BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON ELECTIONS
AND CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS
Senator Norma J. Torres, Chair
BILL NO: AB 1135 HEARING DATE: 7/2/13
AUTHOR: MULLIN ANALYSIS BY: Frances Tibon
Estoista
AMENDED: 6/25/13
FISCAL: NO
SUBJECT
Vote by mail ballots: signature verification
DESCRIPTION
Existing law requires a county elections official, upon
receiving a vote by mail (VBM) ballot, to compare the signatures
on the envelope with the signature appearing on the affidavit of
registration. If the signatures compare, the elections official
shall deposit the ballot, still in its identification envelope,
into a ballot container in his or her office.
Existing law provides that if the ballot is rejected because the
signatures do not compare, the envelope shall not be opened and
the ballot shall not be counted, and requires the cause of the
rejection be written on the face of the identification envelope.
Existing law permits a county elections official to use the
signature on the voter's VBM application for the signature
comparison, if the elections official compared the signature on
the voter's VBM ballot application with the signature on the
voter's affidavit of registration.
Existing law permits a county elections official to use the
duplicate file of affidavits of registered voters or the
facsimiles of voters' signatures when determining from the
records of registration if the signature and residence address
compare.
This bill requires an elections official upon receipt of a VBM
ballot, to compare the signature on the identification envelope
with either of the following to determine whether the signatures
compare:
1) The signature appearing on the voter's affidavit of
registration or any previous affidavit of registration of the
voter.
2) The signature appearing on a form issued by an elections
official that contains the voter's signature, that is part of
the voter's registration record, and that the elections
official has determined compares with the signature on the
voter's affidavit of registration or any previous affidavit
of registration of the voter.
This bill allows the elections official to make this
verification determination by reviewing a series of signatures
appearing on official forms in the voter's registration record
that have been determined to compare, that demonstrates the
progression of the voter's signature, and makes evident that the
signature on the identification envelope is that of the voter.
This bill permits a county elections official, upon receipt of a
military or overseas ballot returned by facsimile transmission,
to determine the voter's eligibility by comparing the signature
on the return information with the signature on the voter's
affidavit of registration or any signature permitted for
comparison as set forth by this bill.
This bill makes other grammatical and corresponding changes.
BACKGROUND
Contra Costa County Report . Over the years, Contra Costa
County, similar to many other counties, has collected data
concerning VBM ballots. The collection and analysis of this
data has helped counties take proactive steps to improve the
success rate for VBM voters. According to a November 6, 2012
General Presidential Election Report prepared by the Contra
Costa County Clerk-Recorder, at the November 2010 election, the
county saw an increase in signatures being rejected for "no
match." Upon further investigation, they found that voters less
than 50 years of age and clustered in the 20-39 age groups
represented a disproportionately high number of rejected ballots
for no signature match.
According to the report, in an effort to help mitigate this
problem, Contra Costa County changed their "Make Your Vote
Count" insert that is placed in their outgoing VBM packets to
highlight the problem. The insert alerted voters that how they
AB 1135 (MULLIN) Page 2
sign their name matters when they sign their ballot envelope and
reminded voters that if their signature changed to immediately
re-register so their current registration would be on file.
According to the report, the outreach efforts had a positive
effect and the county saw a reduction in rejected signatures by
over 40% between the November 2010 and November 2012 elections.
However, despite that reduction, younger voters remain well
above the average for rejected signatures. Consequently, Contra
Costa County plans to do more outreach via the social networks
in hopes to educate voters and reduce the number of ballots
rejected.
COMMENTS
1. According to the Author : In the November 2012 election,
more voters voted by mail than in person. Since 1980, the
percent of votes cast by mail in general elections has
increased from about 6% to just over 50%. Because voting by
mail is quickly becoming the preferred voting method, it is
critical we do everything we can to ensure voters' ballots
are counted.
Last November, nearly 60,000 VBM ballots were rejected. About
one-third were not counted because the signatures on the VBM
envelopes did not match the signatures on the voters'
original registration affidavits. The requirement that the
signature on a VBM envelope matches the voter's original
registration affidavit is unique to absentee ballots.
Signature matching is not required when a person shows up to
vote at a polling place.
Given the nature of voting by mail, this verification system is
important-but it also has pitfalls. One major drawback is
that voters' signatures change over time. Let's consider
young voters, who are often in the process of developing a
permanent signature. Among VBM ballots rejected because the
signatures didn't match, 20-29 year-old voters accounted for
a disproportionate number of rejections. These voters
submitted just 6% of VBM ballots, but were accountable for
30% of rejections due to mismatching signatures. On the
other end of the spectrum are older voters, whose signatures
can change considerably as they age. Their original
registration affidavits have often been on file for decades.
Assembly Bill 1135 will allow county registrars to compare the
signature on a VBM envelope with the signature appearing on
AB 1135 (MULLIN) Page 3
the voter's affidavit of registration or any previous
affidavit of registration of the voter; the signature on an
official form issued by an elections official that contains
the voter's signature that is part of the voter's
registration record and that the elections official has
determined compares with the signature on the voter's
affidavit of registration or any previous affidavit of
registration of the voter through a series of signatures in
the voter's registration record showing a progression of the
voter's signatures. AB 1135 is a critical measure to ensure
all Californians have the best chance possible to have their
votes counted.
2. How Many Ballots Were Rejected Due to Mismatching
Signatures ? According to the Sacramento County Registrar of
Voters, at the November 2012 General Election, Sacramento
County had 3,035 VBM ballots rejected. Of those, 1,064
(approximately 35%) were rejected because the signature did
not match, 403 did not have signatures, 14 had no ballot
enclosed, and the rest were received too late to be counted.
Historically, the main reasons why a ballot is rejected for a
signature mismatch is because the signature is unreadable,
missing or has changed and is out of date. However, there is
evidence to suggest that as the voting process modernizes and
new technologies are used, the election process is being
impacted. For example, the author's staff provided the
committee with a copy of a partial signature that was
received from the Department of Motor Vehicles' (DMV)
database via California's online voter registration. The
image provided to the committee shows that half of the
voter's signature is missing. According to a county
elections official this particular partial signature came
from older DMV records. Clearly this is an unintended
consequence of the online voter registration, but
nevertheless the partial signature provided is the signature
on the voter's affidavit of registration that the county
elections official must use when comparing signatures.
Furthermore, the only way for a voter to update their signature
is to fill out a new voter registration form. Using the
online voter registration system may not guarantee that the
signature on file with DMV is updated, unless the voter has
recently applied or renewed their California driver's license
or identification card. Otherwise the signature in the DMV's
AB 1135 (MULLIN) Page 4
database could be just as outdated as their voter
registration affidavit signature.
AB 1135 (MULLIN) Page 5
3. Related Legislation : SB 589 (Hill) 2012, contained a
provision that would have permitted a county elections
official, when comparing the signature on a VBM
identification envelope, to use the signature appearing on
the voter's current or previous affidavit of registration on
file with the elections official. That provision was
recently amended out of the bill.
PRIOR ACTION
Assembly Elections and Redistricting Committee: 5-2
Assembly Floor: 52-25
POSITIONS
Sponsor: Author
Support: California Association of Clerks and Election
Officials (CACEO)
California Common Cause
California Forward Action Fund
Secretary of State
Oppose: None received
AB 1135 (MULLIN) Page 6