California Proposition 66 (2016)

Last updated
Proposition 66
Death Penalty Procedure Time Limits
Results
Votes%
Yes check.svgYes6,626,15951.13%
X mark.svgNo6,333,73148.87%
Valid votes12,959,89088.70%
Invalid or blank votes1,650,61911.30%
Total votes14,610,509100.00%
Registered voters/turnout19,411,77175.27%
Source: California Secretary of State [1]

Proposition 66 was a California ballot proposition on the November 8, 2016, ballot to change procedures governing California state court challenges to capital punishment in California, designate superior court for initial petitions, limit successive petitions, require appointed attorneys who take noncapital appeals to accept death penalty appeals, and exempt prison officials from existing regulation process for developing execution methods. [2]

California ballot proposition statewide referendum item in California

In California, a ballot proposition can be a referendum or an initiative measure that is submitted to the electorate for a direct decision or direct vote. If passed, it can alter one or more of the articles of the Constitution of California, one or more of the 29 California Codes, or another law in the California Statutes by clarifying current or adding statute(s) or removing current statute(s).

Capital punishment in California

Capital punishment is a legal penalty in the U.S. state of California. As of March 2019, further executions are halted by an official moratorium ordered by Governor Gavin Newsom.

Contents

The intention of Proposition 66 was to speed up the process of capital trials and executions. [3] Proposition 66 was approved by voters in the November general election, with 51.1% voting to speed up executions. [4] Proposition 62, which would have abolished the death penalty in California, was rejected by voters in the same election, with 53.1% voting against it. [4] If voters had passed both Proposition 62 and Proposition 66, then the measure with the most "Yes" votes would have taken effect. [5]

The measure was opposed by the editorial boards of the Los Angeles Times , [6] the San Francisco Chronicle , [7] and The Sacramento Bee . [8]

<i>Los Angeles Times</i> Daily newspaper published in Los Angeles, California

The Los Angeles Times is a daily newspaper which has been published in Los Angeles, California, since 1881. It has the fourth-largest circulation among United States newspapers, and is the largest U.S. newspaper not headquartered on the East Coast. The paper is known for its coverage of issues particularly salient to the U.S. West Coast, such as immigration trends and natural disasters. It has won more than 40 Pulitzer Prizes for its coverage of these and other issues. As of June 18, 2018, ownership of the paper is controlled by Patrick Soon-Shiong, and the executive editor is Norman Pearlstine.

<i>San Francisco Chronicle</i> newspaper serving the San Francisco Bay area

The San Francisco Chronicle is a newspaper serving primarily the San Francisco Bay Area of the U.S. state of California. It was founded in 1865 as The Daily Dramatic Chronicle by teenage brothers Charles de Young and Michael H. de Young. The paper is currently owned by the Hearst Corporation, which bought it from the de Young family in 2000. It is the only major daily paper covering the city and county of San Francisco.

<i>The Sacramento Bee</i> newspaper

The Sacramento Bee is a daily newspaper published in Sacramento, California, in the United States. Since its founding in 1857, The Bee has become the largest newspaper in Sacramento, the fifth largest newspaper in California, and the 27th largest paper in the U.S. It is distributed in the upper Sacramento Valley, with a total circulation area that spans about 12,000 square miles (31,000 km2): south to Stockton, California, north to the Oregon border, east to Reno, Nevada, and west to the San Francisco Bay Area.

State supreme court ruling

After Prop 66 passed, former California Attorney General John Van de Kamp, along with Ron Briggs (whose father John Briggs was the sponsor of Prop 7 in 1978, which expanded capital punishment in California), challenged the measure in court. On December 20, 2016, the California Supreme Court stopped Prop 66 from going into effect pending resolution of the legal challenge. [9]

John Van de Kamp California Attorneys General

John Kalar Van de Kamp was an American politician. He served as Los Angeles County District Attorney from 1975 until 1981, and then as the 28th Attorney General of California from 1983 until 1991.

John V. Briggs is a retired California state politician who served in the California State Assembly and the California State Senate. He is perhaps best known for sponsoring Proposition 6 in 1978, also known as the Briggs Initiative, a failed measure which attempted to remove all gay or lesbian school employees or their supporters from their jobs.

The measure constitutionality was upheld 5-2 on August 24, 2017, though the state supreme court held that one provision requiring it to decide direct appeals of capital cases within five years was directive rather than mandatory. The court ordered that Prop 66 take effect after this decision becomes final. [10]

Related Research Articles

1964 California Proposition 14

California Proposition 14 was a November 1964 ballot proposition that amended the California state constitution, nullifying the Rumford Fair Housing Act. Proposition 14 was declared unconstitutional by the California Supreme Court in 1966. The decision of the California Supreme Court was affirmed by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1967 in Reitman v. Mulkey.

2008 California Proposition 4

Proposition 4, or the Abortion Waiting Period and Parental Notification Initiative, also known to its supporters as Sarah's Law, was an initiative state constitutional amendment on the 2008 California General Election ballot

2008 California Proposition 8 ballot proposition and state constitutional amendment passed in November 2008

Proposition 8, known informally as Prop 8, was a California ballot proposition and a state constitutional amendment passed in the November 2008 California state elections. The proposition was created by opponents of same-sex marriage in advance of the California Supreme Court's May 2008 appeal ruling, In re Marriage Cases, which followed the short-lived 2004 same-sex weddings controversy and found the previous ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional. Proposition 8 was ultimately ruled unconstitutional by a federal court in 2010, although the court decision did not go into effect until June 26, 2013, following the conclusion of proponents' appeals.

2008 California Proposition 5

California Proposition 5, or the Nonviolent Offender Rehabilitation Act was an initiated state statute that appeared as a ballot measure on the November 2008 ballot in California. It was disapproved by voters on November 4 of that year.

2008 California Proposition 7

California Proposition 7, would have required California utilities to procure half of their power from renewable resources by 2025. In order to make that goal, levels of production of solar, wind and other renewable energy resources would more than quadruple from their current output of 10.9%. It would also require California utilities to increase their purchase of electricity generated from renewable resources by 2% annually to meet Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) requirements of 40% in 2020 and 50% in 2025. Current law AB32 requires an RPS of 20% by 2010.

2010 California Proposition 20

A California Congressional Redistricting Initiative, Proposition 20 was on the November 2, 2010 ballot in California. It was approved by 61.2% of voters. Election officials announced on May 5 that the proposition had collected sufficient signatures to qualify for the ballot. The measure is known by its supporters as the VOTERS FIRST Act for Congress.

2012 California Proposition 39

Proposition 39 is a ballot initiative in the state of California that modifies the way out-of-state corporations calculate their income tax burdens. The proposition was approved by voters in the November 6 general election, with 61.1% voting in favor of it.

2012 California Proposition 34

Proposition 34 was a California ballot measure that was decided by California voters at the statewide election on November 6, 2012. It sought to repeal Proposition 17, originally passed by voters in 1972, thus abolishing the death penalty in California.

2012 California Proposition 30

Proposition 30, officially titled Temporary Taxes to Fund Education, is a California ballot measure that was decided by California voters at the statewide election on November 6, 2012. The initiative is a measure to increase taxes to prevent US$6 billion cuts to the education budget for California state schools. The measure was approved by California voters by a margin of 55 to 45 percent.

2014 California Proposition 47

Proposition 47, also known by its ballot title Criminal Sentences. Misdemeanor Penalties. Initiative Statute, was a referendum passed by voters in the state of California on November 4, 2014. The measure was also referred to by its supporters as the Safe Neighborhoods and Schools Act. It recategorized some nonviolent offenses as misdemeanors, rather than felonies, as they had previously been categorized.

Adult Use of Marijuana Act

The Adult Use of Marijuana Act (AUMA) was a 2016 voter initiative to legalize cannabis in California. The full name is the Control, Regulate and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act. The initiative passed with 57% voter approval and became law on November 9, 2016, leading to recreational cannabis sales in California by January 2018.

2016 California Proposition 59

California Proposition 59 is a non-binding advisory question that appeared on the 2016 California November general election ballot. It asked voters if they wanted California to work towards overturning the Citizens United U.S. Supreme Court ruling.

2016 California Proposition 53

Proposition 53 was a California ballot proposition on the November 8, 2016 ballot. It would have required voter approval for issuing revenue bonds exceeding $2 billion.

2016 California Proposition 54

Proposition 54 is a California ballot proposition that passed on the November 8, 2016 ballot. It requires the recording and posting of videos of public meetings of the State Legislature. The measure requires the recordings to be posted on the internet within 24 hours of a meeting, available online for at least 72 hours before a bill can be passed, and downloadable for at least 20 years. The measure also allows members of the public to record meetings.

2016 California Proposition 55

Proposition 55 is a California ballot proposition that passed on the November 8, 2016 ballot, regarding extending by twelve years the temporary personal income tax increases enacted in 2012 on earnings over $250,000, with revenues allocated to K–12 schools, California Community Colleges, and, in certain years, healthcare. Proposition 55 will raise tax revenue by between $4 billion and $9 billion a year. Half of funds will go to schools and community colleges, up to $2 billion a year would go to Medi-Cal, and up to $1.5 billion will be saved and applied to debt.

2016 California Proposition 57

Proposition 57 was a initiated California ballot proposition, approved on the November 8, 2016 ballot. The Proposition allows parole consideration for nonviolent felons, changes policies on juvenile prosecution, and authorizes sentence credits for rehabilitation, good behavior, and education.

2016 California Proposition 60

Proposition 60 was a California ballot proposition on the November 8, 2016 ballot which would have allowed the California Occupational Safety and Health Administration (Cal/OSHA) to prosecute an enforcement action anytime a condom is not visible in a pornographic film. The proposition failed to pass.

2016 California Proposition 62

Proposition 62 was a California ballot proposition on the November 8, 2016, ballot that would have repealed the death penalty and replaced it with life imprisonment and forced labor without possibility of parole. It would have applied retroactively to existing death sentences and increased the portion of life inmates' wages that may be applied to victim restitution.

References

  1. ↑ "Statement of Vote - November 8, 2016, General Election". December 16, 2016. Retrieved January 7, 2017.
  2. ↑ "Proposition 66. California General Election November 8, 2016. Official Voter Information Guide". California Secretary of State. Retrieved 10 October 2016.
  3. ↑ The Times Editorial Board (3 September 2016). "Props 62 and 66: California voters should end the death penalty, not speed it up". Los Angeles Times. Retrieved 11 October 2016.
  4. 1 2 Miller, Jim (9 November 2016). "California votes to keep death penalty". The Sacramento Bee. Retrieved 11 November 2016.
  5. ↑ Shafer, Scott. "Election 2016: Proposition 62". KQED News. Retrieved 20 October 2016.
  6. ↑ The Editorial Board of the Los Angeles Times (3 September 2016). "Props 62 and 66: California voters should end the death penalty, not speed it up". Los Angeles Times . Retrieved 20 October 2016.
  7. ↑ The Editorial Board of the San Francisco Chronicle (25 August 2016). "Fight crime, not futility: Abolish death penalty". San Francisco Chronicle . Retrieved 20 October 2016.
  8. ↑ The Editorial Board of the Sacramento Bee (7 October 2016). "End the illusion: Abolish the death penalty". The Sacramento Bee . Retrieved 20 October 2016.
  9. ↑ California Supreme Court halts voter-approved death penalty measure, Associated Press (December 20, 2016).
  10. ↑ "Supreme Court Case: S238309". appellatecases.courtinfo.ca.gov. Retrieved August 24, 2017.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.