BILL ANALYSIS Ó SB 205 Page 1 Date of Hearing: July 5, 2011 ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON ELECTIONS AND REDISTRICTING Paul Fong, Chair SB 205 (Correa) - As Introduced: February 8, 2011 SENATE VOTE : 24-15 SUBJECT : Voter registration: paid registration activities. SUMMARY : Prohibits a person from paying another person or receiving payment for registering voters if that payment is on a per-affidavit basis. Specifically, this bill : 1)Makes it a misdemeanor for a person to offer to pay or to pay money or other valuable consideration to another person, either directly or indirectly, on a per-affidavit basis to assist another person to register to vote by receiving the completed affidavit of registration. 2)Makes it a misdemeanor for a person to receive money or other valuable consideration, either directly or indirectly, on a per-affidavit basis to assist another person to register to vote by receiving the completed affidavit of registration. 3)Provides that nothing in this bill shall be construed to prohibit payment for assisting another person to register to vote by receiving the completed affidavit that is not, either directly or indirectly, on a per-affidavit basis. 4)Makes corresponding and technical changes. EXISTING LAW : 1)Requires any person who accepts money or other valuable consideration in return for assisting with voter registration to sign and affix on the voter registration form his or her full name, telephone number, address, and the name and phone number of the person, company, or organization, if any, that agrees to pay money or valuable consideration for the completed affidavit of registration. 2)Requires any person, company, or other organization that agrees to pay money or other valuable consideration to a SB 205 Page 2 person for assisting with voter registration to maintain specific records. 3)Establishes penalties for fraudulent activity related to signature gathering and voter registration. FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Senate Appropriations Committee, pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8, negligible state costs. State-mandated local program; contains a crimes and infractions disclaimer. SB 205 Page 3 COMMENTS : 1)Purpose of the Bill : According to the author: Individuals who are paid to register voters or to collect petition signatures are commonly known as "bounty hunters." Between 1994 and 2010 the Secretary of State's Election Fraud Investigation Unit opened 960 cases for fraudulent voter registration or for the illegal altering of party affiliation on voter registration cards. Out of these, 99 were referred to district attorneys for prosecution, resulting in 64 convictions. As recently as 2010, Orange County and other county elections officials have received hundreds of complaints from voters who were re-registered with a political party without their permission. According to press reports, the companies in charge of these registration drives have paid workers as much as $8-$10 for every completed voter registration card. SB 205 would prohibit paying voter registration "bounty hunters" on a per affidavit basis. A violation would constitute a misdemeanor?. ÝT]his bill does not prohibit payment for assisting people to register. It only prohibits payment on a per-affidavit basis. Individuals could still be paid hourly, daily, or in any other fashion. At least five other states, including Colorado, Missouri, Pennsylvania, Washington, and Wisconsin have similar laws on the books. Every election cycle yields another crop of individuals who abuse our voter registration laws -- party affiliations get changed, names are forged, and people are duped into registering even if they are ineligible. This bill will help eliminate the incentive to commit this type of fraud by prohibiting payment to bounty hunters on a per-affidavit basis. SB 205 Page 4 2)Voter Registration Fraud : While some voter registration drives pay employees on an hourly or salaried basis, other voter registration drives pay workers a specified amount of money for each completed voter registration card. In some cases, voter registration drives that pay workers on a per-registration basis only pay workers for voters who register with a specific political party, or pay the workers a larger amount of money for voters who register with a specific political party. While these per-registration payments may create incentives to register voters with a particular political party, they also may create financial incentives for the individuals who are registering voters to commit fraud. In each of the last three election cycles, complaints have been filed by voters who said they were misled into changing their party affiliations. According to media reports of these complaints, the voter registration workers who were accused of misleading these voters were paid as much as $15 for each new voter that the worker registered with a particular political party. In 2006, complaints were reported in Orange, Riverside, and San Bernardino Counties. According to the Orange County Register, 11 individuals were eventually convicted of falsifying voter registrations and other charges in connection with the complaints in Orange County, and eight of those 11 served jail time. In 2008, press reports focused on similar complaints in Los Angeles, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Ventura Counties, while in 2010, complaints were filed in Orange and Sacramento Counties. In every instance, media reports of the complaints indicated that the firms that were conducting the voter registration drives or the individuals who were registering voters as part of those drives were being paid on a per-registration basis. In all, according to the Secretary of State's Election Fraud Investigation Unit (EFIU), between 1994 and 2010, the EFIU opened 960 cases for fraudulent voter registration or fraudulently altering party affiliation on voter registration cards. Out of these, 99 were referred to district attorneys for prosecution, resulting in 64 convictions. Since the EFIU was created in 1994, it has opened more cases, and a larger number of convictions have been obtained, for voter registration fraud than for any other election crime. SB 205 Page 5 3)Other States : At least 11 states (Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Kentucky, Missouri, Nevada, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Washington, and Wisconsin) have laws prohibiting payments for registering voters if those payments are based on the number of registrations obtained. Ohio similarly had a law that prohibited payments for registering voters if those payments were based on anything other than time worked. Ohio's law also prohibited payments for collecting signatures on election petitions if the payments were based on anything other than time worked. The Ohio law was struck down by the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals in Citizens for Tax Reform et al. v. Deters et al. (2008), 518 F.3d 375. However, while the Court struck down the entire Ohio law, including the provisions regarding payments for registering voters, the Court's decision focused on the portion of the law governing payments for collecting signatures on petitions, and did not include substantive discussion about the restrictions on payments for voter registration. 4)Labor Law Implications : This bill prohibits the payment of individuals on a per-piece basis for voter registration. Typically, in California, individuals who are paid to register voters on a per-piece basis are independent contractors. However, to the extent that this bill forces individuals who are paid to register voters to be paid an hourly wage, this bill could also result in these individuals being considered employees under California law. As such, the individual, corporation, or group paying individuals to register voters may be required to pay minimum wage, provide workers compensation insurance and unemployment insurance for its employees, and maintain a payroll system. 5)Increased Costs : As noted in comment #4, individuals or groups paying people to register voters may be required to provide certain benefits such as unemployment insurance and workers compensation insurance. This may result in higher costs to those groups that pay individuals to register voters. In addition, prohibiting payment of individuals on a per-registration basis could increase costs because it may become more difficult to measure the work product of employees who are being paid to register voters. Potential increased costs may be partially offset if, by reducing the incentive to submit fraudulent registrations, this legislation results in individuals submitting fewer invalid registrations. SB 205 Page 6 6)Related Legislation : SB 168 (Corbett), which is pending in the Assembly Appropriations Committee, would prohibit a person from paying another person or from being paid based on the number of signatures obtained on an initiative, referendum, or recall petition. SB 168 was approved by this committee on a 5-2 vote. 7)Previous Legislation : SB 812 (Correa) of 2007, was similar to this bill. SB 812 was approved by this committee, but subsequently was amended and used for an unrelated purpose. AB 2946 (Leno) of 2006, would have prohibited the payment of an individual to register voters if that payment was on a per-registration basis, among other provisions. AB 2946 was vetoed by Governor Schwarzenegger, though his veto message focused on other parts of that bill, and did not address the provisions of the bill that would have prohibited per-registration payments for registering voters. AB 2101 (Fong), Chapter 372, Statutes of 2010, permits a court to prevent someone who is convicted of voter registration fraud from being paid to register voters, among other provisions. REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION : Support California Association of Clerks and Election Officials Secretary of State Debra Bowen Opposition California Libertarian Party Coalition for Free and Open Elections Green Party of California Peace and Freedom Party of California One individual Analysis Prepared by : Ethan Jones / E. & R. / (916) 319-2094 SB 205 Page 7