In Sacramento, Californians have chosen to leave their constitution as it stands, turning down a measure that would have banned forced labor in every form and removed the long-standing exception for punishment for crime. The question at stake reaches back into the state's history of racism and the unfinished work of repair, since the measure was one piece of a reparations package aimed at a past of discrimination against Black Californians. For those who object to the pay of incarcerated workers, many earning less than a dollar an hour for firefighting and cell cleaning, the vote marks a pause
California Voters Reject Prop 6, Keeping Prison Labor Exemption in State Constitution
Incarcerated people are often paid less than $1 an hour for work including firefighting, cell cleaning and cemetery landscaping.
Often paid less than $1 an hour to fight fires, clean cells and landscape cemeteries
Mark
So what exactly did Proposition 6 try to change?
Mimi
The state Constitution bans forced labor, but with an exception for punishment for crime. Prop 6 would have removed that exception. Voters said no, so the exception stays.
Mark
Why did advocates focus on it?
Mimi
Because of what the work looks like in practice. People who are incarcerated are often paid under a dollar an hour to fight fires, clean cells and landscape cemeteries.
Luke
Worth noting that "often paid less than $1 an hour" is a general characterization. The source doesn't give a pay schedule or say how many people do each kind of work.
Mark
And where did the measure come from?
Mimi
It was part of a package of reparations proposals from lawmakers, meant to offer redress for a history of racism and discrimination against Black Californians.
Mark
Other states have gone the other way, haven't they?
Mimi
Alabama, Oregon, Tennessee and Vermont have approved amendments removing slavery and involuntary servitude exceptions in recent years.
Luke
Be careful, though. The source doesn't say why California voters rejected it. No vote totals, no margin, no opposition arguments. Anything about their motives would be guesswork.
Mark
So what do we actually know?
Mimi
The result, the existing language, the pay and work that drove the criticism, and the reparations context. The rest is still open.
Der Puls
- Voters rejected Proposition 6, leaving the constitution's exception for punishment for crime firmly in place.
- Advocates have pressed hard against prison wages of often less than $1 an hour for firefighting, cell cleaning and cemetery landscaping.
- The measure carried the weight of a broader reparations package, so its defeat ripples beyond a single ballot question.
- Similar amendments in Alabama, Oregon, Tennessee and Vermont show the debate spreading across the country.
- The path forward is unsettled, with the question of whether advocates will return to the issue still open.
In Sacramento, Californians have chosen to leave their constitution as it stands, turning down a measure that would have banned forced labor in every form and removed the long-standing exception for punishment for crime. The question at stake reaches back into the state's history of racism and the unfinished work of repair, since the measure was one piece of a reparations package aimed at a past of discrimination against Black Californians. For those who object to the pay of incarcerated workers, many earning less than a dollar an hour for firefighting and cell cleaning, the vote marks a pause rather than a resolution, and the old language remains in force.
California voters have rejected Proposition 6, a ballot measure that would have rewritten the state constitution to ban forced labor in any form. The constitution still prohibits forced labor except when it is imposed as punishment for a crime, and that exception remains untouched.
That carve-out is what drew the anger of criminal justice advocates. They point to the conditions inside the state's prisons, where incarcerated people are often paid less than $1 an hour for jobs such as fighting fires, cleaning cells and landscaping cemeteries.
The measure was part of a package of reparations proposals from state lawmakers, meant to address a history of racism and discrimination against Black Californians. Its defeat leaves that broader effort facing an uncertain future.
Similar amendments have passed in Alabama, Oregon, Tennessee and Vermont, while California has now gone another way. Whether advocates will try again, and how prison work programs will be debated from here, remain open questions.
California voters have turned down Proposition 6, a ballot measure that would have rewritten the state Constitution to ban forced labor in any form. The result, reported from Sacramento, leaves the existing language untouched: the constitution prohibits forced labor except when it is imposed as punishment for a crime.
That exception is the heart of the matter. For criminal justice advocates, it has become a target, and their concern is about the conditions of work inside the state's prisons. People who are incarcerated are often paid less than $1 an hour for the jobs they do. The work includes fighting fires, cleaning cells and doing landscaping at cemeteries.
Proposition 6 would have closed the exception. With its rejection, the constitutional carve-out for punishment remains in place, and the wording that advocates objected to stays on the books.
The measure did not arrive on its own. It was part of a package of reparations proposals introduced by state lawmakers. That package was meant as an effort to atone for, and offer redress for, a history of racism and discrimination against Black Californians. The prison labor amendment was one piece of that larger set of proposals, and it was the piece that went before voters this November.
California is not the first state to take up the question. In recent years, voters in several other states, including Alabama, Oregon, Tennessee and Vermont, have approved constitutional amendments that remove the exceptions for slavery and involuntary servitude. California's outcome puts it on a different path from those four.
The reporting here is brief. The source does not give the vote totals or the margin, and it does not include statements from supporters, opponents or state officials about why the measure failed. What it establishes is the result, the wording of the current constitutional exception, the pay and types of work that drove the advocates' criticism, and the measure's place in the reparations package.
What to watch next is whether advocates and lawmakers try again, in California or through other routes, and how the state's prison work programs continue to be debated now that the constitutional language stands as it was.
Möchten Sie die ganze Geschichte?
Das Original lesen bei KABC-TV ↗
Politics & Governance