governor. An empty suit talking out of both sides of his mouth. He, and the Dems have augered this state into the ground, demonstrably, which is probably the one reason the DNC seems to have shelved their plans to have him take over for Biden after the primary.
It's been painful watching his "ascent" in government. The cherry on the top for me was when he "cleaned" up San Francisco for Xi. What an insult to San Franciscans.
I completely agree and feel exactly the same way about him. But back to the original article/post by Michael, who I respect a great deal. I'm no redneck xenophobe but why can't or shouldn't we just repeal Prop 47, and AB 109 while we're trying to fix the crime/homelessness problem rather than create another new expense placed on the taxpayer. We're already $73B in debt from providing everything to the illegals coming across the southern border. This proposal of Michael's adds more funding for mandatory drug treatment when we already had this with drug diversion programs administered by the courts in 2000 and afterwards. Frustrating to say the least.
Hold on Michael.... some of us ARGUED against prop 47 (even on Berkeleyside) and against the prior decriminalization policies resulting in the dystopia we now endure.
Prop 47 was the result of mass self-delusion; a willingness to believe in fairy tales and unicorns, and a studied unwillingness to consider any potentially negative outcomes. It was like passing a law eliminating fines for speeders on California highways and then being surprised when everyone speeds.
.
.
One definition of insanity is 'doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result'. California has been doing just that for several decades now, and somehow they think that just adding a little bit more money and "compassion" and everything will work out fine, even when they find themselves ankle-deep in human feces, used needles, and fentanyl-corpses. I call this "anti-gravity thinking", because it is the same as thinking that a brick released from a high window won't actually fall to the ground - if enough money and "compassion" is applied by the observers.
.
.
But now, in California, there is an entire economy based on this whole "compassion" idiocy, so there is a LOT of money riding on keeping the music going; all those NGO's with fat contracts to cater to the homeless - they know that actually solving the problem would put them out of business, while making the problem worse will allow them to get a fatter contract the next year. Guess what happens?
.
.
So, Californians are paying exorbitant taxes which go toward making the problem worse every day, and yet, they keep doing it. Not only that, but they will mob and/or cancel anyone who points out how idiotic all this is. And the real losers in all of this are the very people those exorbitant taxes are supposed to help, not to mention the fine citizens of L.A. and San Francisco who have to dodge muggers, car-thieves, fentanyl-corpses and shop lifters on their daily rounds - what a laugh!
That's what the current Prop 1 in California is about - more money for homeless "resources" - read activists that have no interest in or ability to solve the homeless problem, only grow it.
Credit where due: at least Michael admits his error.
As long as the lunacy stays in CA/WA/OR it’s a fine example of what not to do for the rest of the nation.
Well, he kind of admitted his error. He said he still thinks addicts should go to rehab vs prison. Going to rehab will not change anything when the person goes right back to their same environment that led them to addiction in the first place. Let's get the studies out on recidivism for rehab and challenge that idea. We know from studies that AA doesn't really work. There is a high recidivism rate and a low rate of staying clean. Continuing to do that same thing that doesn't work.
It's similar to the "defense of democracy" racket. Bases all over the place, new weapons systems, and Ukraine gets crumbs. Freedom's just another word for . . . salaries in my district.
"Ukraine gets crumbs"? Over $100B is crumbs? That one takes the cake!
Crumbs and not a drop of American blood.
"...not a drop of American blood." Not true. There have been American news people killed, as well as American fighters that volunteered, killed. And let's not forget why this war has dragged on, this Administration sat on their hands for a year.
Fair enough. The Administration stalled a forceful response long enough for Russia to develop glide bombs now devastating the Ukrainian front lines. It's shameful.
Thank you Frank for explaining what so many of us believe to be true! I was gonna add my two cents to the conversation but what you wrote, perfectly summarized the slow, miserable death of California and its people.
As a great former governor of California once said, the most terrifying words in the English language are “I’m from the government and I’m here to help”
I voted for Michael Shellenberger for governor twice and still have confidence that he would make a fine governor.
I don’t agree with all Michael ‘s viewpoints but have faith in his character and intention. He would make a great governor.
There is no way he could eff things up as badly as Newsome.
I think Michael is a good fit for California
Some of the laxness on drugs and other things has a constituency- among suburban wine moms.
These are women who have a soft spot in their heart for every sad story. They see persons of color as more like helpless pets than human beings. If their unemployed, alcoholic, drug addicted brother told them he needed $100 to buy food or gasoline to drive to a job interview, they'd hand over the money no questions asked.
These are the people who elect characters like Gavin Newsom and Joe Biden.
I could use a few bucks. How do I get on their mailing list?
💯
I didn’t vote for that stupid proposition. That was a Democrat initiative. Let the Dems pay to fix this. For cryin’ out loud, didn’t you see this coming????
Dems are stupid
Mandated, compulsory treatment is the only way. It will not be easy, these drugs are so powerful, that rational decisions can not be made by so many of the addicted and homeless, an overlapping population. Of course, our first responders will be tasked with the incredibly difficult process of getting our fellow citizens off the streets. They will need our support, understanding and assistance in this endeavor. Assuming this new proposition gets on the ballot and passes.
After 30 years in recovery I’ve heard years of excuses for their addictions, first and foremost comes consequences (jail ) for their actions just like a 3yo child show their bad behavior will not be tolerated.Second comes treatment if not build more jails because the law abiding citizens are not free to live a safe environment
Punishment for committing crime is another way. Repeal Prop 47.
Any other bad behavior you are ready to tackle by restricting all individual liberties?
homeless tent cities on public byways, restricting business access, shoplifting, assault are very often linked to drug use, addiction. Btw- they are all criminal activity.
Then prosecute.
Your previous comment insinuated that prosecution interferes with personal liberty.
Assuming you are not being intentionally dense, consider the difference between prosecuting laws enforcing what society lets you consume, and laws that prohibit specific actions like public intoxication.
There is a problem with either your logic or how you communicate it. "...prosecuting laws enforcing what society lets you consume." What laws "are enforced" for things "society lets you consume"? Is there a law that says we can drink water that is enforced? Soda, chips, burgers? Nope. If you are saying laws such as DUI for consuming too much alcohol vs laws such as public intoxication for drinking too much in the wrong place, then there is no difference between them. Society has said what is acceptable and what is not acceptable. Both, all, are governed by laws society has demanded.
If you’re in your apartment doing drugs, you’re never going to be pushed into compulsory treatment. The name of this site is Public - the problems and proposed solutions concern *public* problems. If you choose to camp in front of my house, do drugs all day, steal to support your habit, and use the sidewalk in front of my house to take a dump each morning, the issue is no longer individual liberties. Your behavior now encroaches on everyone else’s liberties and outweighs your right to individual expression.
There is simply no right to camp on the streets, deal and/or consume drugs and relieve oneself. Except perhaps in front of where you live. You can tell yourself it’s only bad behavior. It’s clear you haven’t thought through the issues. Perhaps you’re a member of the Homeless Coalition.
Then prosecute for public intoxication and other crimes.
But nice try at projection.
"Then prosecute..." You've posted that multiple times now. What do you think the entire conversation regarding horrible Dem polices is all about? The Dems have implemented laws that allow for behaviors most of society has deemed unacceptable or policies that circumvent law enforcement.
Hot dose will solve the problem
See, the flaw is thinking that the people who proposed and pushed for this *actually* care - about the addicts, the decimated businesses or the residents of California. They don’t. This kind of generated decline is the intent. It’s too obvious an outcome good it to be any other way.
If everything is in a shambles, stores closing, crime rampant, food deserts, (and Gucci deserts), people capping on your front lawn, babies are dying by accidental fentanyl poisoning... who do you turn to? Don’t you feel like you NEED a government? Gosh, especially since you can’t defend yourself....
Thoughtful is right, it is on purpose.
It just has to be. It was clear from the beginning, but the number of times they've doubled down - rather than course-correct as reality got more and more dystopian and completely at odds with their stated values... there can be zero doubt.
None of us thought about it at the time, but this combination is devastating. Prop 47 allowed shoplifters and thieves to break the law with impunity, often to support their deadly drug habit.
In fact, MANY people saw this coming perfectly clear without the need for hindsight.
I don't really care that people are not in prison, jail, anywhere other than stealing for me and other working people like me, shoplifting while store employees are required to pave the way out the door and every field, closed business, etc. is now a collective of the homeless.
I used to but the line about homelessness being caused by mental issues but I don't anymore, or at least I don't believe that is the case currently. I drive through a mass of these zombies daily, have them in my neighborhood looking for anything left out, etc. These are not mentally ill people. They are mostly abled bodied, <40 people that have ruined their lives via their choices and addictions.
If they can be helped through rehab, great. If not, build more prisons. California has zillions of acres of land that nobody wants. Drive from the valley to Vegas. It's everywhere.
I am tired of my community being destroyed and become dangerous so we can tip toe over the fact that these people are destroying society.
Treatment is only effective when desired by the recipient. Compelled treatment has a historic proven record of failure because it is rejected and resented.
This, of course, is why this latest initiative will also fail. As a physician who has worked with this population for decades, most will slip back literally the day they get out of rehab. No one ever wants to face the facts about drug use or drug rehab. A motivated recipient can succeed...the fiction is believing that most of these people are motivated.
I have 15 years sober as a result of going to Federal prison where I was ordered to complete RDAP. Prior to prison I was not interested in sobriety. While there my thoughts and feelings changed and I no longer desire alcohol. After release I started college. First my AA then BA followed by Graduate Certificate. Became legal guardian of my younger brother and bought a home.
Nice about face, James. Kudos to you.
James, You are the reason that some of us still try. But your case is exceptional and wonderful. Sadly, in my experience it has not been the majority outcome. I am curious as to what you think the impact of going to prison as opposed to some "rehab" had on your taking this all seriously. It is a question we often debate, but have seen no good answers.
I don't know how well I can answer under this limited venue but will attempt. I was full of bitterness and resentment. Prison was a humbling experience that gave me time to think and intense exposure to a high concentration of others with like-minded problems and substance abuse. Many of us were past victims that had become perpetrators ourselves of different natures of course. Possibly a reactionary defense. Not justifying. I learned about thinking errors and how guilty I was of many and I didn't want to be that person anymore. Overcoming past shame becomes a daily chore and facing present challenges. Short stint rehab was insufficient for my individual needs and most others I have crossed paths with. It takes around 12-18 months to be effective in my experience. I witnessed the shammers and when caught they were expelled from the program. There will never be 100% compliance. People have historically used substance to escape and change conscience and as long as there is a demand someone will supply. Better to legalize and regulate.
Would you advise school tours of the incarcerated to clue in students how good drugs feel and how they take control? Based on views of the street the drugs must be pretty awesome.
How would you fix or proceed to a better outcome?
Perhaps this is a reason to institutionalize quickly? No expert here, but the war on drugs failed, drugs are with us.
Exactly. When was in grad school I worked at a state psych hospital. Most there were involuntarily committed and many were addicts. They’d go to their group sessions and talk about how great it was to be clean and how they’d never go back to that life, and then sit in the smoke room planning their huffing parties for the night they were released. Addicts are, above all else, manipulative.
James n is correct, so, that’s what prison is for.
One more suggestion. Move out of California.
I did. Smartest thing ever.
There is science, logic, reason; there is thought verified by experience. And then there is California. - Edward Abbey
"...We need to mandate rehabilitation, not prison, for people who repeatedly break the law to support their addiction. "
I have to disagree, Michael. ALL citizens and I must now say (given our open border) residents must be held accountable for their actions, especially if they "repeatedly break the law". Their drug use, which California basically protects, is not a pass for committing a crime. Should rehab be mandated for offenders? Absolutely - and they should work for at least some of the costs of their treatment. But except in very extreme examples, everyone should be treated equally under the law. Druggies are not snowflakes, and prison is where many have dried out in the past. If drugs are available in prisons, well, that's another issue that deserves our attention.
one million less people to steal my stuff and poop in the streets.
Yes good outcome
Next time think about unintended consequences before you vote and vote with your head rather than your heart. The incentives in Prop 47 were so clearly misguided that the outcome that this author laments was totally predictable, and in fact were predicted in advance by some of the opponents. When will many do gooders learn that their intentions are not an excuse for the harm that their misguided actions cause.
KYA speaks for me. He is correct
And one of the unintended consequences to Prop 1 will be everyone will be sending their mentally ill and/or addicted to California. Other states and family members…
This is just my opinion, but Newsom doesn't have anywhere near the brains or passion that Michael has. Newsom was also a terrible mayor who never made it a secret that he hated San Francisco and lived in Mill Valley during his tenure. I would bet the only neighborhood he visited was his own in Pacific Heights.
Newsom is a terrible governor. An empty suit talking out of both sides of his mouth. He, and the Dems have augered this state into the ground, demonstrably, which is probably the one reason the DNC seems to have shelved their plans to have him take over for Biden after the primary.
It's been painful watching his "ascent" in government. The cherry on the top for me was when he "cleaned" up San Francisco for Xi. What an insult to San Franciscans.
I completely agree and feel exactly the same way about him. But back to the original article/post by Michael, who I respect a great deal. I'm no redneck xenophobe but why can't or shouldn't we just repeal Prop 47, and AB 109 while we're trying to fix the crime/homelessness problem rather than create another new expense placed on the taxpayer. We're already $73B in debt from providing everything to the illegals coming across the southern border. This proposal of Michael's adds more funding for mandatory drug treatment when we already had this with drug diversion programs administered by the courts in 2000 and afterwards. Frustrating to say the least.
Hold on Michael.... some of us ARGUED against prop 47 (even on Berkeleyside) and against the prior decriminalization policies resulting in the dystopia we now endure.
I support this from Seattle. We need all west coast cities to band together and reverse the horrible death toll.
I have long wanted to visit Seattle, Oregon and California. I’ve taken those trips off my list.