BILL ANALYSIS Ó
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 397|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 445-6614 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: SB 397
Author: Yee (D), et al.
Amended: 8/26/11
Vote: 21
SENATE ELECT. & CONST. AMENDMENTS COMMITTEE : 3-2, 5/3/11
AYES: Correa, De León, Lieu
NOES: La Malfa, Gaines
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 6-2, 5/26/11
AYES: Kehoe, Alquist, Lieu, Pavley, Price, Steinberg
NOES: Walters, Runner
NO VOTE RECORDED: Emmerson
SENATE FLOOR : 25-14, 6/2/11
AYES: Alquist, Calderon, Corbett, Correa, De León,
DeSaulnier, Evans, Hancock, Hernandez, Kehoe, Leno, Lieu,
Liu, Lowenthal, Negrete McLeod, Padilla, Pavley, Price,
Rubio, Simitian, Steinberg, Vargas, Wolk, Wright, Yee
NOES: Anderson, Berryhill, Blakeslee, Cannella, Dutton,
Emmerson, Fuller, Gaines, Harman, Huff, La Malfa,
Strickland, Walters, Wyland
NO VOTE RECORDED: Runner
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 50-27, 9/1/11 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Online voter registration
SOURCE : California Common Cause
CONTINUED
SB 397
Page
2
DIGEST : This bill permits online voter registration to
begin prior to the completion of a new statewide voter
registration database, if certain conditions are met.
Assembly Amendments (1) specify that if an applicant for an
affidavit of registration cannot electronically submit
required information he/she shall nevertheless be able to
complete the affidavit electronically on the Secretary of
State's (SOS) Internet Web site, print a hard copy of the
completed affidavit, and mail or deliver the hard copy of
the completed affidavit to the SOS or the appropriate
county elections official, (2) exempt the SOS from various
information technology requirements, and from project and
funding approvals, for the purposes of implementing this
bill as expeditiously as possible, and (3) make legislative
findings and declarations.
ANALYSIS : Existing state law requires licensed persons
to provide to the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) a
signature and the DMV is required to digitize that
signature and forward the digitized signature to the SOS if
a person wishes to register to vote. Existing law will
permit a person who is qualified to register to vote and
who has a valid California driver's license or state
identification card to submit an affidavit of voter
registration electronically on the Internet Web site of the
SOS. This provision will become operative when the SOS
certifies that the state has a statewide voter registration
database (VoteCal) that complies with the requirements of
the federal Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA).
This bill:
1. Requires the DMV and the SOS to develop a process and
the infrastructure to allow the electronic copy of the
signature of a person who is registering to vote to be
transferred to the SOS and to county election management
systems to allow a person who is qualified to register
to vote in California to register to vote electronically
on the Internet Web site of the SOS.
2. Permits online voter registration to begin, pursuant to
conditions outlined in existing law, on the date that
either of the following occurs:
CONTINUED
SB 397
Page
3
A. The SOS certifies that the state has a statewide
voter registration database that complies with the
requirements of the HAVA; or,
B. The SOS executes a declaration stating that the
following conditions have occurred:
(1) The United States Elections Assistance
Commission has approved the use of HAVA funding to
provide online voter registration in advance of
the deployment of the statewide voter registration
database, or other federal funding is available
and approved for the same purpose;
(2) The DMV and the SOS have developed a process
and the infrastructure necessary to transfer the
electronic copy of a person's signature from the
DMV to the SOS and to county election management
systems; and,
(3) All county election management systems have
been modified to receive and store electronic
voter registration information received from the
SOS in order to allow a person to register to vote
pursuant to this bill.
3. Exempts the SOS from various information technology
requirements, and from project and funding approvals,
for the purposes of implementing this bill as
expeditiously as possible.
Background
VoteCal and Online Voter Registration . Among other things,
HAVA required every state to implement a single, uniform,
official, centralized, interactive computerized statewide
voter registration list defined, maintained, and
administered at the state level. This statewide voter
registration list will serve as the official list of
eligible voters for any federal election held within the
state. HAVA provided funds to states to develop voter
registration lists and required each state to develop such
a list by January 1, 2004. HAVA also provided a procedure,
CONTINUED
SB 397
Page
4
however, for states to request a waiver that extended the
deadline to January 1, 2006. The SOS applied for, and
received, such a waiver. At the time HAVA was approved,
California was already using a statewide voter registration
system known as Calvoter that achieved some of the goals of
the voter registration list required by HAVA. However,
Calvoter did not satisfy many of the requirements in that
law, including requirements that the database be fully
interactive and have the capability of storing a complete
voter registration history for every voter.
In January 2005, the SOS sought guidance from the U.S.
Department of Justice (DOJ) regarding a plan for compliance
with HAVA's statewide voter registration list requirements.
Under the initial plan, the state would achieve interim
short-term compliance with HAVA by January 1, 2006, through
upgrades to Calvoter, with a plan for long-term compliance
through the development and implementation of a new voter
registration system, to be known as VoteCal. The DOJ,
however, expressed concerns that this plan did not comply
with the requirements of HAVA. Subsequent discussions
between the SOS and the DOJ led to the adoption of a
memorandum of agreement (MOA) between the two parties. In
that MOA, the SOS committed to further upgrades to the
Calvoter system to achieve short-term interim compliance
with the requirements of HAVA, and to complete development
and implementation of a longer-term solution for replacing
the Calvoter system with a new permanent statewide voter
registration system. In exchange, the DOJ agreed to
refrain from initiating litigation in federal court against
the state to enforce the voter registration list
requirements of HAVA. Since that MOA was signed on
November 2, 2005, the state has continued its efforts to
develop the VoteCal system. After completing a planning
process that is required by state law for all major
technology projects, the procurement process began, and a
final deadline for bids to be submitted for the VoteCal
project was set for January 29, 2009. Of all the vendors
who submitted bids for the VoteCal project, only one -
Catalyst Consulting - met all the requirements of the
request for proposal (RFP). Upon obtaining approvals for
expenditure authority for the VoteCal costs, a contract was
executed with Catalyst Consulting on September 8, 2009, and
work on the VoteCal project commenced.
CONTINUED
SB 397
Page
5
However, on April 19, 2010, the SOS discovered that the
vendor hired to develop and deploy the VoteCal system had
not obtained a performance bond for the project, even
though the RFP required the vendor to obtain such a bond
within 21 days of the contract being executed.
Additionally, the SOS and the independent project oversight
consultant that was hired to oversee the VoteCal project
both expressed concerns about the ability of Catalyst
Consulting to meet the agreed-upon schedule for VoteCal to
be deployed. On May 21, 2010, the SOS and Catalyst
Consulting agreed to terminate the contract for the
development of VoteCal. Since terminating the contract
with Catalyst Consulting in May, the SOS, in coordination
with the Department of General Services and the California
Technology Agency, has begun the process again of awarding
a contract for the development of VoteCal. A new RFP was
issued on October 29, 2010 but a contract has yet to be
awarded. The delay in the implementation of a statewide
voter registration database that complies with HAVA has
notable impacts on election administration in the state.
Among other programs that have been signed into law and
absent new legislation to provide otherwise, online voter
registration will not go into effect until VoteCal is in
place.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: No
According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee:
1. One-time costs of around $250,000 to the DMV, and
one-time costs of $150,000 and ongoing costs of $40,000
to the SOS to develop and maintain online voter
registration capability prior to implementation of the
statewide voter registration database. Per this bill's
requirements, these costs would have to be covered by
federal funds.
2. To the extent this bill results in the availability of
online voter registration sooner than the expected
completion of the statewide voter registration database,
and significant numbers of registrants use this option,
the SOS, DMV, and counties will more quickly realize
CONTINUED
SB 397
Page
6
significant and ongoing savings from reduced paper
processing of voter registrations.
SUPPORT : (Verified 9/1/11)
California Common Cause (source)
AARP
California Association of Clerks and Elections Officials
California Church IMPACT
California National Organization for Women
California Nurses Association
California Public Interest Research Group
California State Council of the Services Employees
International Union
California State Student Association
California Teachers Association
Consumer Federation of California
League of Women Voters of California
Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors
Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk
Pew Center on the States Election Initiatives
Progressive States Action
Rock the Vote
San Mateo County Board of Supervisors
Southwest Voter Registration Education Project
University of California Student Association
EDITORIAL - The Bakersfield Californian
EDITORIAL - Sacramento Bee
OPPOSITION : (Verified 9/1/11)
Department of Motor Vehicles
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the sponsors, current
law allows voters to submit an affidavit of voter
registration electronically under Elections Code Section
2196 once the VoteCal is implemented. Unfortunately,
VoteCal is delayed until at least 2015. The voter
registration process should be a catalyst, not a barrier to
participation. It would be practical and convenient to
allow for online voter registration. In fact, eleven
states currently or soon will offer online registration,
including North Carolina, Washington, Oregon, and Colorado.
This change helped alleviate the expenses of election
CONTINUED
SB 397
Page
7
cycles in many states. In Arizona, one county went from
paying 83 cents to three cents per registration. This bill
authorizes counties to develop and use an electronic voter
registration system for the electronic submission of an
affidavit of voter registration. Under this bill, only
people who are qualified to register to vote, who have a
valid California driver's license or state identification
card, and who reside in a county that chooses to
participate in the online voter registration, will be able
to participate. The provisions of this bill remain in
effect only until the SOS certifies that the state has a
statewide voter registration database that complies with
the requirements of HAVA. This bill increases security,
accuracy, and efficiency in voter registrations by creating
a new avenue for voters to register online. Additionally,
the registration information can be automatically verified
for authenticity, increasing registration security and
saving the state and counties time and resources. Voter
registrations now are often handwritten and must be keyed
in by county workers, whereas under this bill, many voters
would be able to enter their own information directly -
minimizing concerns about inaccuracies.
In support of this bill, the Los Angeles County Board of
Supervisors writes:
"The federal National Voter Registration Act of 1993
provides for state departments of motor vehicles to make
voter registration information and materials available to
an applicant for a driver's license and other vehicular
documents. Existing state law requires persons to
provide the ÝDMV] a signature, and requires the DMV to
digitize that signature and forward it to the ÝSOS] if a
person wishes to register to vote. Under existing law,
operative when the ÝSOS] certifies that the state has a
statewide voter registration database, a person who is
qualified to register to vote and who has a valid
DMV-issued license or identification card may submit an
affidavit of voter registration electronically on the
Secretary of State's Internet Web site. Currently, it is
estimated that more than one million Los Angeles County
residents are eligible to register to vote but have not
done so. Online voter registration would greatly expand
access for many of these potential voters. In addition,
CONTINUED
SB 397
Page
8
the Los Angeles Registrar-Recorder notes that significant
cost avoidances may be expected as the use of paper-based
voter registration forms declines."
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION : DMV states:
"Current law provides for an online voter registration
system to be established once the statewide voter
registration database (VoteCal) is deployed. The DMV
continues to work with the SOS on the current business
requirements to providing the SOS with digitized
signatures necessary to implement VoteCal. SB 397 seeks
interim online voter registration system be implemented
while waiting for VoteCal to become operational, and in
time for the 2012 election. Developing an interim system
to online voter registration before the 2012 election
would only be possible if all parties involved (SOS, DMV,
counties and their election management systems providers)
are able to fund and perform all of the programming
required and in an extremely short timeframe. For the
DMV, this presents a significant programming effort,
pulling valuable information technology resources away
from the department's mission critical Information
Technology Modernization (ITM) project currently
underway, as well as numerous legislatively mandated
programming efforts. It is unlikely that the programming
required by this bill could be accomplished in time for
the 2012 election without jeopardizing other projects,
including VoteCal itself"
They believe that mandating DMV and the SOS to develop a
process and infrastructure that provides for the
applicant's signature now, without any assurance that these
interim processes/efforts would be utilized or incorporated
into the online voter registration system that will be
developed as part of VoteCal, is not efficient use of
valuable DMV information technology resources.
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 50-27, 9/1/11
AYES: Alejo, Allen, Ammiano, Atkins, Beall, Block,
Blumenfield, Bradford, Brownley, Buchanan, Butler,
Charles Calderon, Campos, Carter, Cedillo, Chesbro,
Dickinson, Eng, Feuer, Fong, Fuentes, Furutani, Galgiani,
CONTINUED
SB 397
Page
9
Gatto, Gordon, Hall, Hayashi, Roger Hernández, Hill,
Huber, Hueso, Huffman, Lara, Bonnie Lowenthal, Ma,
Mendoza, Mitchell, Monning, Pan, Perea, V. Manuel Pérez,
Portantino, Skinner, Solorio, Swanson, Torres,
Wieckowski, Williams, Yamada, John A. Pérez
NOES: Achadjian, Bill Berryhill, Conway, Cook, Donnelly,
Fletcher, Beth Gaines, Garrick, Grove, Hagman, Halderman,
Harkey, Jeffries, Jones, Knight, Logue, Mansoor, Miller,
Morrell, Nestande, Nielsen, Norby, Olsen, Silva, Smyth,
Valadao, Wagner
NO VOTE RECORDED: Bonilla, Davis, Gorell
DLW:kc 9/1/11 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED