First, the disclaimers:
1. I am not trolling for my own problem here. This is a research question.
2. I am not a lawyer, and shall not use the answer here as legal
anything. I'm seeking general information
3. I have read and agreed to the GA Terms. 
4. I understand that the answer is NOT LEGAL ADVICE. I'm seeking best
thoughts on trends here. Althought framed as a legal question, I am
really seeking a combination of legal thought and sociological
prognostication in the answer.

a. I do request that someone with some legal search background take up
this question. I'm happy to give attaboys for a great answer, and I'll
be tough on bad answers.

Ok - on to the question!

The State of California has long had a statue used for misdemeanor
prostitution, 247(b). A while back a felony statue was proposed to go
after traffickers, pimps, and others nasty big guys. Without getting
into a ton of legislative history, let's just say that due to laziness
and sloppiness this felony statue, 266(e) was basically cut and pasted
from the misdemeanor 647(b).

So, the consequence is that anyone that could be charged with the
misdemeanor 647(b) COULD be charged with the felony 266(e). This is
significant, because the punishment for a felony could be much
greater. Also, misdemeanors have to be witnessed (officer sees car
speeding) but felonies don't (officer didn't witness the murder but
arrests you for it anyway).

The current thinking (well, speculation) is that the various county
District Attys are considering if they should just charge everyone
with a 266(e) instead of a 647(b). While the trial may be more
expensive, it's easier to convict (don't have to witness). What is NOT
speculation but fact is that during the month of Feb 2005 many in
Santa Clara County in California were charged with both misdemeanor
647(b) and felony 266(e). Court dockets dated 25Feb05 indicate this.

This seems to have been a unique month. After this, SC County went
back to 647(b) charges for sexworkers and their customers as has been
the case historically.

So after that history, here's the questions:

1. Has there been a recent trend to charge people in CA with 266(e)
instead of 647(b)? If there are significant trends in various
jurisdictions, please include this info in your answer

2. What discussions, speculations, and thoughts have the district
attys and prosecutors around the state had about this? How have these
discussions changed over time? What seems to be the building
concensus, if any?

3. How have attys defending sexworkers and their customers responded
to the threat of the 266(e)? Please present any presentations or
discussions on this general topic.

4. Bottom line - 266(e) was intended to be a tool to get those
trafficking in young girls and coerced women. Due to the Law of
Unintended Consequences, CA gov has a great tool for going after
anyone exchanging money for sex. Is the trend in favor of using this
punative tool more broadly as society becomes more conservative?

Please indicate how you researched this!

Thanks!