BILL ANALYSIS
SENATE COMMITTEE ON ELECTIONS, REAPPORTIONMENT AND
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS
Senator Loni Hancock, Chair
BILL NO: SB 1203 HEARING DATE:4/6/10
AUTHOR: DeSAULNIER ANALYSIS BY:Frances Tibon
Estoista
AMENDED: AS INTRODUCED
FISCAL: No
SUBJECT
Elections
DESCRIPTION
Existing law requires every state or local initiative
petition to contain a statement notifying voters of their
right to inquire whether the petition is being circulated
by a paid signature gatherer or a volunteer.
This bill requires a person who is paid to circulate an
initiative, referendum, or recall petition to wear a badge
identifying himself or herself as a paid signature
gatherer. Specifically this bill requires:
An initiative, referendum, or recall petition circulator
who receives compensation to circulate the petition must
wear a badge stating "PAID SIGNATURE GATHERER."
The badge must be worn on the chest of the petition
circulator in clear view of anyone signing or asked to
sign the petition.
The print on the badge can be no smaller than 30-point
font.
BACKGROUND
Until the 1980s, courts upheld bans on paid signature
gatherers. That changed in 1988, when the U.S. Supreme
Court invalidated Colorado's ban in the Meyer v. Grant
decision as a violation of the First Amendment's guarantee
of free speech.
In Buckley v. American Constitutional Law Foundation
(1999), the U.S. Supreme Court examined a Colorado law that
provided a number of other restrictions on the signature
collection process for ballot initiatives. In Buckley , the
court invalidated Colorado's requirement that paid petition
circulators wear a badge identifying themselves and
identifying that they are paid circulators. The court
stated the requirement to wear badges inhibits
participation in the petitioning process, "because the
badge requirement compels personal name identification at
the precise moment when the circulator's interest in
anonymity is greatest, it does not qualify for inclusion
among 'the more limited [election process] identification
requirement[s].'" However, the Buckley decision did not
rule on the validity of the requirement that a circulator
wear a badge stating whether a petition circulator was paid
or a volunteer.
COMMENTS
1. According to the author , currently, voters do not
immediately know when approached by a signature gatherer
whether he or she is paid or a volunteer. By making it
obviously clear that signature gatherers are paid for
their services, voters will have more information so
they can determine whether they want to participate or
not.
2. Helpful Information . It's unclear if voters base their
decisions to sign petitions on whether or not the
circulator is paid or a volunteer. On the other hand,
any information which may help a voter make a decision
that doesn't constitute an undue burden on the
circulator or proponent is probably advantageous. As of
June 21, the Secretary of State's office reported there
were 60 initiative petitions in circulation and 14 other
petitions pending at the Attorney General's office.
3. Prior and related legislation . AB 738 (Nation) of 2005
was identical to this bill but was vetoed by the
Governor. In his veto message the Governor indicated he
wasn't compelled to sign and stated: "I agree with
Governor Davis and Governor Wilson, who returned similar
measures without their signature, [because] under
SB 1203 (DESAULNIER) Page
2
existing law, petitions must contain the following
notice in 12 point type: NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC - THIS
PETITION IS BEING CIRCULATED BY A PAID SIGNATURE
GATHERER OR A VOLUNTEER. YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO ASK."
SB 469 (Bowen) of 2005 was also vetoed by the Governor and
would have required an initiative, referendum, or recall
petition to reflect, in specified language, whether it
is being circulated by a paid circulator or by a
volunteer, and defines "volunteer" and "paid
circulator." SB 469 would have also required any state
or local initiative, referendum, or recall petition
circulated by a committee to include a disclosure
statement identifying the five largest cumulative
contributors in support of the measure.
SB 725 (Scott) of 2001 would have required an initiative,
referendum, or recall petition to reflect whether it is
being circulated by a person paid to collect signatures
or by a volunteer. SB 725 was vetoed by Governor Davis,
who argued the bill was unnecessary because petitions
are already required to inform voters the circulator may
be a volunteer or may be paid, and that the voter has
the right to ask.
POSITIONS
Sponsor: Author
Support: State Building and Construction Trades Council of
California
Oppose: Governor's Office of Planning and Research
SB 1203 (DESAULNIER) Page
3