We find the ballot arguments against the proposition in the official voter handbook -- signed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Attorney General Bill Lockyer -- disturbing. Their argument seems designed to inflame passions rather than to promote reasoned analysis. For example, Schwarzenegger and Lockyer argue that Proposition 66 would "flood our streets with thousands of dangerous felons, including rapists, child molesters and murderers." In fact, the central reform of the initiative would be to eliminate a life sentence only for criminals whose third strike is a nonserious, nonviolent crime, not "rapists, child molesters and murderers."

They also argue that Proposition 66 will result in the "release" of 26, 000 felons. But, according to the Department of Corrections, as of March, 7, 372 third-strikers were serving life sentences. Under the initiative, just more than 3,000 inmates will likely be entitled to resentencing, rather than being released.

Gov. Arnold needs to rethink his position on this initiative. It's way past due. As TChris wrote here:

One quarter of California prisoners are serving life terms under the three-strikes law, at a cost so far of about $8.1 billion. More than half that amount was spent to warehouse offenders whose third strike was not a violent crime. So the law is expensive, it wastes prison resources on people who don't deserve life sentences, and it seems to be implemented in a racially discriminatory manner. California, is that what you intended?

For more on the initiative, visit here.