Quirks in the Prop 35 law - Human Trafficing is not Human Trafficing

Interestingly enough for a law geek like myself who actually reads these things in detail, the definition of what a human traficker is is very broad.

For example, if you are behind on your mortgaga and you turn a few tricks to make your house payment because the bank is threatening to evict you, your loan officer can be convicted of human traficking. (you committed the commercial sex act because the bank was threatening to deprive you of a place to live)

If you are the parent of a teenager and your child gets on the Interbet and watches a comercially made sex video, you might be charged with human traficing. (you "caused" it because you allowed your child access to material, through your negligence, that could be construed to "attenpt to persuade" your child to commit a sex act)

California alread has a lot of laws on the books to stop enslaved prostitution. There's nothing that's really bad that isn't already illegal. It's just a matter of catching them. And there are a lot of thinks the Sate can do you reduce prostitution for those people who have to do it to make ends meet.

For example, if the State had more child care slots, more drug treatment slots, and more educational opportunities for people who are trying to crawl up out of poverty then most all of the moderatlely bad prostitution would be eliminated. (Moderately bad means people who have to do it because they need money.)

Really bad prostitution, (where violence, drug addiction, human captivity are involved) can be reduced by additional funding for law enforcement.

When it comes down to it the biggest way to reduce prostitution is to fix the California ecomony. Cheate good high paying jobs, reduce unemployment, and have that generate tax revenue to provide funds for law enforcement and social services. Pro 35 will just waste billions and will wrongly convict people who are caught up in the broad language of the act.