BILL ANALYSIS Ó
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 360|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: SB 360
Author: Padilla (D)
Amended: 5/20/13
Vote: 21
SENATE ELECTIONS & CONST. AMEND. COMM : 4-1, 4/30/13
AYES: Correa, Hancock, Padilla, Yee
NOES: Anderson
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 5-0, 5/13/13
AYES: De León, Hill, Lara, Padilla, Steinberg
NO VOTE RECORDED: Walters, Gaines
SUBJECT : Certification of voting systems
SOURCE : Los Angeles County Registrar Recorder/County Clerk
DIGEST : This bill authorizes a county to conduct a pilot
program for the experimental use of a voting system, requires
the Secretary of State (SOS) to adopt and publish regulations
governing the pilot program, recasts and revises various
procedures and criteria for the SOS's approval of voting
systems, and authorizes the SOS to certify, conditionally
approve, or withhold approval of a voting system.
ANALYSIS : Existing law establishes various procedures and
criteria for the approval by the SOS of voting systems,
including ballot marking systems, to be used in elections. A
voting system and any modification to a voting system must be
approved by the SOS before it can be used in any election.
CONTINUED
SB 360
Page
2
Electronic voting systems must be certified at the federal level
by the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC) before they can
be submitted to the SOS's office for review.
This bill:
1.Requires the SOS to adopt and publish regulations governing
pilot programs for the experimental use of voting systems.
2.Authorizes the SOS to certify or conditionally approve the use
of a new voting system.
3.Authorizes a person, corporation, or public agency to acquire
a voting system and apply to the SOS for certification that
includes testing and examination of the applicant's system by
a state-approved testing agency.
4.Requires the SOS to publish and make available on his/her
Internet Web site a quarterly report of regulatory activities
related to voting systems.
5.Requires the SOS to provide a 30 day public review period (in
addition to the already required public hearing) prior to
publishing his/her decision to certify, conditionally approve,
or withhold certification of a voting system.
6.Extends the period of time that the SOS has to make its report
publicly available after completing the examination of a
voting system from 30 days to 60 days.
7.Provides that if more than one voting system is used to count
ballots, the names of candidates shall be placed on the
primary voting system.
8.Authorizes a county to use a publicly owned voting system in a
pilot program held at an election in one or more precincts.
9.Makes numerous technical and conforming changes to the
Certification of Voting Systems code sections.
Background
CONTINUED
SB 360
Page
3
Existing law establishes various procedures and criteria for the
approval by the SOS of voting systems, including ballot marking
systems, to be used in elections. A voting system and any
modification to a voting system must be approved by the SOS
before it can be used in any election. Electronic voting
systems must be certified at the federal level by the U.S. EAC
before they can be submitted to the SOS's office for review.
In April 2003, California received $265 million in Help America
Vote Act (HAVA) funds; including $75 million for new voting
equipment and $40 million for a new statewide voter database.
These voting equipment funds were distributed to each county
beginning in 2004. California counties were then required to
purchase a new voting system. Nearly all California counties
purchased their voting systems from five different vendors. The
vendors offered a variety of systems and upgrades resulting in a
patchwork of technologies throughout California. In addition,
the vendors considered their technology intellectual property,
thereby limiting public access to both the operating software
and hardware.
Los Angeles County is the only county that uses the InkaVote
Plus and Microcomputer Tally Systems, and did not purchase a new
system because they could not identify one that met their unique
needs. In 2009, the Los Angeles County
Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk launched the Voting Systems
Assessment Project with the goal of developing its own voting
system. Los Angeles County would be the first county in the
U.S. to develop, own and operate its own voting system.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: No
According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:
One-time costs of $75,000 to the SOS (HAVA Trust)
Costs to the SOS consist of $65,000 to adopt regulations for
voting systems testing to replace the federal EAC certification
and EAC testing agency certification. Costs to approve testing
agencies for voting systems testing done in compliance with the
new regulations could vary, however if the EAC Voting Systems
CONTINUED
SB 360
Page
4
Testing Laboratory Accreditation Program is mimicked, those
costs would be a little as $10,000. It is likely that available
HAVA funds could be used for these activities. The costs for
the actual testing of voting systems will be paid by the entity
submitting a voting system for testing.
SUPPORT : (Verified 5/17/13)
Los Angeles County Registrar Recorder/County Clerk (source)
California Association of Clerks and Election Officials
Common Cause
National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials
PowerPAC
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the Los Angeles County
Registrar Recorder/County Clerk:
The integrity, security and accuracy of voting systems will
not be compromised under a state certification process.
This legislation allows the Secretary of State (SOS) to
adopt federal voting system standards.
County voting systems in California are aging rapidly and
the process for approving voting systems is doing little to
help approve new innovative systems or spur new approaches
to voting system development. No new voting systems have
been approved in California since 2007.
Federal standards may not meet California's standards. The
SOS has previously conducted a review of voting systems.
In 2007, the SOS conducted the "Top-to-Bottom" review where
it used more stringent standards than the adopted federal
standards to test already federally certified systems.
Under a state certification process the SOS will have the
ability to approve and monitor the testing agencies used
for certification. The current SOS has expressed concerns
about the checks and balances in the selection and
monitoring of federal testing labs in the past.
Existing federal Voluntary Voting System Standards and
Voting System Test Labs provide an infrastructure the SOS
can leverage with the freedom to adopt state specific
CONTINUED
SB 360
Page
5
requirements and standards.
The federal certification process does not contemplate for
publicly owned voting systems. This is a problem for Los
Angeles County who is seeking to develop and implement a
publicly owned and county operated voting system.
Currently, the state does not provide for the pilot use of
publicly owned/non-proprietary software systems by
counties. This is also an impediment for counties.
(RM:nl):ej 5/17/13 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED