A majority of likely California voters support stiffer penalties for crimes involving theft and fentanyl, according to a new UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies poll co-sponsored by The Times.

The results of the poll released Friday showed that 56% of Californians would support Proposition 36, an initiative on the November ballot that would impose stricter sentences for repetitive theft and offenses involving the deadly drug fentanyl.

The proposition has been at the center of a battle in the state Capitol this year as Republicans and law enforcement advocates call for the undoing of Democratic reform policies that downgraded some felonies to misdemeanors, which they blame for an increase in organized retail theft and “smash and grab” robberies.

The poll also gauges how voters feel about initiatives designed to respond to California’s high cost of living. According to the poll, a majority of likely voters support a measure to increase the state minimum wage to $18 per hour, though those surveyed were more divided over a measure that would embolden local governments to expand rent control but still lean toward “yes.”

The broad support for Proposition 36, the tough-on-crime measure, comes as Gov. Gavin Newsom and state Democrats try to balance frustrations about crime among Californians with criminal justice reform goals that voters once supported.

The initiative aims to overhaul parts of Proposition 47, a measure approved by voters a decade ago that downgraded some crime penalties in an effort to reduce the state’s prison population and offer nonviolent offenders more chances at rehabilitation and freedom.

Mark DiCamillo, director of the Berkeley IGS Poll, a nonpartisan survey of California public opinion, noted the “great visibility” of retail theft crimes — caught on camera or witnessed by voters in their communities — as a possible reason why more than twice as many voters said they support Proposition 36 than those who don’t.

“It’s kind of outrageous to voters, what they’re seeing, and they’re linking it to the approval of Proposition 47,” DiCamillo said.

Becky Warren, a spokesperson for the Yes on Proposition 36 campaign, said that the poll “confirms that Californians want real solutions to address our homelessness and drug crises” and that the measure will ensure that “repeat offenders face accountability and consequences.”

While advocates of the GOP-backed measure — which has garnered support from some Democrats including San Francisco Mayor London Breed — see it as a solution to some crime, opponents said it will lead to a costly rise in the state’s prison population.

Newsom and Democrats attempted to craft a rival ballot measure this summer that would have addressed crimes like shoplifting with a less punitive approach than the prosecutor-driven Proposition 36. That measure, though, was abruptly abandoned by the governor last month amid chaotic deal-making in the Capitol.

Anthony York, a former spokesperson for Newsom who now serves as a spokesperson for the No on Proposition 36 campaign, said he’s confident that as election day nears, and voters better understand the nuances of the initiative, they will change their minds.

“It’s really about bringing back the war on drugs; re-criminalizing drug possession and wasting billions of dollars on prisons and jails with zero way to pay for it,” York said. “Quality-of-life issues are important, understandably. People want and deserve to feel safe in their own communities. But they also don’t want bad policies that are going to ruin lives and take us backward.”

Likely voters also support Proposition 32 to increase the California minimum wage to $18 per hour from the current rate of $16, with 52% inclined to vote “yes,” according to the poll, and 34% intending to vote “no.” The remaining voters polled are undecided.

The measure is backed by Joe Sanberg, a wealthy Los Angeles investor and anti-poverty activist, and comes as unions have won raises for individual industries, securing $25 an hour for healthcare workers and $20 an hour for fast-food workers.

Several cities including West Hollywood and Berkeley have moved ahead of the state minimum and already pay more than $18 an hour. Proponents of the measure say that pay should be more uniform across the state, while business groups oppose it over concerns that it will collapse companies that are already struggling financially.

On Proposition 33, a measure that could expand rent control, 40% of likely voters said they would support the initiative, while 34% are opposed. The measure would give local jurisdictions in California more power to regulate rent and would repeal a law that bans localities from capping prices on some properties.

The measure is sponsored by the AIDS Healthcare Foundation, a Los Angeles nonprofit that has backed similar rent control initiatives in the past, and is opposed by the real estate industry, which warns it could cause developers to build less — a problem that could worsen California’s housing crisis.

Ten measures in total will be on the November ballot. DiCamillo said that with a high-stakes presidential election, political excitement could trickle down and draw record attention to propositions that could significantly change California policy.

“I’m expecting a big turnout, and usually that is beneficial to the issues lower down on the ballot,” he said.

Times staff writers Anabel Sosa and Andrew Khouri contributed to this report.

EXCLUSIVE: The House Oversight Committee is investigating Vice President Kamala Harris’ running mate, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, and his alleged “longstanding connections” to China and CCP-linked entities, Fox News Digital has learned. 

Fox News Digital exclusively obtained a letter that House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., penned to FBI Director Christopher Wray, notifying the bureau of the committee’s investigation into Walz. 

“The Committee on Oversight and Accountability is conducting a government-wide investigation into the Chinese Communist Party’s political warfare operations against America and the response from federal agencies,” he wrote. “Vice President Kamala Harris recently announced her vice presidential running mate, Timothy Walz, the current governor of Minnesota.” 

WALZ BACKED ‘SANCTUARY’ POLICIES, SERVICES FOR ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS AS GOVERNOR: ‘WIN FOR OPEN BORDERS’ 

Comer said that the committee had been briefed by the FBI on April 22 and July 17 — both briefings occurred before Walz was named Harris’ running mate. 

However, Comer said that FBI briefers told the committee that the bureau’s Foreign Influence Task Force “investigates exactly the kind of activity that has since come to light about Governor Walz.” 

Comer is now seeking information about the Chinese entities and officials Walz has “engaged and partnered with,” as well as any “warnings or advice the FBI may have given to Governor Walz about U.S. political figures being targeted by or recruited for CCP influence operations.” 

Comer said Walz has “longstanding connections to CCP-connected entities and officials that make him susceptible” to the CCP’s strategy of “elite capture,” which seeks to co-opt influential figures in elite political, cultural and academic circles to “influence the United States to the benefit of the communist regime and the detriment of Americans.” 

Comer pointed to reports of Walz’s “extensive engagement with CCP officials and entities while serving in public office,” saying it raises questions about “possible CCP influence in his decision-making as governor — and, should he be elected, as vice president.” 

Rep. James Comer, R-Ky., chairman of the House Oversight and Accountability Committee, speaks during a hearing in Washington, D.C., on Wednesday, March 20, 2024. (Al Drago/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

“Recent reporting reveals that Governor Walz has concerning ties to the People’s Republic of China,” Comer wrote.

Comer pointed to reports that suggest that while Walz was a teacher in the early 1990s, he organized a trip to China for Alliance High School students, where the costs were reportedly “paid by the Chinese government.”  

“In 1994, Mr. Walz set up a private company named ‘Educational Travel Adventures, Inc.,’ which coordinated annual student trips to the PRC until 2003, and was led by Mr. Walz himself,” Comer wrote, adding that the corporation was “reportedly dissolved four days after he took congressional office in 2007.” 

KAMALA HARRIS’ RUNNING MATE TIM WALZ PICTURED IN 1995 NEBRASKA MUGSHOT AFTER DUI ARREST

Comer also said Walz has traveled to China an estimated “30 times.” 

“In its investigation, the Committee has highlighted the importance of U.S. officials being cognizant of CCP political and psychological warfare efforts that seek to threaten national security,” Comer wrote. 

Comer then pointed to Walz’s time in Congress, noting he served as a fellow at the Macau Polytechnic University — a Chinese institution that characterizes itself as having a “long-held devotion to and love for the motherland.” 

Democratic vice presidential candidate, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, speaks during a campaign rally with Democratic presidential candidate Vice President Kamala Harris at the Liacouras Center at Temple University on Aug. 6, 2024 in Philadelphia. (Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)

“At the time he disclosed serving as a Macau fellow, Mr. Walz also had significant credit card debt,” Comer wrote, noting that in 2019, Walz headlined the 27th National Convention for the U.S. China Peoples Friendship Association in Minnesota.

“Governor Walz spoke alongside the president of the Chinese People’s Association for Friendship with Foreign Countries, which, a year later, the Department of State exposed as ‘a Beijing-based organization tasked with co-opting subnational governments,’ including efforts to ‘directly and malignly influence state and local leaders to promote the PRC’s global agenda,’” Comer wrote. 

Comer said Walz himself has “admitted that he does not ‘fall into the category that China necessarily needs to be an adversarial relationship.’” 

“Despite bipartisan efforts to identify and defeat CCP unrestricted warfare against America, Governor Walz continues problematic engagement with concerning entities and individuals,” Comer wrote. 

Comer also pointed to a March 2024 meeting Walz had with Consul General Zhao Jian to discuss “China-U.S. relations and sub-national cooperation.”

WALZ IN 2010 SAID PLAN TO CURB SOCIAL SECURITY, INCREASE RETIREMENT AGE WAS ‘VERY SIMILAR’ TO HIS APPROACH

“Despite his knowledge and condemnation of communist China’s human rights violations, Governor Walz has said he ‘applaud[s] the accomplishments of the Chinese people and recognize[s] that some in the Chinese Government advocate for greater rule of law,’” Comer wrote. 

Gov. Tim Walz, vice presidential nominee, delivers remarks at the AFSCME’s 46th International Convention in Los Angeles on Aug. 13, 2024. (Genaro Molina/Los Angeles Times via Getty Images)

Comer is now requesting that the FBI assist in the committee’s investigation by providing documents and information related to any Chinese entity or individual with whom Walz may have engaged or partnered. 

Comer is also asking for any records between the FBI and Walz, or his gubernatorial office pertaining to warnings or guidance about subnational government officials engaging with the PRC, CCP and the CCP’s proxies. 

Comer, in a statement to Fox News Digital, said “the CCP has sought to destroy the United States through coordinated influence and infiltration campaigns that target every aspect of American life, including our own elected officials.” 

“Americans should be deeply concerned that Governor Walz, Kamala Harris’s vice-presidential running mate, has a longstanding and cozy relationship with China,” Comer said. “Mr. Walz has visited China dozens of times, served as a fellow at a Chinese institution that maintains a devotion to the CCP, and spoke alongside the President of a Chinese organization the State Department exposed as a CCP effort to influence and co-opt local leaders.” 

Comer added, “FBI briefers recently informed the Committee that the Bureau’s Foreign Influence Task Force investigates CCP activity that is similar to China’s engagement with Governor Walz.” 

“The American people deserve to fully understand how deep Governor Walz’s relationship with China goes,” Comer told Fox News Digital. 

The Harris-Walz campaign did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital’s request for comment. 

When emails from Hillary Clinton’s campaign were leaked just before the 2016 election, the news media breathlessly covered the October surprise as if they’d opened Al Capone’s vault and there was actually something in it.

The WikiLeaks dump provided journalists with a treasure trove of correspondence, from Clinton’s backroom thoughts on Syria and China to staffer complaints about the candidate’s “terrible instincts” to campaign chairman John Podesta’s risotto recipe.

Fast forward to this month when it was revealed the Trump campaign was hacked and its emails leaked to the press. There was no media feeding frenzy over the contents of the breach, no divining about how the stolen emails reflect upon the former president or his bid for reelection. Major press outlets instead sat on the story for weeks until Trump’s campaign spokesman broke news of the hack Saturday.

What a difference eight years make.

The New York Times, Politico and the Washington Post opted not to publish the emails, even after the hack was revealed to the public. It was ironic given that all three outlets — like most of the news media — pored over Clinton’s emails in 2016, unleashing a torrent of salacious content but few if any bombshells. So what changed?

It’s hard to know since the three news outlets in possession of the leaked material have not gone into detail about why they’ve abstained from publishing the emails, but they should explain their thinking. Hypocrisy is not a nice word.

Perhaps the silence on the Trump emails boils down to lessons learned. Journalistic publishing standards had to shift in the wake of the 2016 race, when Russia’s hacking and disinformation efforts played a role in the outcome of the election. The Clinton campaign’s emails were stolen by bad actors who sought to sway the election in favor of Trump, and covering the leaked material ad nauseam played right into the villain’s hands.

Clinton spent the last month of her campaign on the defense, answering to the contents of the leaked communications. The flurry of coverage put the campaign on its heels, and she was often treated more like a defendant than a candidate.

Now would be a good time for news organizations to reflect on what they did, or didn’t do, when Clinton ran against Trump. Simply admitting that the news media made mistakes back in 2016 would go a long way. The Washington Post circled the idea recently without totally going there.

“This episode probably reflects that news organizations aren’t going to snap at any hack that comes in and is marked as ‘exclusive’ or ‘inside dope’ and publish it for the sake of publishing,” said Matt Murray, executive editor of the Post, who was quoted in an article published by the outlet. “…All of the news organizations in this case took a deep breath and paused, and thought about who was likely to be leaking the documents, what the motives of the hacker might have been, and whether this was truly newsworthy or not.”

The New York Times told the Associated Press that it would not discuss why it chose not to publish details of the leak, but the paper appeared to indirectly defend its decision in a broader piece about the nature of the breach. “The documents sent to Politico, as it described them, and to The Times included research about and assessments of potential vice-presidential nominees, including Senator JD Vance, whom Mr. Trump ultimately selected,” the Times wrote. “Like many such vetting documents, they contained past statements with the potential to be embarrassing or damaging, such as Mr. Vance’s remarks casting aspersions on Mr. Trump.”

Vice presidential candidate JD Vance during the Republican National Convention in Milwaukee in July.

(Robert Gauthier / Los Angeles Times)

Advertisement

Politico covered the mechanics of the Trump campaign leak rather than the contents of the hacked emails. The messages and documents were sent on an AOL account from an anonymous figure who referred to themselves as “Robert.” Politico spokesperson Brad Dayspring said editors weighed “the questions surrounding the origins of the documents and how they came to our attention were more newsworthy than the material that was in those documents.”

That’s quite a contrast to 2016, when there was no bar too low regarding coverage of the Democratic campaign leak. A list of Clinton’s most revealing emails published by Politico was once such example of voyeurism passing for news. Entry number five of eight was titled, “Joking about the Benghazi hearing”:

On Oct. 24, 2015, the Clinton team debated how sharp of a dig Clinton should take at Rep. Trey Gowdy after her marathon appearance before his committee investigating the Benghazi attack. As they discussed remarks she was set to deliver at the October Jefferson Jackson dinner the next night, Podesta had an idea for a joke. “I used to be obsessed with Donald Trump’s hair, that was until I got to spend 11 hours staring at the top of Trey Gowdy’s head,” Podesta suggested inserting into the speech.”

“I love the joke too but I think HRC should stay above the committee — and especially above personal insults about it. She’s got every inch of the high ground right now,” Jake Sullivan replied.

“Wow. You people are a bunch of ninnies,” joked Clinton comms director Jennifer Palmieri.

Not exactly a stop-the-presses, newsworthy bombshell, but Politico published it all the same.

Vice President Kamala Harris and President Biden.

“Seriously the double standard here is incredible,” posted Neera Tanden, a top White House official with the Biden administration who was an advisor to the Clinton campaign. “For all the yapping on interviews, it would be great for people making these decisions to be accountable to the public. Do they now admit they were wrong in 2016 or is the rule hacked materials are only used when it hurts Dems? There’s no in between.”

When another X user pointed out that the hacked Clinton campaign material was dumped into the public domain by WikiLeaks, and that’s what led to some bad decisions by the press, Tanden replied: “The manner of the hacking made them cover a Russian psyop? That is not a justification. That’s a rationalization.”

According to Politico, emails from “Robert” began arriving July 22. The contents appeared to include internal communications from senior Trump officials. Reporters confirmed with the Republican campaign that the leaked emails were authentic. The mysterious sender also noted that there was more material to come, including “legal and court documents to internal campaign discussions.”

Trump campaign spokesman Steven Cheung reminded the press of their duty to fairness and democracy. “Any media or news outlet reprinting documents or internal communications are doing the bidding of America’s enemies and doing exactly what they want.”

But Trump sang a different tune in July 2016, when during a news conference the presidential hopeful directly appealed to Russia to hack Clinton’s emails. “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” he said, referring to emails she’d deleted from a private account she had used when she was secretary of State. “I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”

That same day, Russians made their first attempt to break into the servers used by Clinton’s personal office. From there, the hacked emails were released by WikiLeaks in dribs and drabs. And by October, Trump was complaining that the leaks were not getting enough coverage from reporters. “Very little pick-up by the dishonest media of incredible information provided by WikiLeaks,” he posted on Twitter.

The FBI is now investigating claims that Iran is behind the Trump campaign breach, and looking into attempted hacks of Biden-Harris campaign servers.

Ethical standards are a fine reason not to publish dubiously obtained material. So is the determination that the content isn’t newsworthy. Neither of those approaches is the problem here. The issue is around the media’s absence of self-examination about its actions in 2016, and its lack of candid discussion around whether Clinton deserved similar caution.