Vox - The biggest 2020 state ballot initiativeshttps://cdn.vox-cdn.com/community_logos/52517/voxv.png2020-11-19T18:20:00-05:00http://www.vox.com/rss/stream/213053012020-11-19T18:20:00-05:002020-11-19T18:20:00-05:00Alaska voters adopt ranked-choice voting in ballot initiative
<figure>
<img alt="Hands holding a ballot with some choices filled in." src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/yRGCX1C_HNl1dFZYhrao4UM8eYI=/93x0:2760x2000/1310x983/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/67820584/GettyImages_594745352.0.jpg" />
<figcaption>Voters in Alaska have approved ranked-choice voting. | Brianna Soukup/Portland Portland Press Herald via Getty Images</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The voting reform measure is meant to combat polarization and increase voter choice.</p> <p id="3wYOW5">In a tight vote that came down to about 4,000 ballots, Alaskans approved a measure to <a href="https://www.vox.com/2018/6/12/17448450/maine-ranked-choice-voting-paul-lepage-instant-runoff-2018-midterms">join Maine</a> in conducting their elections using ranked-choice voting by <a href="https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2020/11/3/21546902/live-results-ballot-initiatives-democracy-reform">approving the ballot initiative Measure 2</a>.</p>
<p id="NLyeB4">Measure 2 makes sweeping changes to how Alaska administers elections. Instead of two primaries, in which each political party nominates a candidate for the general election in November, the state will hold one open primary from which the top four candidates, regardless of party affiliation, proceed to the general election.</p>
<p id="sorm9Y">Ranked-choice voting lets voters list the candidates in order of preference.</p>
<p id="X92inA">“This is a victory for all Alaskans regardless of their political leaning,” Shea Siegert, manager of the Yes on 2 for Better Elections campaign, <a href="https://alaskansforbetterelections.com/alaska-voters-approve-landmark-nonpartisan-election-reforms/">said in a statement Wednesday</a>. “We now have an electoral system that lives up to Alaska’s independent streak by saying ‘to hell with politics let’s do what is right for Alaska.’”</p>
<p id="uhRmdJ">Alaska’s outcome was a victory for voting reform campaigners, who have argued that changing how we vote might address hyperpartisanship and polarization while giving third-party candidates a better chance at elected office. Opponents have warned it could be a logistical headache, though so far the cities and states that have adopted ranked-choice voting have conducted their elections without major problems. Massachusetts considered a similar law this November but rejected it.</p>
<p id="fq57Ut">Ranked-choice voting works like this: Instead of just<strong> </strong>picking one of the candidates on the ballot, you rank them from most preferred to least preferred. While it is new in the United States, it has been successfully used for a century in Australia and in Ireland.</p>
<aside id="P9SRKN"><div data-anthem-component="readmore" data-anthem-component-data='{"stories":[{"title":"Live results: Ballot initiatives on democracy reform","url":"https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2020/11/3/21546902/live-results-ballot-initiatives-democracy-reform"}]}'></div></aside><p id="3b9vjI">The idea is that this allows voters to choose their favorite possible candidate. Most of the United States has what’s called a first-past-the-post electoral system, where the candidate who receives the most votes becomes president. First-past-the-post systems incentivize strategic voting (voting not for your favorite candidate but for your preferred candidate with a real shot at victory), and they have driven the rise of a two-party system like the one in the US.</p>
<p id="8duXId">And while first-past-the-post voting systems are not the only factor that has led to the two-party system or to the <a href="https://www.vox.com/2020/1/24/21076232/polarization-america-international-party-political">increasing polarization of America</a>, they’ve certainly contributed. First-past-the-post systems mean third-party candidates rarely win, even if many voters prefer them; each voter expects that voting for a third party constitutes “throwing away” their vote.</p>
<p id="h88hHH">Imagine a person were deciding between President Donald Trump, Democratic candidate Joe Biden, Green Party candidate Howie Hawkins, and Libertarian Party candidate Jo Jorgensen. Our hypothetical voter likes both Hawkins and Jorgensen better than Biden but would prefer Biden win than Trump.</p>
<p id="dcqkO5">Under first-past-the-post voting — the voting system most Americans voted with this election — our hypothetical voter might feel forced to vote for Biden. Under ranked-choice voting, they would list (for example) Hawkins first, Jorgensen second, Biden third, and Trump fourth. When ballots are counted, the ballot counters will eliminate the candidate with the fewest first-place votes and “move” their vote to their second-place candidate.</p>
<p id="GqDFbm">You can see how it works on this ballot from Maine, which conducted the first-ever general statewide election with ranked-choice voting this November.</p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt=" " data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/3pYyUWvHih0zD1WnCJxuGPA7MZw=/800x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/21993563/media_7e9cf132d236443bbc05d22b40af96a7Election_2020_Maine_Ranked_Voting_89453.jpg">
<cite>David Sharp/AP Photo</cite>
</figure>
<p id="QHNfnE">As a result, third-party candidates get more votes because voters don’t feel like they’re throwing their vote away by supporting them. And the process generally favors candidates whom lots of voters find acceptable over polarizing candidates whom many voters hate.</p>
<p id="WjZFt6">“Ranked-choice voting rewards candidates who can appeal most broadly because candidates compete to be voters’ second and third choices as well as their first,” voting reform expert Lee Drutman <a href="https://www.vox.com/polyarchy/2019/3/21/18275785/electoral-college-ranked-choice-voting-president-democracy">wrote for Vox in 2019</a>. Studies find that in areas with ranked-choice voting, campaigns are <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/ncr.21307">more civil</a>. Ranked-choice voting might also <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0261379417304006">increase representation of women and minorities</a>, who seem to benefit when the electoral conditions encourage coalition building.</p>
<p id="Wzh9nW">That’s a particularly <a href="https://www.adn.com/politics/2020/10/29/on-ballot-measure-2-republicans-and-democrats-ally-against-an-independent-supported-push-for-election-reform-in-alaska/">big deal in Alaska</a>, where independents account for 57 percent of registered voters but hold only three seats in the state legislature.</p>
<p id="CmLZLY">Another implication of Ballot Measure 2 is that Alaska’s moderate Republican senator, Lisa Murkowski, is in less danger of being primaried from the right — <a href="https://www.adn.com/politics/article/alaska-senate-race-untold-story-lisa-murkowski-s-write-decision/2010/11/12/">which is what happened in 2010,</a> when a more conservative Republican won the party’s nomination, forcing Murkowski to run an unprecedented successful write-in campaign to keep her seat. In a ranked-choice voting system, Murkowski only needs to be one of the top four candidates in the primary to advance to the general election.</p>
<h3 id="dLKP8s">A growing conversation about how we vote</h3>
<p id="2OeiqP">Ranked-choice voting is used all over the world, but until two decades ago — when San Francisco adopted it — it was rarely used or discussed in the US.</p>
<p id="ztqRX2">US election experts, concerned about growing polarization and voter disenchantment, began encouraging other cities and states to adopt it. It did nicely in San Francisco, and <a href="https://www.fairvote.org/where_is_ranked_choice_voting_used">other cities signed on</a>. Eventually, the movement hit the national stage: In 2018, <a href="https://www.vox.com/the-highlight/2019/7/24/20700007/maine-san-francisco-ranked-choice-voting">Maine became the first state</a> to adopt ranked-choice voting. In 2019, <a href="https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/11/1/20941870/ranked-choice-voting-new-york-city">New York City signed on as well</a>. In the 2020 election cycle, presidential candidates Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Michael Bennet endorsed it.</p>
<p id="Lx9aIq">These early adopters allow us a window into some important questions about ranked-choice voting. In particular, critics have worried it will be harder for the election office to tabulate and that it will confuse voters or lead to more spoiled ballots.</p>
<p id="FuJYRe">No such problems were reported in this year’s ranked-choice primaries, and ranked-choice voting works fine in many other countries. But Maine’s high statewide turnout in the 2020 general election represented the system’s first time in the spotlight for most Americans. With both Maine and Alaska now using ranked-choice voting, this method of conducting elections will have a chance to prove that it works — or that it doesn’t — in combating the rising tide of polarization.</p>
https://www.vox.com/2020/11/19/21537126/alaska-measure-2-ranked-choice-voting-resultsKelsey Piper2020-11-11T08:00:00-05:002020-11-11T08:00:00-05:00America’s war on drugs has failed. Oregon is showing a way out.
<figure>
<img alt="An illustration of Oregon and drugs." src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/8hqqeoLB57QKq9dR7OPoUPsNpnY=/294x0:2057x1322/1310x983/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/67770513/oregon_decriminalized_board_4.0.jpg" />
<figcaption>Christina Animashaun/Vox</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Oregon’s voters have forced significant reforms to end the war on drugs.</p> <p id="gcZGzp">America’s decades-long war on drugs has failed, simultaneously causing huge harms — fueling drug-related violence around the world and funneling millions of people into jails and prisons — and not preventing drug epidemics, including the worst overdose crisis in US history with the <a href="https://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2017/8/3/16079772/opioid-epidemic-drug-overdoses">opioid epidemic</a>. But now Oregon has declared a truce of sorts, and it’s showing the rest of the US what an end to the drug war might look like.</p>
<p id="ZbyZdW">On November 3, Oregon voters <a href="https://www.vox.com/2020/11/3/21514828/oregon-drug-decriminalization-measure-110-results">elected to decriminalize all drugs</a>, including heroin and cocaine, so possessing small amounts of these substances no longer carries the threat of jail or prison time. The state’s voters also approved another ballot measure to <a href="https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2020/11/3/21546824/live-results-psychedelic-drugs-washington-dc-oregon">legalize psilocybin</a>, the main psychoactive compound found in magic mushrooms, in supervised therapeutic settings. Oregon voters had previously legalized marijuana for recreational and medical purposes, but it’s the first state in modern American history to legalize psilocybin and decriminalize some drug possession.</p>
<p id="4SFbrF">This amounts to a fundamental rejection of America’s modern war on drugs. The central pillar of the country’s drug war is criminal prohibition — even simple possession of illegal substances carries the threat of jail or prison time. Oregon is chipping away at that regime, if not dismantling it entirely: Drug possession no longer carries the threat of incarceration, and some drugs are even allowed for therapeutic or purely recreational purposes. </p>
<p id="DVBi29">The value of Oregon’s moves, both symbolically and practically, is hard to overstate. I’ve been reporting on the war on drugs for years, and have <a href="https://www.vox.com/2015/7/24/9027363/acid-lsd-psychedelic-drugs">long</a> <a href="https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/4/20/15328384/opioid-epidemic-drug-legalization">imagined</a> the end of the US drug war as a three-legged framework: legalizing marijuana, decriminalizing other drugs, and allowing psychedelics for therapeutic purposes.</p>
<p id="YC0hbX">Ten years ago, marijuana legalization was widely described as unpopular and controversial, with <a href="https://news.gallup.com/poll/1657/illegal-drugs.aspx">more Americans opposing it than not</a>. But Oregon has now approved all three legs. On Election Day, Drug Policy Alliance executive director Kassandra Frederique described the Oregon measures passing as “a huge victory taking on a cornerstone of the drug war.”</p>
<p id="Zl7SmH">Oregon, like other states that have relaxed their drug laws, didn’t do so because political leaders woke up to the problem and pushed serious reforms. The three major steps Oregon has taken, instead, were all done through ballot initiatives. The same is true for 13 of the 15 states that have legalized marijuana so far; only two states have legalized cannabis through their legislatures.</p>
<p id="wAN1y1">Oregon’s example shows that even if politicians remain reluctant and cautious on the issue, the public can take action on its own terms. <a href="https://ballotpedia.org/States_with_initiative_or_referendum">Less than half of states</a> don’t have an open-ended ballot initiative process. But ballot initiatives can ultimately inspire action beyond state borders; political leaders in <a href="https://www.marijuanamoment.net/new-york-governor-says-time-is-ripe-for-marijuana-legalization-and-itll-pass-this-year/">New York</a>, which doesn’t have an open-ended process, and <a href="https://www.marijuanamoment.net/connecticut-governor-says-legalizing-marijuana-would-prevent-covid-spread-by-reducing-travel-to-new-jersey/">surrounding areas</a> started to talk up legalization after Massachusetts and Maine legalized, and they’ve already become more vocal after New Jersey voted to legalize this year.</p>
<p id="P3CY8K">There are still limits to what any state can do. For one, all the drugs decriminalized or legalized in Oregon, including marijuana, remain illegal at the federal level. While the federal government has taken a hands-off approach to state-level drug policy reforms since President Barack Obama’s second term, federal prohibition creates hurdles to state policies, such as limits on government benefits and banking marijuana profits.</p>
<p id="IkkJM7">And as Oregon will soon learn, ending the drug war <a href="https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/5/30/15591700/mass-incarceration-john-pfaff-locked-in">doesn’t mean the end of mass incarceration</a> and all its racially disparate consequences. Most US inmates are locked up for violent and other more serious offenses, not minor drug crimes. This also doesn’t repair the damage already done to many communities by the war on drugs, from aggressive policing to the toll of arrests, incarceration, and criminal records on individuals and their families.</p>
<p id="15e5QJ">But Oregon, as well as the dozen-plus other states to legalize, has shown that much of the public is fed up with the war on drugs — and there is a way out.</p>
<h3 id="yCzLCU">Oregon’s approach is a big step to ending the drug war</h3>
<p id="aV6PX3">Oregon’s ballot initiatives are an acknowledgment that criminalization hasn’t worked to prevent drug use and even large drug epidemics, such as the <a href="https://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2017/8/3/16079772/opioid-epidemic-drug-overdoses">ongoing opioid crisis</a>. That’s despite criminal prohibition spawning its own negative consequences: millions of arrests, vast racial disparities in those arrests and any resulting incarceration, and an international web of crime and violence as the black market has funneled money into drug cartels and other illicit organizations. All the while, <a href="http://faculty.publicpolicy.umd.edu/sites/default/files/reuter/files/pollack_and_reuter.pdf">some research</a> suggests that harsher penalties don’t even reduce drug use more than a less aggressive form of prohibition would.</p>
<p id="hAqFCy">Criminalization might even stop some from seeking help for drug addiction, Elaine Hyshka, a drug policy expert at the University of Alberta’s School of Public Health, told me. “Being liable to criminal charges for drug possession, or criminalizing people who use drugs, is a really significant deterrent for people talking about their substance use problems.”</p>
<p id="dmgP65">Oregon’s voters and activists, supported by national advocacy groups like the Drug Policy Alliance, have taken a three-pronged approach to ending the state’s war on drugs:</p>
<p id="K6OQEF"><strong>1) Marijuana legalization:</strong> Since 2015, the state has let adults 21 and older possess and grow marijuana. Retail outlets across the state sell cannabis. The state government regulates and taxes marijuana cultivation, distribution, and sales. It’s all a big shift from the days when pot could result in a fine or incarceration.</p>
<p id="kGYvTI"><strong>2) Drug decriminalization: </strong>With the 2020 election, Oregon also voted to remove the threat of jail or prison time for simple possession of every drug, including cocaine and heroin. Instead, those caught with small amounts of the drugs will be able to choose between a $100 fine or a “completed health assessment” through an addiction recovery center. Harder drugs like cocaine and heroin would <em>not</em> be legally sold or distributed; possession of higher quantities remain illegal, as do sales and distribution. The initiative also redirected savings, from less incarceration and law enforcement, as well as preexisting marijuana sales tax revenue to addiction treatment.</p>
<p id="COcFTi"><strong>3) Therapeutic psychedelics: </strong>Through a separate ballot measure, Oregon allowed the supervised, therapeutic use of psilocybin. This won’t mean that a person can just go to a magic mushroom dispensary and get the drug. Instead, trained facilitators at a “psilocybin service center” will help administer and then supervise the psychedelic trip. There’s <a href="https://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2019/1/10/18007558/denver-psilocybin-psychedelic-mushrooms-ayahuasca-depression-mental-health">some</a> <a href="https://www.vox.com/2016/6/27/11544250/psychedelic-drugs-lsd-psilocybin-effects">research</a> backing this approach, showing that just one or two doses of psilocybin can have lasting effects on conditions like depression, anxiety, PTSD, and addiction.</p>
<p id="4CorvO">All three of these prongs approach the overall issue of the drug war differently, but they each chip away its foundation: the idea that the use of any of these drugs should be criminally illegal. Instead, they acknowledge that drugs can have value for recreational, therapeutic, or medical purposes, and craft rules on a case-by-case basis according to drugs’ risks and uses.</p>
<p id="ctdlbF">Oregon is also putting more money into addiction treatment. Based on <a href="https://sos.oregon.gov/elections/Documents/fec/IP-44-FEC-final-statement.pdf">state</a> <a href="https://www.oregon.gov/cjc/CJC%20Document%20Library/SB1041Report.pdf">analyses</a>, the recently passed decriminalization measure puts more than $100 million a year toward treatment, which would at least quadruple the $25 million the state spent a year before. The question is how this money will be used: There’s significant public funding for addiction treatment out there, but much of it goes to <a href="https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/12/17/18292021/opioid-epidemic-methadone-buprenorphine-naltrexone-drug-rehab">ineffective</a> or <a href="https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2020/3/2/21156327/florida-shuffle-drug-rehab-addiction-treatment-bri-jaynes">downright fraudulent</a> programs, as I’ve covered in <a href="https://www.vox.com/2019/9/6/20853284/drug-addiction-treatment-rehab-cost-vox">Vox’s Rehab Racket project</a>.</p>
<p id="ZnBZJD">Still, if used well, the money could go to a big gap. Just 1 in 10 people with a drug addiction get treatment, according to <a href="https://addiction.surgeongeneral.gov/">federal data</a>, largely due to lack of access. “We have gaping holes in coverage,” Renee Johnson, a drug policy expert at Johns Hopkins University, told me. “We just don’t value behavioral health care or mental health care.”</p>
<p id="UwpQmI">Increased access to addiction treatment remains a key component of any plan to reel back the war on drugs. The hope is that more emphasis on public health, through treatment and harm reduction (which tries to reduce risk rather than eliminate it altogether), will address the problems caused by drug use that criminalization failed to address. If legalization and decriminalization lead to more drug use overall, more and better treatment along with harm reduction could also help combat those trends without the negative consequences created by criminalization.</p>
<p id="UIr6um">That’s all in some ways an attempt to emulate the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/22/opinion/sunday/portugal-drug-decriminalization.html">Portugal model</a> that many drug policy reformers have praised for years. In 2001, the small European country decriminalized all drugs, and invested heavily in evidence-based treatment and harm reduction. So far, it <a href="https://transformdrugs.org/drug-decriminalisation-in-portugal-setting-the-record-straight/">seems to have worked well</a>, with lifetime drug use slightly increasing but problematic use, addiction, and their negative consequences declining overall. (Although there are <a href="https://www.vox.com/21509815/oregon-ballot-measure-110-drug-decriminalization">notable differences</a> between Portugal and Oregon’s approaches.)</p>
<p id="UD0Qnk">The question now is if this works in the US. In modern America, decriminalization is a truly untried experiment; no state has done it, besides Oregon. We don’t know if all the money going to treatment in Oregon will be spent wisely and effectively. Cultural attitudes matter too; it’s notable that Portugal, despite its drug policy, maintained a disapproving attitude in general toward drug use — what Stanford drug policy expert Keith Humphreys described, citing the late <a href="https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2019/7/22/20703014/mark-kleiman-criminal-justice-drug-policy-expert-died">Mark Kleiman</a>, as “grudging tolerance.” </p>
<p id="8gDQg3">But if it works, the model could spread to other states, as is now happening with marijuana legalization. Already, activists in Washington state <a href="https://www.marijuanamoment.net/washington-state-campaign-to-decriminalize-drugs-gets-boost-from-oregon-victory/">are pushing</a> to get drug decriminalization through their legislature next year.</p>
<h3 id="KU2JLD">Some worry Oregon still doesn’t go far enough</h3>
<p id="MBsdqy">Despite the historic nature of Oregon’s moves, some experts and advocates continue to caution that more action is needed to roll back the state’s — and the US’s — war on drugs.</p>
<p id="d8cgDv">“There’s still so much more to the drug war than the criminal legal system,” Frederique, of the Drug Policy Alliance, said.</p>
<p id="dg88Jg">For one, the federal government still prohibits all drugs. That includes marijuana, even for medical purposes. That the Obama administration decided to take a hands-off approach to states legalizing, and President Donald Trump’s administration followed a similar model, is a matter of executive discretion, not a reflection of changes in federal law. That means a future administration, or less cooperative federal law enforcement agents, could still crack down on drugs in Oregon and elsewhere.</p>
<p id="cVwiiO">Along with federal prohibition, there’s a range of policy outcomes that don’t necessarily lead to an arrest or incarceration. Banking is much harder, if not impossible, for marijuana businesses due to federal prohibition. People can still struggle to get publicly subsidized housing or education if they have a record related to drugs.</p>
<p id="UUc1Ac">Notably, some of the outcomes are cultural. Employers still often test people for drugs, and opt not to hire them if they have a history of drug use — despite the greater understanding across the country that addiction is a medical issue. Those kinds of consequences are part of a war on drugs, some argue, even if they’re not necessarily tied to any particular statute.</p>
<p id="5XONP1">Some experts have also pushed against the notion, <a href="https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/5/30/15591700/mass-incarceration-john-pfaff-locked-in">perpetuated</a> by books like Michelle Alexander’s <em>The New Jim Crow</em>, that the war on drugs is a main driver of mass incarceration. In reality, <a href="https://www.prisonpolicy.org/reports/pie2020.html">only 1 in 5 people</a> are in jail or prison right now for drug offenses, and the majority of those in state prisons, where most of America’s incarcerated population is held, are in for violent offenses. What sets America’s massive prison population apart isn’t so much its drug war but punitive practices elsewhere, such as its <a href="https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2019/2/12/18184070/maximum-prison-sentence-cap-mass-incarceration">relatively long prison sentences</a> for even minor crimes.</p>
<p id="mGn5PJ">“It’s not just drug offenses that are causing mass incarceration,” Johnson said. “It’s a piece of the pie, but it’s not the pie.”</p>
<p id="AuoBEQ">America, meanwhile, could take more steps to combat drug misuse and addiction. Better access to evidence-based treatment and harm reduction programs could be a component of that. Drug policy historian Kathleen Frydl <a href="https://medium.com/@kfrydl/amid-multiple-heinous-suggestions-trump-tosses-off-a-valid-idea-to-manage-the-opioid-crisis-2ca8d315d5f4">has also argued</a> for using other levers of policy, like tariffs, to limit the international distribution of illicit substances; it’s an effort to restrain supplies of illegal drugs, which <a href="http://www.lse.ac.uk/IDEAS/publications/reports/pdf/LSE-IDEAS-DRUGS-REPORT-FINAL-WEB01.pdf">some evidence</a> does support to make these substances less accessible and used.</p>
<p id="eop4g7">All of that is to say: Ending the criminal prohibition of drugs at the state level doesn’t fully solve for all the problems surrounding the war on drugs, including within Oregon.</p>
<h3 id="E1c527">At some point, America will have to do more than ballot initiatives</h3>
<p id="cyLJii">It’s notable that Oregon has carried the three major drug policy reforms through ballot measures. It’s also notable that this is the common story for bigger drug policy reforms across the country: While federal and state lawmakers have eased penalties for drug crimes here and here, they’ve by and large resisted anything bigger than merely making criminal prohibition more tolerable — even as there’s been clear public support for bigger reforms.</p>
<p id="ouCp2M">Consider marijuana legalization. It polls extremely well, with <a href="https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/11/14/americans-support-marijuana-legalization/">some</a> <a href="https://news.gallup.com/poll/267698/support-legal-marijuana-steady-past-year.aspx">surveys</a> showing that even a majority of Republicans, who are typically more skeptical of bigger reforms, back legalization. That’s how you get the situation in Montana and South Dakota this year, where state voters simultaneously picked Trump for president <em>and</em> elected to legalize marijuana — while both Trump and Biden opposed legalization at the federal level.</p>
<p id="sBnSpz">Humphreys recalled his frustrating experience with a related issue in California. In 2013, then-Gov. Jerry Brown <a href="https://www.drugpolicy.org/news/2013/10/governor-brown-vetoes-bill-reduce-penalty-simple-drug-possession">vetoed</a> a <a href="https://www.scpr.org/blogs/politics/2013/09/04/14659/historic-drug-sentencing-reform-bill-on-gov-brown/">bill</a> that would have reduced drug possession crimes from felonies to “wobblers,” which can be charged as felonies or misdemeanors. Humphreys was furious that the Democratic governor rejected a modest reform approved by the legislature. </p>
<p id="F26on2">So he endorsed the campaign to get this done through a ballot initiative, <a href="https://www.vox.com/2015/1/7/7504801/proposition-47">Proposition 47</a>. The measure even went further than the bill Brown vetoed, cutting drug possession crime down to flat-out misdemeanors instead of wobblers — effectively defelonizing simple drug possession.</p>
<p id="k1C8nk">Proposition 47 went on to win by a massive <a href="https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_47,_Reduced_Penalties_for_Some_Crimes_Initiative_(2014)">19-point margin</a>.</p>
<p id="a0uHBl">“The process failed me,” Humphreys told me. “So here I am endorsing a ballot initiative with Jay-Z.”</p>
<p id="c0MRG4">There’s an obvious lesson here in that politicians should represent their constituents, who are clearly fed up with a destructive drug war, instead of rejecting milder measures only to see more aggressive ones pass through ballot initiatives.</p>
<p id="HHrFCu">But there’s another concern, too: Ballot measures really shouldn’t be the main means of making policy on any issue, especially one as complicated as drugs. Let’s say that there are better ways to legalize marijuana than the current commercial model states are embracing, as some <a href="https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR864.html">experts</a> and <a href="https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2015/12/2/9831980/marijuana-legalization-industry-business">activists</a> have argued. Maybe it’s better to put the state government in charge of marijuana distribution and sales, as some states do with alcohol.</p>
<p id="JpXZXL">That is simply less likely to end up on the ballot. No one wants to run a campaign that effectively argues the government should sell marijuana. It’s also much harder to raise money for this campaign, since the for-profit cannabis business won’t throw its weight behind it. It’s also possible that the measure may not be able to get on some state ballots at all, since the regulations would be much more complicated than some state laws may allow.</p>
<p id="XwX3lJ">For all these reasons, much of the country has been pushed toward the same commercial model for marijuana with no serious alternatives offered.</p>
<p id="78TM9F">Ballot measures also can’t be as comprehensive as bills produced by a legislature and governor. While activists and experts note that Oregon’s measures don’t do enough to address concerns about the war on drugs and mass incarceration, the truth is it would be really difficult, if not impossible, to deal with all these issues through the ballot process — requiring possibly dozens of initiatives over years and years. A legislature could, at least in theory, enact many of the necessary reforms in a single piece of legislation.</p>
<p id="yZkrDl">But that requires lawmakers overcoming the caution they exhibit toward drug policy.</p>
<p id="R4jyYU">Until then, Oregon activists and voters have demonstrated, with popular support, a possible framework for the US beginning to end its war on drugs.</p>
https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/21552710/oregon-drug-decriminalization-marijuana-legalizationGerman Lopez2020-11-04T20:57:04-05:002020-11-04T20:57:04-05:00Live results: Nevada renewable energy ballot initiative
<figure>
<img alt="" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/6HIpp0BbCQ6luF7qHp8vJy77fPI=/0x0:2560x1920/1310x983/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/67732978/AP_16259717148888.0.jpg" />
<figcaption>Nevadans need to pass the same renewable energy initiative to amend the state constitution. | John Locher/AP</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Voters could require the state’s electricity supplies to shift to 50 percent renewable energy by 2030.</p> <p id="3VhVVq"><strong>Update November 4, 2020, 8:55 pm:</strong> <a href="https://www.vox.com/2020/11/4/21536321/nevada-question-6-renewable-energy-results">Nevada voters approved this renewable energy ballot initiative, according to the New York Times and the Associated Press.</a></p>
<hr class="p-entry-hr" id="c2QRfq">
<p id="D5cW07">Question 6 on Nevada’s ballot this year would mandate that the state’s electricity suppliers reach 50 percent renewable energy by 2030. As of Wednesday, November 4, at 10:50 am ET, more than 56 percent of ballots were cast in support of the measure, with more than 80 percent of the vote reported, according to Vox’s partners at <a href="https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/21535103/when-will-we-get-election-results-calls-networks">Decision Desk</a>. </p>
<p id="s1FpbE">The initiative is less about voters changing where their electricity comes from than putting an exclamation point on a decision they’ve already made — in 2018, Nevadans passed the exact same initiative. It just so happens that, to amend the state constitution, voters must pass an initiative twice. So it’s back on the ballot this year, and expected to pass again by similarly enthusiastic margins.</p>
<p id="IiJt2t">There’s been a significant push for Nevada to quickly move toward renewable energy in recent years — and one that has seen some setbacks. In 2017, the state legislature passed a bill that would have mandated 40 percent renewable energy 2030, but then-Gov. Brian Sandoval (R) vetoed it. In 2019, the bill was bumped up to 50 percent, passed again, and newly elected Gov. Steve Sisolak (D) signed it. </p>
<p id="W9katZ">So a successful Question 6 will makes a bill and a constitutional amendment, both mandating 50 percent renewables. Nevada is serious about this!</p>
<p id="QKTGkE">Given that the target is already law, the only substantial opposition to the initiative comes from those leery about inscribing a specific target into the state constitution — not only from those who think the target is too high, but from those who think it’s too low (like the Center for Biological Diversity, which opposes the measure). </p>
<p id="NJerKh">Nonetheless, most backers will be happy to have a target that can’t be overturned by subsequent administrations, so Question 6 is likely to be approved.</p>
<h3 id="6ZCQPh">Nevada Question 6</h3>
<p id="expPfo">A yes vote means the state’s electricity suppliers will be constitutionally mandated to reach 50 percent renewable energy by 2030. </p>
<p id="CG0zHl">A no vote would mean the mandate will not be added to the constitution. A law with the same target will remain on the books, but could be overturned by a court challenge, or amended by future lawmakers.</p>
<div id="eDaI8m">
<div data-analytics-viewport="autotune" data-iframe="https://apps.voxmedia.com/vox/ddhqload-v3.html?params=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" data-iframe-height="150" data-iframe-layout="standard" data-iframe-resizable="true">
</div>
<script>
(function() {
var eles = document.querySelectorAll('[data-iframe]')
for ( var i = 0; i < eles.length; i++ ) {
var ele = eles[i]
if ( ele.getAttribute('data-iframe-loaded') == 'true' ) continue
var src = ele.getAttribute('data-iframe')
var iframe = document.createElement('IFRAME')
iframe.src = src
iframe.width = '100%'
ele.appendChild(iframe)
ele.setAttribute('data-iframe-loaded', 'true')
var handleSizingResponse = function(e) {
if (iframe.contentWindow != e.source) return;
if (!e.data || e.data.type != 'embed-size') return;
iframe.setAttribute('height', e.data.height)
}
window.addEventListener('message', handleSizingResponse, false);
}
// Fix for Safari scroll bug
var GetScreenCordinates = function (obj) {
var p = {};
p.x = obj.offsetLeft;
p.y = obj.offsetTop;
while (obj.offsetParent) {
p.x = p.x + obj.offsetParent.offsetLeft;
p.y = p.y + obj.offsetParent.offsetTop;
if (obj == document.getElementsByTagName("body")[0]) {
break;
}
else {
obj = obj.offsetParent;
}
}
return p;
}
var receiveMessage = function (e) {
if (typeof e.data === 'number') {
var offset = GetScreenCordinates(document.querySelector("[data-iframe] iframe"));
window.scrollTo(0, e.data + offset.y);
}
}
window.addEventListener('message', receiveMessage);
})();
</script>
</div>
<p id="gWinYI"></p>
<p id="qQe37K"></p>
<p id="vrMrpK"></p>
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2020/11/3/21546908/live-results-nevada-question-6-renewable-energyDavid Roberts2020-11-04T20:51:59-05:002020-11-04T20:51:59-05:00Live results: Puerto Rico votes in favor of statehood
<figure>
<img alt="" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/NTwIc7HRrh99ToaUvjH4rxmLBCI=/213x0:2880x2000/1310x983/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/67732980/GettyImages_1209369830.0.jpg" />
<figcaption>Puerto Rico is holding its sixth nonbinding referendum on the issue of statehood. | Ricardo Arduengo/AFP via Getty Images</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Puerto Rico’s statehood referendum isn’t binding, but proponents hope to pressure Congress into action.</p> <p id="WN6fF8"><strong>Update November 4, 8:50 pm: </strong><a href="https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2020/11/4/21536603/puerto-rico-status-referendum-statehood-results">Puerto Ricans have voted in favor of US statehood</a>, according to the AP, New York Times, and the island election commission, as of Wednesday afternoon.</p>
<hr class="p-entry-hr" id="i605Cy">
<p id="L2UKxb">Puerto Rico has been a US territory for 122 years. It’s the world’s oldest colony. And on Election Day, it held its sixth nonbinding referendum on the issue of statehood.</p>
<p id="ejnrib">In 2012 and 2017, the island’s 3 million citizens overwhelmingly backed statehood, but Congress never took further action to admit Puerto Rico into the union. Both those votes, however, were plagued by low turnout — in fact, <a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2017/06/15/ricardo-rossello-puerto-rico-statehood-239608">less than a quarter </a>of eligible voters cast ballots in the 2017 referendum, which was boycotted by opposition parties that support either maintaining the status quo or independence.</p>
<p id="fd8jHf">That raised questions about the legitimacy of the vote, and has allowed congressional lawmakers to punt on the issue.</p>
<p id="PgddG0">This year, Puerto Ricans are hoping to send a clear message to Congress regarding their desire to attain the rights and privileges associated with statehood.</p>
<p id="iETd8O">Congress isn’t under legal obligation to abide by the outcome of the referendum, but proponents hope that, particularly if Democrats are able to take control of both Congress and the White House, strong turnout and a decisive outcome will pressure federal lawmakers to finally take up the issue.</p>
<h3 id="vJzoM2">2020 Puerto Rico statehood referendum </h3>
<p id="s1wt3y">A yes vote means Puerto Rico would like to become a state.</p>
<p id="nKY7Xf">A no vote means Puerto Rico would like to remain a territory.</p>
<div id="W3OYyx">
<div data-analytics-viewport="autotune" data-iframe="https://apps.voxmedia.com/vox/ddhqload-v3.html?params=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" data-iframe-height="150" data-iframe-layout="standard" data-iframe-resizable="true">
</div>
<script>
(function() {
var eles = document.querySelectorAll('[data-iframe]')
for ( var i = 0; i < eles.length; i++ ) {
var ele = eles[i]
if ( ele.getAttribute('data-iframe-loaded') == 'true' ) continue
var src = ele.getAttribute('data-iframe')
var iframe = document.createElement('IFRAME')
iframe.src = src
iframe.width = '100%'
ele.appendChild(iframe)
ele.setAttribute('data-iframe-loaded', 'true')
var handleSizingResponse = function(e) {
if (iframe.contentWindow != e.source) return;
if (!e.data || e.data.type != 'embed-size') return;
iframe.setAttribute('height', e.data.height)
}
window.addEventListener('message', handleSizingResponse, false);
}
})();
</script>
</div>
<p id="8GidEB"></p>
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2020/11/3/21546911/live-results-puerto-rico-statehood-referendumNicole Narea2020-11-04T19:44:44-05:002020-11-04T19:44:44-05:00Puerto Ricans have voted in favor of statehood. Now it’s up to Congress.
<figure>
<img alt="" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/jKP2ZEqGpmY7NiCw1N5YWP5xeSk=/132x0:1483x1013/1310x983/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/67739977/puerto_rico_statehood_yes.0.jpg" />
<figcaption>Christina Animashaun/Vox</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Congress hasn’t taken steps to admit Puerto Rico as the 51st state.</p> <p id="1qomV3">Puerto Ricans have again <a href="https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2020/11/3/21546911/live-results-puerto-rico-statehood-referendum">voted in favor of making their island home a US state</a> and they’re hoping that, this time around, their decision will carry actual weight. </p>
<p id="WN6fF8">Puerto Rico, which has been a US territory for 122 years and is the world’s oldest colony, has held five previous non-binding referendums on the issue. In 2012 and 2017, the island’s 3 million citizens overwhelmingly backed statehood, but Congress never took further action to admit Puerto Rico into the union.</p>
<p id="hZEdni">This year, they were asked: “Should Puerto Rico be immediately admitted into the Union as a state?” A majority of voters answered “yes,” according to the AP, New York Times, and the island election commission, as of Wednesday afternoon. With 95 percent of precincts reporting, the margin stood at 52 percent for, and 48 percent against. </p>
<p id="MB1quC"><a href="https://www.nytimes.com/live/2020/11/04/us/election-results/in-puerto-rico-a-slim-majority-votes-for-statehood">As the Times noted</a>, the turnout figures are complicated. But<strong> </strong>Puerto Ricans are hoping that sends a clear message to Congress regarding their desire to attain the rights and privileges associated with statehood. Though Puerto Ricans are American citizens and pay into federal programs like Social Security and Medicare, they do not hold seats in Congress and cannot cast votes for president. They do vote for a resident commissioner who can introduce legislation and vote on committees in the House of Representatives, but that’s a far cry from full voting privileges.</p>
<aside id="CHALP9"><div data-anthem-component="readmore" data-anthem-component-data='{"stories":[{"title":"Live results for Puerto Rico’s statehood referendum","url":"https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2020/11/3/21546911/live-results-puerto-rico-statehood-referendum"}]}'></div></aside><p id="iETd8O">Congress isn’t under legal obligation to abide by the outcome of the referendum — congressional lawmakers could have passed legislation that would have conferred the island with statehood depending on the outcome of the referendum, but they didn’t.</p>
<p id="EMkbRA">Statehood proponents hoped for higher turnout than in past referendums, feeling that would make it difficult for US lawmakers to ignore the issue after years of claiming that Puerto Ricans should decide their own fate. <a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2017/06/15/ricardo-rossello-puerto-rico-statehood-239608">Less than a quarter</a> of eligible voters cast ballots in the 2017 referendum, which was boycotted by opposition parties that support either maintaining the status quo or independence. That raised questions about the legitimacy of the vote and allowed US lawmakers to punt the issue. </p>
<p id="O1vhId">Puerto Rico has a lot to gain from becoming a state. In addition to having a say in presidential elections, the new state would have two seats in the Senate and five representatives in the House. It would also likely gain federal funding; it would be a lot harder for the federal government to <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/trump-only-wants-aid-puerto-rico-s-recovery-hurricane-maria-ncna1240658">withhold aid</a>, as President Donald Trump, who previously <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/12/politics/trump-puerto-rico-hurricane-maria/index.html">mulled selling the island</a>, did after Hurricane Maria. </p>
<p id="gLOfYc">But critics have warned that it would also increase federal taxes. (Puerto Ricans and corporations headquartered on the island currently only pay federal taxes in limited circumstances.)</p>
<p id="ubVKvb">If Puerto Rico becomes a state, it could shake up the political dynamics in Congress. Most Puerto Ricans who have moved to the US mainland have historically backed Democrats. But it’s not clear that the island would be reliably blue. Experts say it’s more likely that it would be a <a href="https://www.aljazeera.com/economy/2020/10/23/best-chance-we-ever-had-puerto-ricans-to-vote-on-statehood">swing state</a>. </p>
<p id="fEnzO5"></p>
<p id="jTxeHC"></p>
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2020/11/4/21536603/puerto-rico-status-referendum-statehood-resultsNicole Narea2020-11-04T19:38:23-05:002020-11-04T19:38:23-05:00Nevada voters seal renewable energy goals in their state constitution
<figure>
<img alt="" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/fVcXN6Xt4lsk8HzXRYgfcTksvIc=/225x0:1576x1013/1310x983/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/67739946/nevada_renewable_energy_yes.0.jpg" />
<figcaption>Christina Animashaun/Vox</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The state will target 50 percent renewables by 2030.</p> <p id="x0YUkm">As was widely expected, Nevada <a href="https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2020/11/3/21546908/live-results-nevada-question-6-renewable-energy">voters approved Question 6 </a>on the ballot, which amends the state constitution to mandate that the Nevada’s electricity providers shift to at least 50 percent renewable energy by 2030, according to the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/11/03/us/elections/results-nevada-question-6-require-utilities-to-use-renewable-energy.html">New York Times</a> and the Associated Press.</p>
<p id="s1FpbE">The initiative is less about voters changing where their electricity comes from than putting an exclamation point on a decision they’ve already made — Nevadans passed the exact same initiative in 2018. It just so happens that, to amend the state constitution, voters must pass an initiative twice, which landed the issue back on the ballot this year. </p>
<p id="IiJt2t">There’s been a significant push in recent years for Nevada to quickly move toward renewable energy — one that has seen some setbacks. In 2017, the state legislature passed a bill that would have mandated 40 percent renewable energy by 2030, but then-Gov. Brian Sandoval (R) vetoed it. In 2019, the bill was bumped up to 50 percent, passed again, and newly elected Gov. Steve Sisolak (D) signed it.</p>
<aside id="QrnvX2"><div data-anthem-component="readmore" data-anthem-component-data='{"stories":[{"title":"Live results: Nevada renewable energy ballot initiative","url":"https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2020/11/3/21546908/live-results-nevada-question-6-renewable-energy"}]}'></div></aside><p id="W9katZ">The success of Question 6<strong> </strong>means there’s now a bill and a constitutional amendment mandating 50 percent renewables. </p>
<p id="QKTGkE">Given that the target is already law, the most substantial opposition to the initiative came from those leery about inscribing a specific target into the state constitution, not only from those who thought the target was too high, but also from those who thought it was too low — like the Center for Biological Diversity, which opposed the measure.</p>
<p id="NJerKh">Nonetheless, most backers will be happy to have a target that can’t be overturned by subsequent administrations, and now, the state’s target appears to be very secure.</p>
<p id="bNFGKn"></p>
https://www.vox.com/2020/11/4/21536321/nevada-question-6-renewable-energy-resultsDavid Roberts2020-11-04T17:44:07-05:002020-11-04T17:44:07-05:00Colorado voters approve compact seeking to neutralize the Electoral College
<figure>
<img alt="" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/zFpvG9u4rg5jzjfElGVIxIReaiU=/333x0:3000x2000/1310x983/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/67739510/622115766.jpg.0.jpg" />
<figcaption>Hillary Clinton speaks during a press conference the day after the 2016 election. | Matt McClain/The Washington Post via Getty Images</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The National Popular Vote compact scores a win.</p> <p id="akvm8s"><a href="https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2020/11/3/21546902/live-results-ballot-initiatives-democracy-reform">Colorado voters have backed</a> the <a href="https://www.vox.com/21336225/voting-rights-senate-electoral-college-gerrymandering-supreme-court">National Popular Vote Compact</a>, a nationwide effort that would effectively neutralize the Electoral College and ensure that the presidential candidate who receives the most votes in the nation as a whole becomes president. </p>
<p id="geFDF4">The issue was on the ballot as Proposition 113, which passed according to the Associated Press and New York Times. For the moment, Colorado’s decision to enter the compact will have no effect, but it could prove consequential if several more states join this agreement.</p>
<p id="2OHwj3">The Electoral College is the Rube Goldberg-like device that the United States uses to choose a president. Each state is assigned a certain number of electoral votes, equal to the number of lawmakers it sends to the Senate and House of Representatives. Constitutionally, the District of Columbia gets three electoral votes. To secure the presidency, a candidate must win a majority of these electors, or 270 in total.</p>
<aside id="Uw2NLo"><div data-anthem-component="readmore" data-anthem-component-data='{"stories":[{"title":"Live results: Ballot initiatives on democracy reform","url":"https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2020/11/3/21546902/live-results-ballot-initiatives-democracy-reform"}]}'></div></aside><p id="H00FNp">Most states assign all of their electoral votes to the candidate who wins the state as a whole. But the Constitution permits states to assign electors “<a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articleii">in such manner as the Legislature thereof may direct</a>.” The core insight of the National Popular Vote Compact is that, if a bloc of states that controls 270 electoral votes all agree to assign their electors to whoever wins the national popular vote, rather than the candidate who wins their state, then whoever wins the national popular vote will become president in every election.</p>
<p id="OsL44C">The compact does not take effect until enough states to add up to 270 electoral votes have joined it. Including Colorado, a group of 15 states plus the District of Columbia — <a href="https://coloradosun.com/2020/09/30/proposition-113-explained-colorado-voters-could-push-the-u-s-closer-to-a-national-popular-vote-system/">totaling 196 electoral votes</a> — are parties to the compact. So several more states will need to join the compact before it takes effect.</p>
<aside id="rbZGJT"><div data-anthem-component="readmore" data-anthem-component-data='{"stories":[{"title":"A definitive case against the Electoral College","url":"https://www.vox.com/21142223/electoral-college-2020-election-jesse-wegman"}]}'></div></aside><p id="DnW1y9">Colorado enacted legislation joining the compact in 2019, but opponents of the compact <a href="https://coloradosun.com/2020/09/30/proposition-113-explained-colorado-voters-could-push-the-u-s-closer-to-a-national-popular-vote-system/">invoked a rarely used procedure</a> that subjects a state law to a popular referendum if opponents of that law collect 150,000 signatures. As it turns out, however, a majority of Colorado voters do not wish to leave the compact.</p>
<p id="uvD7Qt">Though Colorado’s vote is good news for the National Popular Vote Compact, the compact’s supporters still have a long road ahead of them if they hope to negate the Electoral College in the future. For one thing, they still need to convince several more states to join the compact before it can take effect. While some states with a large number of Electoral College votes — like California and Illinois — have joined, other consequential states — like Texas and Florida — have not done so thus far.</p>
<p id="AUsUkO">And the Constitution also provides that a compact among the states may not take effect “<a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articlei#:~:text=Article%20I-,Article%20I,the%20powers%20that%20Congress%20has.">without the consent of Congress</a>.” Though there is a <a href="https://www.nationalpopularvote.com/section_9.16#myth_9.16.5">plausible argument</a> that the National Popular Vote Compact does not require such consent, it is uncertain how this argument will fare in court — especially if brought before a Supreme Court with a 6-3 Republican majority. So the compact would stand on much firmer ground if it receives congressional approval.</p>
<p id="711d5u">Some constitutional scholars have also <a href="https://digitalcommons.law.byu.edu/lawreview/vol2012/iss5/3/">argued that the compact itself is unconstitutional</a>. Though their argument is difficult to square with the text of the Constitution — again, the Constitution provides that presidential electors shall be determined “in such manner as the Legislature thereof may direct” — Republicans tend to support the Electoral College because it allowed them to win two recent presidential elections where the Republican candidate lost the popular vote.</p>
<p id="ywt4O9">There is a real risk, in other words, that a Supreme Court dominated by Republicans would strike down the National Popular Vote Compact even if it receives congressional approval.</p>
<p id="Orhgzn">Nevertheless, if the Supreme Court follows the text of the Constitution, it will likely uphold the compact. And the vote in Colorado brings the compact one state closer to the threshold where it could take effect.</p>
https://www.vox.com/2020/11/4/21530891/colorado-proposition-113-national-popular-vote-compact-resultsIan Millhiser2020-11-04T16:27:12-05:002020-11-04T16:27:12-05:00Los Angeles voters just delivered a huge win for the defund the police movement
<figure>
<img alt="A protester in a large group of protesters holds a sign that reads, “Defund LAPD.”" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/eIOSZ8borXquF_4LFAgh3xJclRo=/167x0:2834x2000/1310x983/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/67739108/1228710412.0.jpg" />
<figcaption>Demonstrators in Los Angeles peacefully protest the Kentucky grand jury decision in the case of Breonna Taylor’s death at the hands of Louisville police, September 24, 2020. | Robert Gauthier/ Los Angeles Times via Getty Images</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>LA’s “Yes on J” campaign flipped the message from defunding cops to investing in everything else. It worked brilliantly.</p> <p id="ixbVg3">Los Angeles voters have approved Measure J, also known as “Reimagine LA County,” which requires that 10 percent of the city’s unrestricted general funds — <a href="https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-10-30/measure-j-police-reforms">estimated</a> between $360 million and $900 million per year — be invested in social services and alternatives to incarceration, not prisons and policing. </p>
<p id="MuNXCX"><a href="https://www.latimes.com/projects/2020-los-angeles-county-election-live-results/">As of Wednesday afternoon</a>, with a majority of votes counted, 57.1 percent of voters supported the measure, 42.9 percent opposed, according to <a href="https://results.lavote.net/text-results/4193">the Los Angeles County registrar</a>.</p>
<p id="7BdGAb">The measure’s passage comes at a moment when activists across the US — including in LA — have called for defunding police departments. While Measure J isn’t directly a defund the police initiative, it was designed as an important first step toward the public health and investment-based model of public safety that animates the defund movement.</p>
<p id="YAQQOX">A critique often made by police reformers <a href="https://www.vox.com/21312191/police-reform-defunding-abolition-black-lives-matter-protests">of all stripes</a> is that American cities rely <a href="https://www.vox.com/2020/7/31/21334190/what-police-do-defund-abolish-police-reform-training">far too heavily</a> on law enforcement to address issues like substance abuse, mental health, and homelessness that would be better handled by social service providers and civilian responders. Thus, they generally agree that some level of funding should be redirected from police department budgets to those alternative service providers. </p>
<p id="U30Zjo">In practice, that is exactly what Measure J is likely to do. The <a href="http://file.lacounty.gov/SDSInter/bos/supdocs/147585.pdf">measure’s language</a> does not explicitly require that the funds for social services and incarceration alternatives must be diverted from law enforcement and the prison system. Nevertheless, in an August board meeting, acting county chief executive Fesia Davenport <a href="https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-10-30/measure-j-police-reforms">said</a> that the Sheriff’s Department — which accounts for <a href="https://ceo.lacounty.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/2020-21-Adopted-Budget-Charts.pdf">$2 billion</a> of the existing local budget — would likely be impacted. </p>
<p id="eOxZze">The fact that Measure J echoes demands to defund the police isn’t an accident. The charge to support the initiative was led by the Re-Imagine L.A. County coalition: a collection of almost 100 local racial and criminal justice organizations, including Black Lives Matter Los Angeles, progressive political groups, and local unions — many of which had been at the forefront of the <a href="https://theintercept.com/2019/08/22/los-angeles-county-mental-health-facility-abolition/">successful organizing effort</a> to stop LA County’s $2.2 billion jail expansion plan in 2019. </p>
<p id="OZnGcZ">“Measure J answers county voters’ call for true structural change by ensuring through a charter amendment that dollars from existing county funds are dedicated to the priority programs and services our Black and Brown communities need for an equitable future,” Eunisses Hernandez, co-chair of Re-Imagine L.A. County, <a href="https://patch.com/california/los-angeles/measure-j-election-results-los-angeles-2020">told</a> Patch. “Measure J invests in jobs, rather than jails; in people, rather than punishment; and in mental health rather than incarceration.”</p>
<h3 id="zCw97S">How Measure J will work, briefly explained</h3>
<p id="mR79H6">Measure J will amend LA county’s charter, requiring the local Board of Supervisors to allocate a 10th of its <a href="https://ceo.lacounty.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/2020-21-Adopted-Budget-Charts.pdf">roughly $8.8 billion discretionary local budget</a> to programs and services that fall within one of two categories: “direct community investment,” which includes affordable housing, job training, and investments in minority-owned businesses; and “alternatives to incarceration,” which includes restorative justice programs, mental health and substance abuse disorder treatment, and prison reentry initiatives. </p>
<p id="ag2ywq">The measure prohibits the city from using any of those funds on law enforcement or incarceration. And it explicitly dictates that the new funds “cannot supplant” existing social service or alternatives to incarceration spending — they must be taken from elsewhere. </p>
<p id="9Xx0cs">Crucially, Measure J is not simply a one-off budgetary concession; it codifies the 10 percent funding mandate into law with no sunset clause. For supporters, this is the measure’s most important feature: LA County will be required to continue funding alternatives to policing and incarceration in perpetuity, long after immediate political pressure for police reform dies down. </p>
<p id="7qM80j">It’s “something that’s going to outlive me, it’s going to outlive you, and it hopefully impacts the communities that come after us,” Hernandez <a href="https://newrepublic.com/article/159905/ballot-initiative-change-think-defunding-police">told</a> the New Republic. </p>
<p id="vknEtK">The Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors <a href="https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-08-04/l-a-county-will-vote-on-whether-to-reimagine-government-spending">approved</a> placing the measure on the ballot by a vote of 4-1 in early August. That decision was largely in response not only to the protest movement for racial justice that rose to new prominence this summer, but to pressure by groups like the <a href="https://yesonj.reimagine.la/">Re-Imagine L.A. Coalition</a>, </p>
<p id="lAgSIR">The measure went on to<strong> </strong>garner public support from numerous local and statewide officials like LA Mayor Eric Garcetti, California Rep. Adam Schiff, and California’s Secretary of State Alex Padilla, as well as community leaders like Dolores Huerta, organizations like the Los Angeles County Democratic Party, and major publications like <a href="https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2020-09-28/yes-measure-j">the LA Times</a>. </p>
<p id="3qcVXx">Meanwhile,<strong> </strong>Measure J drew sharp opposition from local law enforcement leaders who argued it is a thinly veiled attempt to defund the police. Earlier this year, LA Sheriff Alex Villanueva took to <a href="https://www.facebook.com/watch/live/?v=309753690178503&ref=watch_permalink">social media </a><a href="https://twitter.com/LACoSheriff/status/1285718712243412992?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1285718712243412992%7Ctwgr%5Eshare_3&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.latimes.com%2Fcalifornia%2Fstory%2F2020-10-30%2Fmeasure-j-police-reforms">to warn</a> that if the amendment passes, the measure would lead to de facto<em> </em>cuts to law enforcement budgets, resulting in patrol station closures, officer layoffs, and a dystopian future in which the streets of LA would look “like a scene from <em>Mad Max</em>.” The Association for Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs alone has spent <a href="https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-11-03/2020-la-election-tracking-measure-j">more than $3.5 million</a> on campaign advertising aimed at convincing the public that Measure J’s goal is to defund the police.</p>
<p id="t4d9k6">The advocates pushing for Measure J, however, have avoided framing the initiative in those terms. The rhetoric of defunding the police is completely absent from the campaign’s <a href="https://yesonj.reimagine.la/">website</a> and <a href="https://www.socalgrantmakers.org/sites/default/files/files/news/Reimagine_la_funder_call_-_slide_deck_08.20.20%20%282%29.pdf">outreach materials</a>. Instead, the campaign’s messaging has focused almost entirely on the benefits of increased investment in underserved Black and brown communities. </p>
<p id="NeOonw">That was a likely strategic decision by the Re-Imagine LA County coalition. <a href="https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/americans-like-the-ideas-behind-defunding-the-police-more-than-the-slogan-itself/">National polls</a> from this summer indicate that voters largely support investing in social services and policing alternatives; however, direct questions about defunding or abolishing the police are often opposed by majorities. For instance, a June <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-minneapolis-police-poll-exclusive/exclusive-most-americans-including-republicans-support-sweeping-democratic-police-reform-proposals-reuters-ipsos-poll-idUSKBN23I380">Reuters/Ipsos poll</a> found that 76 percent of respondents supported proposals to shift money from policing to social services but only 39 percent supported “defunding the police.” And <a href="https://www.socalgrantmakers.org/sites/default/files/files/news/Reimagine_la_funder_call_-_slide_deck_08.20.20%20%282%29.pdf">polling</a> done by the Re-Imagine L.A. County coalition and the local polling outfit Evitarus in LA county found similar results. </p>
<p id="tUWfD1">In a year when most major cities have responded to nationwide protests by <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2020-city-budget-police-defunding/">increasing their police budgets</a> and others have <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/26/us/politics/minneapolis-defund-police.html">walked back</a> or <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/30/nyregion/nypd-budget.html">circumvented</a> their commitments to slash police spending, the strategic choice to frame Measure J as an investment — and develop a ballot initiative that does not explicitly cut police funding — could explain why the initiative has succeeded where so many others have failed. </p>
<p id="30Tzcu">Supporters also point to the <a href="https://theintercept.com/2019/08/22/los-angeles-county-mental-health-facility-abolition/">successful efforts</a> of local organizers to stop LA County’s $2.2 billion jail expansion plan in 2019 and push local government to develop the county’s <a href="https://lacalternatives.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/ATI2-pager-11-FINAL.pdf">Alternatives to Incarceration Workgroup report</a> as laying the political and coalitional foundation for Measure J’s eventual victory. </p>
<p id="OLWj07">Voters confirmed the efficacy of that strategy this week. The passage of Measure J is perhaps the most significant victory for the police reform movement since this summer’s protests. </p>
<p id="lKtIkX"></p>
https://www.vox.com/2020/11/4/21549019/measure-j-police-abolition-defund-reform-black-lives-matter-protest-2020-election-george-floydRoge Karma