Kamala Refuses to Answer How She’s Voting on Key Cali Crime Measure: ‘It’s the Sunday Before the Election’

In the closing days of the 2024⁢ presidential campaign, crime has emerged as a pivotal issue, placing California’s Proposition 36 in the spotlight.⁣ The proposition ​aims to impose stricter penalties on retail theft and drug-related crimes, a significant concern in a state grappling with rising crime rates. Kamala Harris, the Vice President, faced ‌scrutiny when asked about ‌her stance⁣ on this ‍measure during ⁢an event in Detroit. Instead of clearly stating her position, Harris⁤ sidestepped the question, choosing not to disclose how she would vote. This decision sparked criticism from both constituents and political opponents who ⁣accused her of evasiveness and questioned her commitment to⁢ addressing crime.

Historically,​ when serving as‌ California’s Attorney General, Harris was involved‌ in the passage⁢ of Proposition 47, which had previously reclassified certain ‌felonies related to theft ⁤and drugs into misdemeanors. Critics ‍argue that this earlier ⁣action led to an increase in‌ crime⁣ that Prop 36 now seeks to correct, ⁣making her reluctance to ‌endorse Prop 36 seem notably disingenuous. Harris’s hesitance⁢ to engage with such a crucial topic ​just⁢ before⁣ the election raises⁤ concerns about her ability to balance progressive values ⁣with the ⁢pressing demands ​of mid-America voters, portraying her as detached from⁢ critical⁤ issues that impact everyday‍ citizens.

Harris’s ambiguous stance on Proposition 36 highlights ‌the tension between political strategy and pressing societal concerns, casting doubt on her ‍approach to tackling ​crime during her campaign.


With crime being one of the most out-front issues in the closing days of the 2024 presidential campaign, you’d think support for Prop 36 would be a no-brainer for Kamala Harris.

After all, her campaign has spent months emphasizing that she was once a prosecutor, a way to preemptively strike any soft-on-crime attacks against her. Surely the proposed California law, which is aimed at curbing retail theft and drug use in a state where woke laws have caused an epidemic of it — and the concomitant loss of major stores in cities like San Francisco and Los Angeles — is an easy layup for the Harris campaign, right?

Instead, when the measure was brought up, the vice president decided to call attention to the issue by failing to say whether she was on either side of the proposition.

While appearing in Detroit to mark the last day of early voting in Michigan, Harris was asked how she’d vote on the measure — which would see those convicted of certain drug or theft crimes receiving an increased sentence, even if their theft was under $950 — by a reporter.

“I am not going talk about the vote on that because, honestly, it’s the Sunday before the election and I don’t intend to create an endorsement one way or the other,” she responded.

Ah, yes. It’s the Sunday before the election, so she can’t tell people how she’s voting on what’s arguably the most important thing on her home state’s ballot. Because of course. How disingenuous can you get?

It’s worth noting that, when she was the state’s attorney general, Proposition 47 — the measure that reclassified certain thefts and drug crimes as misdemeanors and thus dissuaded police from investigating them — passed by an overwhelming number.

“Although her office wrote Proposition 47’s summary and title, Harris herself took no position on the initiative,” opinion contributor J.T. Young wrote in The Hill regarding her role in the 2014 ballot initiative passing. “Proposition 47 went on to pass overwhelmingly. And ever since, California has been overwhelmed by the consequences.

“Drug use not only surged but spilled into the streets. Homelessness spiked. What had been felony theft (including shoplifting, grand theft, forgery, and fraud) was now simply a misdemeanor (so long as it stayed below $950), and newly reclassified ‘shoplifting’ skyrocketed,” Young noted.

“And without DNA testing for now-reduced drug and theft offenses, many other serious crimes went unsolved.”

And, of course, this gave her a do-over to say that she supported curbing the excesses of Prop 47 with Prop 36. What did she do? She punted. Of course.

Donald Trump’s social media accounts — along with those of other conservatives — ripped her for the pusillanimity.

And this is the thing — if she supported it, saying she did would be the easiest thing in the world. It’d make her look tough on crime in the closing moments of a momentous election cycle and might seal the deal for her in swing states.

The fact that she won’t say anything should tell you a lot about what a Harris presidency will look like: an inveterately progressive Californian trying to appear somewhat moderate to middle America while appeasing the worst elements in her own party. If that wasn’t clear enough already, this should clinch it.




Advertise with The Western Journal and reach millions of highly engaged readers, while supporting our work. Advertise Today.



" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases

Related Articles

Sponsored Content
Back to top button
Available for Amazon Prime
Close

Adblock Detected

Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker