Home Vote Results History Contacts Admin
 GPCA Standing General Assembly Voting

Login

Ranked Choice Vote Details

Ranked Choice Vote ID6
Ranked Choice VoteGPCA position on Prop 35: Human Trafficking Penalties Sex Offender Registration Initiative Statute
TypeOpen Ballot
Number of Seats1
Ranked Choice Vote AdministratorMike Feinstein
PhaseClosed
Discussion08/01/2012 - 08/10/2012
Voting08/11/2012 - 08/31/2012
ResultResults
Presens Quorum13 0.5001
Candidates GPCA endorses Proposition 35
GPCA opposes Proposition 35
GPCA takes no position on Proposition 35
 

Background

This is the ranked choice vote for the GPCA to take a position Proposition 35: Human Trafficking. Penalties. Sex Offender Registration. Initiative Statute.

The choices are to rank 'endorse', 'oppose', 'no position' and/or 'abstain'. Delegates can rank as many (or as few) of these options in their order of preference.

An 'endorse' vote would mean the GPCA would endorse Proposition 35. An 'oppose' vote means the GPCA would oppose Proposition 35. A 'no position' vote means the GPCA would not take a position on Proposition 35. An 'abstain' vote means the voter is not expressing a preference, but is voting to help achieve quorum. Any of these position that receives 2/3 after all preferences are transferred is the position of the party. If neither 'endorse' nor 'opposes' receive 2/3, the GPCA's position will be 'no position'.

---------------

Ballot Title and Summary: Human Trafficking. Penalties. Sex Offender Registration. Initiative Statute.

http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/vig-public-display/110612-general-election/prop-35/prop-35-title-summary.pdf

"Increases criminal penalties for human trafficking, including prison sentences up to 15-years-to-life and fines up to $1,500,000. Fines collected to be used for victim services and law enforcement. Requires person convicted of trafficking to register as sex offender. Requires sex offenders to provide information regarding Internet access and identities they use in online activities. Prohibits evidence that victim engaged in sexual conduct from being used against victim in court proceedings. Requires human trafficking training for police officers."

Summary of Legislative Analyst's Estimate of Net State and Local Government Fiscal Impact

"Increased costs, not likely to exceed a couple million dollars annually, to state and local governments for criminal justice activities related to the prosecution and incarceration of human trafficking offenders. Potential one-time local government costs of up to a few million dollars on a statewide basis, and lesser additional costs incurred each year, due to the new mandatory training requirements for certain law enforcement officers. Potentially additional revenue from new criminal fees, likely a few million dollars annually, which would fund services for human trafficking victims and for law enforcement activities related to human trafficking."

Yes/No Statement

"A YES vote on this measure means: Longer prison sentences and larger fines for committing human trafficking crimes."

"A NO vote on this measure means: Existing criminal penalties for human trafficking would stay in effect."

Full text of Proposition 35: http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/vig-public-display/110612-general-election/prop-35/prop-35-text.pdf

Legislative Analysis: http://www.lao.ca.gov/ballot/2012/35_11_2012.aspx or http://www.lao.ca.gov/ballot/2012/35_11_2012.pdf

Argument in Favor: http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/vig-public-display/110612-general-election/prop-35/prop-35-arg-in-favor.pdf

Rebuttal to Argument in Favor: http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/vig-public-display/110612-general-election/prop-35/prop-35-rebut-arg-in-favor.pdf

Argument Against: http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/vig-public-display/110612-general-election/prop-35/prop-35-arg-against.pdf

Rebuttal to Argument Against: http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/vig-public-display/110612-general-election/prop-35/prop-35-rebut-arg-against.pdf

Qualified: 05/10/12 | Signatures Required: 504,760
Proponent: Daphne Phung c/o James C. Harrison and Kari Krogseng. (510) 346-6200

Campaign Finance Disclosure Filings of Committees formed to support or oppose Proposition 35: http://cal-access.sos.ca.gov/Campaign/Measures/Detail.aspx?id=1343414&session=2011

Yes on 35: http://www.safecalifornia.org/

Candidate Information

GPCA endorses Proposition 35


GPCA opposes Proposition 35


GPCA takes no position on Proposition 35



Questions about this system?
Contact the Voting Admin.

The Voting is free software, licensed under the GNU General Public License (GPL).
You can download the 2006 gp-us version here or the 2012 gpca sga version here.

To independently verify a Ranked Choice Vote, or for information about how that works, go to Jonathan Lundell's Voting Page and upload the ballot file from the ranked choice vote result page. JL's ranked choice module is licensed under an alternate free software license.