In a November vote, Californians declined to rewrite their state constitution so that forced labor would be banned in every form, leaving intact the old exception that permits compelled work as punishment for crime. The question touches a long human argument about where public order ends and bondage begins, and the people who live with the answer are often the ones with the least say in it. The measure belonged to a broader package of reparations proposals meant to answer a history of racism against Black Californians, and its defeat means that argument now continues in the courts of public op
California Voters Reject Ban on Forced Prison Labor, Keeping Constitutional Exception Intact
Incarcerated people are often paid less than $1 an hour for work such as firefighting, cleaning cells, and cemetery landscaping under the existing exception.
The exception stays in the state's founding document.
Mark
So what exactly did California voters decide?
Mimi
They declined to amend the state Constitution to ban forced labor in every form. The current text bans it except as punishment for a crime, and that stays.
Mark
Why did advocates care about that exception?
Mimi
Because of how it plays out in prisons. Incarcerated people are often paid under $1 an hour to fight fires, clean cells and do landscaping at cemeteries.
Luke
I'd flag that the under-$1 figure is described as 'often' and comes through the advocates' framing. The report doesn't give a precise wage range or the number of people affected.
Mark
And this was tied to reparations?
Mimi
Yes. Lawmakers put it in a package of reparations proposals meant to address a history of racism and discrimination against Black Californians.
Luke
Worth noting we don't know from this reporting what happened to the rest of that package, or why voters said no. No margin, no polling, no campaign arguments.
Mark
Is California an outlier?
Mimi
Not entirely. Alabama, Oregon, Tennessee and Vermont have approved amendments removing similar exceptions in recent years.
Luke
Right, but the report doesn't say how those measures differed from California's, so I wouldn't draw a tidy comparison.
The Pulse
- Voters in California turned down a ballot measure that would have stripped the constitutional exception allowing forced labor as criminal punishment.
- Advocates say incarcerated workers earn under a dollar an hour fighting fires, cleaning cells, and landscaping cemeteries.
- The initiative was one piece of a reparations package, and its rejection leaves that broader agenda without its first major test.
- Alabama, Oregon, Tennessee and Vermont have already removed similar exceptions, leaving California's constitution notably out of step with them.
- The constitutional language stands unchanged, so the current pay and work arrangements remain lawful, and advocates must decide whether to try again.
In a November vote, Californians declined to rewrite their state constitution so that forced labor would be banned in every form, leaving intact the old exception that permits compelled work as punishment for crime. The question touches a long human argument about where public order ends and bondage begins, and the people who live with the answer are often the ones with the least say in it. The measure belonged to a broader package of reparations proposals meant to answer a history of racism against Black Californians, and its defeat means that argument now continues in the courts of public opinion and in the statehouse, not in the founding text.
California voters have rejected a ballot measure that would have rewritten the state Constitution to prohibit forced labor in any form. The constitution will keep its long-standing rule: forced labor is banned, except as punishment for a crime. That exception was the entire target of the measure, and its defeat means it stays in the founding document.
Criminal justice advocates had pressed the change because of what prison labor looks like on the ground. Incarcerated people are often paid less than $1 an hour for work such as fighting fires, cleaning cells and doing landscaping at cemeteries. The initiative was part of a reparations package meant to address a history of racism and discrimination against Black Californians, and the reporting does not say what became of the other proposals.
Several states, including Alabama, Oregon, Tennessee and Vermont, have already removed similar exceptions from their constitutions, so California now stands apart on this point. The reporting does not give the vote margin or describe the campaign. What remains clear is that the constitutional text is unchanged and the pay arrangements advocates criticized remain permitted. Whether advocates try again, and how the other reparations proposals fare, are the questions to watch.
California voters have turned down a ballot measure that would have rewritten the state Constitution to prohibit forced labor in any form. The result, reported from Sacramento by The Associated Press, leaves in place the language that has long governed the question: forced labor is banned, except as punishment for a crime.
That exception is the whole story. The measure was aimed squarely at it, and its defeat means the carve-out stays in the state's founding document.
The exception had become a target for criminal justice advocates who object to conditions in prison labor programs. Their concern centers on pay and on the kind of work involved. People who are incarcerated are often paid less than $1 an hour. The jobs named in the reporting include fighting fires, cleaning cells and doing landscaping work at cemeteries.
The initiative did not arrive alone. Lawmakers introduced it as part of a package of reparations proposals, a legislative effort to atone for and offer redress for a history of racism and discrimination against Black Californians. The ballot question was one piece of that larger body of proposals, and the source reporting does not detail what became of the others.
California is not the first state to be asked this question. In recent years, several others, including Alabama, Oregon, Tennessee and Vermont, have approved constitutional amendments that remove slavery and involuntary servitude exceptions from their own constitutions. California's voters now stand apart from those states on this point.
The reporting is brief and does not say what the vote margin was, how the campaign unfolded, or what arguments voters weighed. It does establish the outcome plainly: the constitutional text is unchanged, and the pay and work arrangements that advocates criticized remain permitted under it.
What to watch is whether the advocates who pushed the measure try again, and whether the remaining reparations proposals move forward on their own. The states that have already changed their constitutions offer the comparison point for any new attempt in California.
Want the full story?
Read the original at BradfordToday ↗
Politics & Governance