Field Poll | Large Majority Favors Modifying "Three Strikes" Law
Support for shifting inmates to county jails, but don't want taxes added. Large majority favors modifying "three strikes" law to allow for more discretion in sentencing.
Published on Jun 16, 2011 - 6:53:52 AM

By: Mark DiCamillo and Mervin Field, Field Research Corporation

June 16, 2011 - A large majority of this state's voters (79%) recognize the serious impact of the U.S. Supreme Court's recent ruling mandating that California make big reductions in its prison population.

By a 51% to 37% margin voters back Governor Jerry Brown's proposal to comply with the High Court's ruling by transferring lower-risk inmates from state prisons to local county jails and other community-based facilities.

However, voters do not believe that state taxes should have to be raised or that the temporary tax increases enacted by the state several years ago extended to pay for this transfer. Three in four voters (74%) say they now agree that the state's "three strikes" law should be modified to give judges and juries more discretion in deciding the sentences given to persons convicted of a third felony as a way to ease prison overcrowding.

These findings come from the latest statewide Field Poll completed earlier this week.

Background

Last month the U.S. Supreme Court ordered California to sharply reduce its overcrowded state prisons to fix a health care system that does not meet constitutional standards.

The Court, noting that the state's prison population was nearly twice its designed capacity, says overcrowding within the prisons is fostering grossly inadequate provisions for medical and mental health care, endangering both inmates and prison guards.

Under the Court's ruling, California's prison population must be reduced by more than thirty thousand within two years. The governor, while critical of the ruling, said the state would attempt to comply by shifting thousands of low-risk offenders from state prisons to county jails and other community-based facilities.

Voters recognize the seriousness of releasing state prison inmates

The impact of the High Court's decision ordering California to release a large number of state prison inmates is viewed most seriously by this state's voters. Nearly eight in ten voters (79%) believe the situation is serious, with 50% viewing it as a very serious matter. Just one in seven (16%) believe the situation is not serious.

All voters, regardless of partisanship, believe that releasing this many inmates creates a serious situation, although Republicans are more likely than Democrats or non-partisans to view the situation as very serious.

Support for governor's proposal to transfer low-risk inmates to local county jails

In order to comply with the Court's ruling, Brown has proposed transferring lower-risk inmates from the state prisons to local county jails and other community-based facilities.

When asked their opinions about this, more voters (51%) endorse the governor's proposal than oppose it (37%). Democrats support the governor's plan two to one (60% to 31%). Non-partisans also support this approach 55% to 32%. On the other hand, more Republicans view it as a bad idea (48%) than a good idea (38%)

Voters not inclined to go along with additional state taxes to pay for the inmate transfer

Despite their backing of Brown's proposed inmate transfer, voters are not in agreement with the governor that the inmate transfer will require increasing state taxes to provide the counties with additional funds to house the new prisoners.

When voters are asked whether they agree or disagree that more state taxes are needed for this purpose, 59% disagree, while 34% agree. Opinions are more divided when the question is framed in terms of extending the temporary tax increases enacted by the state two years ago to pay for this. In this setting 44% agree that the tax extension is needed, while 48% disagree.

In both settings, a large majority of Republicans disagree that additional tax revenues are needed. Non-partisans also oppose each proposal but by smaller margins. Among Democrats, a majority agrees with the idea of extending the temporary tax increase for this purpose, but they divide almost evenly about whether taxes generally need to be increased to pay for this.

Strong support for modifying the state's "three strikes" law to help ease prison overcrowding

In 1994 California voters adopted a tough criminal sentencing law referred to as the "three strikes and you're out" law. The statute requires state courts to hand down mandatory 25 year-to-life sentences after a felon is convicted for the third time, regardless of the seriousness of the third offense.

Critics of the law say that the one-size-fits-all sentencing procedure for repeat offenders is a major contributor to the state's overcrowded prisons. Supporters of the law counter that a mandatory third strike sentence is required to maintain public safety and they point to recent declines in the crime rate as a demonstration of the law's success.

Voters in this survey were asked whether or not they felt the law should be modified to give judges and juries more discretion in deciding how long a person convicted of a third felony should be sent to prison as a way to ease prison overcrowding. The results indicate that about three in four voters (74%) agree that such a modification should be made, 46% of whom agree strongly. Large majorities of voters from each political party support this modification.

By submitting a comment you consent to our rules. Please use your real first and last name, not a nickname or alias. Thank you.