BILL ANALYSIS Ó ----------------------------------------------------------------- |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 2233| |Office of Senate Floor Analyses | | |1020 N Street, Suite 524 | | |(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | | |327-4478 | | ----------------------------------------------------------------- THIRD READING Bill No: AB 2233 Author: Donnelly (R) Amended: 5/13/14 in Assembly Vote: 21 SENATE ELECTIONS & CONSTITUTIONAL AMEND. COMM : 5-0, 6/24/14 AYES: Padilla, Anderson, Hancock, Jackson, Pavley ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 70-3, 5/27/14 - See last page for vote SUBJECT : Primary elections: petitions: signatures SOURCE : Author DIGEST : This bill reduces the number of signatures that a candidate needs at a special vacancy election on a petition in lieu of paying a filing fee in proportion to any reduction in the amount of time to collect signatures. ANALYSIS : Existing law: 1.Requires a person who seeks to have his/her name printed on the ballot as a candidate for an office at the direct primary election to file a declaration of candidacy and nomination papers. 2.Requires a candidate for specified offices to pay a fee to file the declaration of candidacy. Provides that the amount of the fee is established as follows: CONTINUED AB 2233 Page 2 A. In the case of a United States Senator or any statewide office, 2% of the first-year salary for the office; B. In the case of a Representative in Congress, member of the Board of Equalization, justice of the court of appeal, state Senator, or Member of the Assembly, 1% of the first-year salary; and C. In the case of a county or judicial office to be voted only wholly within one county, 1% of the annual salary of the office provided, however, no filing fee shall be charged for any office for which the annual salary is $2,500 or less. 1.Permits a candidate to submit a petition containing signatures of registered voters in lieu of paying a filing fee. Allows any registered voter to sign an in-lieu-filing-fee petition for any candidate for whom he/she is eligible to vote. Requires a candidate to collect the following number of signatures on an in-lieu-filing-fee petition in order to cover the full amount of the filing fee that is required to be paid: A. For the office of Member of the Assembly, 1,500 signatures; B. For the office of state Senate or Representative in Congress, 3,000 signatures; C. For statewide office, 10,000 signatures; and D. For all other offices for which a filing fee is required: If the number of registered voters in the district is 2,000 or more, four signatures for each dollar of the filing fee or 10% of the total of registered voters in the district, whichever is less; or If the number of registered voters in the district is less than 2,000, four signatures for each dollar of the filing fee or 20% of the total of registered voters in the district, whichever is less. This bill: CONTINUED AB 2233 Page 3 1.Provides that if the number of days for a candidate to collect signatures on a petition in lieu of a filing fee for a special election that is held to fill a vacancy is less than the number of days that a candidate will have to collect signatures on a petition at a regular election for the same office, the elections official shall reduce the required number of signatures for the petition by the same proportion as the reduction in time for the candidate to collect signatures. 2.Provides that in determining the proportion of time by which the period for a candidate to collect signatures has been reduced, the elections official shall exclude any days allotted for filing a supplemental petition. 3.Provides that an in-lieu-filing-fee petition for a special election held to fill a congressional or legislative vacancy shall require not less than 100 signatures. Background California law requires candidates for many elective offices to pay a filing fee at the time they obtain nomination papers from the elections official. Filing fees are intended, in part, to help cover the administrative costs of conducting the election, but also serve as a means of limiting the size of the ballot in order to reduce voter confusion, prevent overwhelming voting systems, and allow the electorate to focus attention on a smaller number of candidates in order that elections may better reflect the will of the majority. Courts have long recognized that states have a legitimate interest in regulating the number of candidates on the ballot for these reasons. At the same time, courts have also found that a state cannot require candidates to pay a filing fee in order to appear on the ballot unless the state also provides a reasonable alternative means of ballot access. In Lubin v. Panish (1974) 415 U.S. 709, the United States Supreme Court found that a California law that required certain candidates for office to pay a filing fee in order to appear on the ballot was unconstitutional because the law did not provide an alternate means of qualifying for the ballot for indigent candidates who were unable to pay the fee. In finding California's filing fee law to be invalid, the court CONTINUED AB 2233 Page 4 noted that there were other "obvious and well known means of testing the 'seriousness' of a candidacy which do not measure the probability of attracting significant voter support solely by the neutral fact of payment of a filing fee," including a requirement for a candidate who cannot pay the filing fee to "demonstrate the 'seriousness' of his candidacy by persuading a substantial number of voters to sign a petition in his behalf." In response to the Supreme Court's decision in Lubin, the Legislature enacted and the Governor signed AB 914 (Ray Gonzales, Chapter 454, Statutes of 1974), an urgency measure that permitted candidates to file petitions containing the signatures of a specified number of registered voters in lieu of paying a filing fee. The number of signatures required to be collected in lieu of paying a filing fee has remained largely unchanged since the signatures-in-lieu procedure was originally adopted in 1974, notwithstanding the fact that the number of registered voters in California has increased by more than 77% since that time. FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No Local: No SUPPORT : (Verified 6/27/14) California Alliance for Retired Americans Coalition for Free and Open Elections Libertarian Party of California Peace and Freedom Party of California ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the author's office, this is a simple bill that will allow more access to special elections. Currently, the number of signatures required in a special election are the same amount required in a regularly scheduled election, even though the number of days to collect those signatures is usually far less. By dropping the number of signatures required in proportion to the number of days a candidate has to collect those signatures, we would be allowing the public better access to the ballot. ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 70-3, 05/27/14 AYES: Achadjian, Allen, Ammiano, Bigelow, Bloom, Bocanegra, Bonta, Bradford, Brown, Buchanan, Ian Calderon, Campos, Chau, Chávez, Chesbro, Conway, Cooley, Dababneh, Dahle, Daly, CONTINUED AB 2233 Page 5 Dickinson, Donnelly, Fong, Fox, Frazier, Beth Gaines, Garcia, Gatto, Gomez, Gordon, Gorell, Gray, Grove, Hagman, Hall, Harkey, Roger Hernández, Holden, Jones, Jones-Sawyer, Levine, Linder, Logue, Lowenthal, Maienschein, Mansoor, Medina, Melendez, Mullin, Muratsuchi, Nazarian, Nestande, Olsen, Perea, John A. Pérez, V. Manuel Pérez, Quirk, Rendon, Ridley-Thomas, Salas, Skinner, Stone, Ting, Wagner, Waldron, Weber, Wieckowski, Wilk, Yamada, Atkins NOES: Alejo, Gonzalez, Williams NO VOTE RECORDED: Bonilla, Eggman, Pan, Patterson, Quirk-Silva, Rodriguez, Vacancy RM:nl 6/27/14 Senate Floor Analyses SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE **** END **** CONTINUED