BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 141
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB 141 (Gorell)
As Amended May 8, 2013
Majority vote
ELECTIONS 5-1 APPROPRIATIONS 16-1
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Fong, Bocanegra, Bonta, |Ayes:|Gatto, Harkey, Bigelow, |
| |Hall, Weber | |Bocanegra, Bradford, Ian |
| | | |Calderon, Campos, Eggman, |
| | | |Gomez, Hall, Rendon, |
| | | |Linder, Pan, Quirk, |
| | | |Wagner, Weber |
| | | | |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
|Nays:|Donnelly |Nays:|Donnelly |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Requires a write-in candidate for a voter-nominated
office, as defined, to receive a specified number of votes at
the primary election in order for his or her name to appear on
the ballot at the general election. Specifically, this bill :
1)Prohibits a write-in candidate at a primary election who is
one of the two candidates who received the highest number of
votes cast for that office from having his or her name appear
on the ballot at the general election, unless the candidate
received votes equal in number to at least 1% of all votes
cast for that office at the last preceding general election at
which the office was filled.
2)Provides that this measure applies to statewide offices
(except Superintendent of Public Instruction), Board of
Equalization, congressional offices, and legislative offices.
3)Provides that it shall become operative only if ACA 9
(Gorell), which is pending in the Assembly Appropriations
Committee, is approved by the voters.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee, potential minor savings to county elections officials
associated with having fewer candidates and thus shorter ballots
in general elections.
AB 141
Page 2
COMMENTS : According to the author, "In 2010, public approval of
Proposition 14 changed the way Californians choose their
candidates for elected office. The new 'Top Two' general
election format was designed so that the two candidates who
received the most votes in the state's primary election would
face each other in a November general election, regardless of
their own party registration. The language necessary to
maintain a minimum threshold for write-in votes was not included
in Prop 14, unintentionally abandoning the longstanding
requirement that write-in candidates must receive at least 1% of
all votes cast to advance to a general election. AB 141
corrects this oversight by reestablishing that 1% minimum."
In February 2009, the Legislature approved SCA 4 (Maldonado),
Res. Chapter 2, Statutes of 2009, which was enacted by the
voters as Proposition 14 on the June 2010 statewide primary
election ballot. Proposition 14 implemented a top two primary
election system in California for most elective state and
federal offices. At primary elections, voters are able to vote
for any candidate, regardless of party, and the two candidates
who receive the most votes, regardless of party, advance to the
general election.
The 2012 elections marked the first time that the top two
primary election system was used at a regularly scheduled
election in California. In the June 2012 primary, six write-in
candidates finished as one of the top two candidates in the
primary election for the offices that they sought, and
accordingly moved on to the general election ballot. In each
case, the write-in candidates who moved on to the general
election were running for an office where only one candidate was
listed on the ballot at the primary election. Those write-in
candidates, all of whom received less than 2% of the vote in the
primary election, received between 13% and 36% of the vote at
the ensuing general election.
None of those six candidates received a number of write-in votes
equal to at least 1% of all the votes cast for the office at the
last preceding general election at which the office was filled.
As such, had this bill been in effect for the 2012 primary
elections (and assuming that the number of votes for each of
these write-in candidates did not change), none of these six
write-in candidates would have moved on to the general election
AB 141
Page 3
ballot.
Existing law requires a write-in candidate to file a statement
of write-in candidacy and nomination papers not later than 14
days before the election, and elections officials are prohibited
from counting a write-in vote for a candidate unless that
candidate has filed those documents. Candidates for State
Senate and Assembly, the Board of Equalization, and House of
Representatives in Congress must collect at least 40 signatures
on nomination papers, while candidates for statewide office and
for United States Senate must collect at least 65 signatures on
nomination papers. In light of these requirements, a write-in
candidate for one of the offices covered by this bill must
collect either 40 or 65 signatures on nomination papers before
any write-in votes will be counted for that candidate. The
candidate then needs to be one of the top two vote getters at
the primary election to be eligible to appear on the general
election ballot. While existing law theoretically could allow a
write-in candidate to advance to the general election with a
single write-in vote, that candidate would not be eligible to
advance if he or she had not previously filed nomination papers
with the requisite number of signatures. As a result, it is not
the case that a voter who simply wrote his or her own name on
the ballot could advance to the general election if that voter
had not previously collected the required number of signatures
on nomination papers.
ACA 9 (Gorell) is a companion measure to this bill that would
make necessary changes to the state constitution to prohibit a
write-in candidate at the primary election for a voter-nominated
office from appearing on the general election ballot unless that
candidate received a specified number of votes. ACA 9 must be
approved by the voters in order to take effect, and since the
Constitution currently provides that the candidates who are the
top two vote-getters at a voter-nominated primary election for a
congressional or state elective office shall compete in the
ensuing general election, this bill cannot become effective
unless and until that constitutional provision is amended. As
such, this bill provides that it shall become operative only
upon voter-approval of ACA 9.
Please see the policy committee analysis for a full discussion
of this bill.
AB 141
Page 4
Analysis Prepared by : Ethan Jones / E. & R. / (916) 319-2094
FN: 0000589