Yesterday I discussed a plan by California Democrats to protect Prop. 47 from the voters. Prop. 47 is the law passed in 2014 which reduced a bunch of drug and theft crimes to misdemeanor status. There have been complaints ever since that Prop 47 is at least partly responsible for the rise in property crime and public drug use in the state. 

But the Democrats who supported Prop. 47, including Gov. Gavin Newsom, are going all out to keep it from being overturned. Democrats have proposed a whole series of new laws to address property and drug crimes but they have threated to add an "interoperability clause" to the bills that would cause them to evaporate if Prop. 47 is repealed. Republicans have called it a poison pill and they are right. Today the SF Chronicle had an excellent opinion piece on the topic titled "California Democrats being shady about squashing Prop 47 reform."

Democrats have now cooked up a scheme to kill most of their own bills if voters approve a ballot measure to reform Proposition 47 — the controversial 2014 initiative that reduced penalties for some drug and theft offenses — which formally qualified Tuesday for the November election.

It’s the legislative version of Meredith Blake’s ultimatum in the 1998 movie “Parent Trap,” when she asks her fiance Nick to choose between her and his twin daughters: “Get the picture? It’s me, or them. Take your pick.”...

In doing so, they’re not only fumbling their attempts to get Prop 47 reform off the ballot. They’re also creating yet another criminal justice PR nightmare for themselves and giving Republicans an easy opportunity to make them look foolish.

As I pointed out yesterday, the reason Democrats are turning this into an either/or situation is partly that they don't want to admit they were wrong about Prop. 47 but also partly that they still believe in Prop. 47 as a solution to "mass incarceration." Simply put, the new laws they have proposed aren't as tough on criminals as the repeal effort would be. They know that and they want the less tough on crime laws rather than the tough on crime ones.

But two other things happened yesterday which have advanced the story a bit. First, the California secretary of state announced that Prop. 47 reform had qualified for the ballot.

BREAKING: California’s Secretary of State notifies county elections officials the initiative to reform Prop 47 has qualified for the November ballot.

The measure has filed more than 600k valid signatures. pic.twitter.com/sKaaZX5g0i

— Ashley Zavala (@ZavalaA) June 11, 2024

But the bigger thing that happened yesterday is that Democrats seem to have blinked.

Democratic leaders in the Senate and Assembly doubled down on their efforts Monday to add inoperability clauses to 14 public-safety-related bills, signaling the group is prepared to abandon efforts it has spent the year working on if voters pass the reforms to Proposition 47.

Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas and Senate Pro Tempore Mike McGuire claimed on Monday that the two proposals would conflict legally, but were short on specifics.

On Tuesday, legislative officials clarified that five of the 14 bills might conflict, while the rest represent ideological differences.

"We added inoperability clauses to help ensure that if these bills were put into law and the ballot initiative also goes into effect, we don't have a world-class mess of conflicting policies on our hands," McGuire said.

Got that? Monday they argued all 14 bills had conflicts with Prop. 47 reform which necessitated the addition of their poison pill "interoperability clause." By Tuesday they admitted only 5 bills had conflicts and the rest were "ideological differences." In other words, they were lying Monday and they got caught. At this point, it's not even clear if the interoperability clauses will be added to any of the bills.

Those clauses are tearing down the concept that the package is broadly supported by both parties.

Multiple sources tell me Dems are divided, while Reps are pulling their support from the bills that will contain inoperability language.

Will this have the 2/3 vote required?

— Ashley Zavala (@ZavalaA) June 12, 2024

Democrats do seem to be defecting from this plan. CBS News reported that California Assemblyman Kevin McCarty, chair of the Assembly Public Safety Committee, said he does not support the poison pills and will not add them in his committee.

...in a surprise twist, Democratic leaders announced that the poison pill amendment would not be added to their proposed legislation...

"For this bill and the other three bills, they are not being amended today in the public safety committee. They're being heard as is," McCarty said Tuesday.

McCarty announced that he would steer clear of controversial amendments to retail theft legislation in his committee and, when asked by a reporter, even announced that he does not support them.

"We didn't support them in committee today. I didn't support them. I support the bills as is," McCarty said.

McCarty is running for mayor of Sacramento which may explain why he's not willing to go all in on this scheme. Another Democratic state senator also pulled her support for the bills based on the poison pill amendments.

Democratic State Senator drops her name from two bills on public safety package over controversial clauses hinging on Prop 47. https://t.co/yIrZjzTExZ

— Ashley Zavala (@ZavalaA) June 12, 2024

This story isn't over yet but it does seem that California Democrats have taken a small step backwards after it became clear their explanations were partisan nonsense in most cases. We'll have to wait and see how things play out from here, but at least for now Prop 47 reform is on the ballot this year.