BILL ANALYSIS �
SB 654
Page 1
Date of Hearing: June 25, 2013
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON ELECTIONS AND REDISTRICTING
Paul Fong, Chair
SB 654 (Leno & Padilla) - As Amended: May 24, 2013
SENATE VOTE : 28-9
SUBJECT : Ballot measure petitions: translations.
SUMMARY : Requires the Attorney General (AG), if proponents
intend to circulate a proposed initiative or referendum in a
county covered by the federal minority language laws, to
translate the title and summary of the proposed initiative or
referendum into the applicable languages covered in that county.
Requires the Secretary of State (SOS), if proponents intend to
circulate a proposed recall petition in a county covered by the
federal minority language laws, to translate the title and
summary of the proposed recall petition into the applicable
languages covered in that county. Specifically, this bill :
1)Makes the following findings and declarations:
a) California is a diverse state with a government selected
by the votes of its citizens. The state's robust
initiative process is designed to put lawmaking in the
hands of the people, and continues to play an important
role in setting public policy with regard to education,
civil rights, fiscal policy, and other issues that affect
the lives of all Californians, including the state's 6.9
million limited-English-proficient residents. The
referendum and recall processes also play an important role
in developing public policy;
b) The signature-gathering phase to qualify these proposed
measures for the ballot is an integral part of the state's
electoral system;
c) The federal Voting Rights Act (VRA) of 1965 (42 U.S.C.
Sec. 1971 et seq.) prohibits discriminatory voting
practices and protects the rights of voters with limited
English proficiency by requiring covered jurisdictions to
provide voting materials in the language of specified
minority groups. However, ballot measure petitions, which
are circulated for signature in hopes of qualifying a
SB 654
Page 2
measure for the ballot, are not required to be provided in
other languages under existing law. As a result, millions
of voters with limited English proficiency are excluded
from playing a role in determining which proposed measures
qualify for the ballot; and,
d) The provision of translated versions of circulating
titles and summaries of initiative and referendum measures,
and of translated versions of recall petitions, will
further the purpose of the federal VRA and ensure that
voters with limited English proficiency have the ability to
exercise their fundamental democratic rights.
2)Deletes a requirement that the AG, within 15 days after the
receipt of the final version of a proposed initiative measure,
provide a copy of the title and summary of the proposed
initiative measure to SOS, and instead requires the AG to
provide a copy only to the proponents.
3)Deletes a requirement that the AG, within 10 days after the
receipt of a proposed referendum measure, provide a copy of
the circulating title and summary of the measure to SOS and
proponents, and instead requires the AG to provide a copy only
to the proponents.
4)Requires the AG to provide a copy of the circulating title and
summary of a proposed initiative measure to the proponents and
to include a notice stating that, if the proponents intend to
circulate the proposed initiative or referendum measure, that
the proponents shall, no later than five days after receipt of
the copy of the circulating title and summary, submit to the
AG a list of the counties in which the petition will be
circulated that are covered by Section 203 (42 U.S.C Sec.
1977aa-1a) or Section 4(f)(4) (42 U.S.C. Sec. 1973b(f)(4)) of
the federal VRA.
5)Requires the proponents, if they intend to circulate the
initiative or referendum measure petition, to submit to the AG
a list of the counties in which the petition will be
circulated that are covered by the federal minority language
laws no later than five days after receipt of the copy of the
circulating title and summary.
6)Requires the AG, upon receipt of the list of the counties, to
prepare a translation of the circulating title and summary of
SB 654
Page 3
the proposed initiative or referendum measure in each
applicable minority language for the counties identified by
the proponents that are covered by federal minority language
laws. Requires the AG, no later than 10 days after receipt of
the list of counties, to provide a copy of each translation to
the proponents.
7)Requires the AG, within 10 days after receipt of the list of
the counties identified by the proponents, to provide to the
SOS a copy of the circulating title and summary of the
proposed initiative or referendum, its unique numeric
identifier, the list of counties identified by the proponents,
and each translation of the circulating title and summary.
8)Requires the SOS to provide the relevant translation to the
county elections official in each county identified by the
proponents.
9)Requires the circulator of an initiative or referendum
petition that circulates the petition in a county covered by
the federal minority language laws to attach the translated
circulating title and summary prepared by the AG to the
petition and make it available to each person whom the
circulator solicits in that language to sign the petition.
Requires the circulator to provide a copy of the translated
circulating title and summary to any person upon request.
10)Requires the proponents of a recall of a state officer, at
the time of filing with the SOS two blank copies of the recall
petition, to submit to the SOS a list of the counties in which
the petitions will be circulated that are covered by Section
203 or Section 4(f)(4) of the federal VRA.
11)Requires the SOS, within 10 days after ascertaining the
proposed recall petition meets form and wording requirements,
to prepare a translation of the petition in each applicable
minority language for the counties identified by the
proponents that are covered by the federal minority language
laws and provide a copy of each translation to the proponents.
12)Requires a copy of the translation of the recall petition
prepared by the SOS to be attached to the petition and
available to each person whom the circulator solicits in that
language to sign the petition. Requires the circulator to
provide a copy of the applicable translation of the petition
SB 654
Page 4
to any person upon request.
EXISTING FEDERAL LAW :
1)Requires a state or a political subdivision of a state to
provide voting materials in the language of a minority group
when that group within the jurisdiction has an illiteracy rate
that is higher than the national illiteracy rate, and the
number of the United States citizens of voting age in that
single language group within the jurisdiction meets at least
one of the following:
a) Numbers more than 10,000;
b) Makes up more than five percent of all voting age
citizens; or,
c) On an Indian reservation, exceeds five percent of all
reservation residents.
2)Requires a state or political subdivision of a state to
provide voting materials in the language of a minority group
if all of the following apply:
a) Over five percent of the voting age citizens were, on
November 1, 1972, members of a single language minority
group;
b) Registration and election materials were provided only
in English on November 1, 1972; and,
c) Fewer than 50 percent of the voting age citizens were
registered to vote or voted in the 1972 Presidential
election.
3)Defines language minorities or language minority groups, for
the purposes of the above provisions, to mean persons who are
American Indian, Asian American, Alaskan Natives, or of
Spanish heritage.
EXISTING STATE LAW :
1)Requires the proponent of a proposed initiative or referendum
to submit the proposal to the AG who must prepare a
circulating title and summary of its chief points and
SB 654
Page 5
purposes. Requires the AG to provide a copy of the
circulating title and summary to the SOS within 15 days after
receipt of the final version of a proposed initiative measure,
or if a fiscal estimate is to be included, within the 15 days
after receipt of the fiscal estimate prepared by the
Department of Finance and the Joint Legislative Budget
Committee, which have 25 days to prepare the fiscal estimate.
2)Requires the AG to provide a copy of the circulating title and
summary of a proposed referendum measure to the proponents of
the measure and the SOS within 10 days after receipt of the
proposed referendum.
3)Requires the proponents of a proposed initiative or
referendum, at the time of submitting the text of the proposed
measure to the AG, to pay a fee of two hundred dollars ($200),
which will be refunded to the proponents if the measure
qualifies for the ballot within two years from the date of the
title and summary.
4)Requires the proponents of a recall of a state officer to file
a notice of intention with the SOS that includes the name and
title of the officer sought to be recalled, a statement of the
reasons for the proposed recall, and the name, signature and
residence address of each recall proponent. Requires a copy
of the notice of intention to be served by personal delivery,
or certified mail, to the officer sought to be recalled.
Permits the state officer sought to be recalled to file with
the SOS an answer to the statement of the proponents.
Requires the answer, if any, of the officer sought to be
recalled, to be included on the petition. Requires the
petition to indicate if no answer was provided.
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown
COMMENTS :
1)Purpose of the Bill : According to the author:
California is a diverse state with a government selected by
the votes of its citizens. In addition, we have a robust
initiative process designed to put lawmaking in the hands
of the people. Federal law recognizes that many Americans
rely heavily on languages other than English, and that they
SB 654
Page 6
require information in minority languages in order to be
informed voters and participate effectively in our
representative democracy.
According to the Migration Policy Institute (MPI),
California is home to the largest foreign-born LEP
population in the United States - approximately 5,807,401
persons, to be precise - many of whom are eligible to vote.
46.5% of California's naturalized U.S. citizens age 5 and
older are limited- or non-English-proficient.
The Federal Voting Rights Act of 1965 protects the rights
of limited English proficient (LEP) voters by providing
language accessible election materials (i.e. official state
voter's guide and sample ballot) in their primary language.
In California, the languages covered by the Federal Voting
Rights Act include Spanish, Chinese, Vietnamese, Japanese,
Korean, and Tagalog. However, ballot initiative and
referendum petitions circulated in hopes of qualifying for
the ballot are not covered by current law. As a result,
millions of LEP voters [are] excluded from playing a role
in determining what initiatives qualify for the ballot.
As the initiative system continues to play an important
role in setting policy in California, it is imperative that
we provide initiative material in languages set by the
Federal Voting Rights Act. SB 654 will allow LEP voters to
fully participate in the initiative process by requiring
the Attorney General to translate the title and summary of
the proposed initiative or referendum, or the recall
petition, as applicable, into the applicable languages
covered in that county.
2)Voting Rights Act of 1965 : The 15th Amendment to the United
States Constitution provides, in part, "[t]he right of
citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or
abridged by the United States or by any state on account of
race, color, or previous condition of servitude."
Additionally, the 15th Amendment authorizes Congress to enact
legislation to enforce its provisions.
Congress determined that the existing federal
anti-discrimination laws were not sufficient to overcome the
resistance by state officials to enforce the 15th Amendment.
As a result, Congress passed and President Johnson signed the
SB 654
Page 7
VRA. The VRA provides, among other provisions, that "[n]o
voting qualification or prerequisite to voting, or standard,
practice, or procedure shall be imposed or applied by any
State or political subdivision to deny or abridge that right
of any citizen of the United States to vote on account of race
or color."
In 1975, Congress adopted the language minority provisions of
Sections 4(f)(4) and 203 of the VRA. Congress extended these
provisions in 1982, 1992, and 2006. Sections 4(f)(4) and 203
of the VRA require certain jurisdictions with significant
populations of voting age citizens who belong to a language
minority community to provide voting materials in a language
other than English.
Specifically, Sections 203 and 4(f)(4) require that when a
covered state or political subdivision "[p]rovides
registration or voting notices, forms, instructions,
assistance, or other materials or information relating to the
electoral process, including ballots, it shall provide them in
the language of the applicable minority group as well as in
the English language."
3)New Census Data : On October 13, 2011, the U.S. Census Bureau
released a notice of determination of minority language status
following the 2010 census. Based on the findings, several
California counties will be required to provide materials to
voters in new or additional languages. Pursuant to Section
203, the State of California is required to provide bilingual
voting assistance to Spanish speakers. Additionally, pursuant
to Section 203, 27 of California's 58 counties are
individually required to provide bilingual voting assistance
to Spanish speakers, and eight counties (Alameda, Los Angeles,
Orange, Sacramento, San Diego, San Francisco, San Mateo, and
Santa Clara) are required to provide voting materials in at
least one language other than English and Spanish. Pursuant
to Section 4(f)(4) of the Act, three counties are required to
provide bilingual voting assistance to Spanish speakers,
though two of those counties are also required to provide
assistance pursuant to Section 203. In total, 28 of
California's 58 counties are required to provide voting
materials in at least one language other than English.
Below is the breakdown of the covered counties and minority
languages according to the Federal Register from last year.
SB 654
Page 8
Statewide: Spanish
Alameda: Chinese, Spanish, Tagalog, Vietnamese
Colusa: Spanish
Contra Costa: Spanish
Fresno: Spanish
Glenn: Spanish
Imperial: Spanish
Kern: Spanish
Kings: Spanish
Los Angeles: Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Thai, Khmer, Hindi,
Spanish, Tagalog,
Vietnamese
Madera: Spanish
Merced: Spanish
Napa: Spanish
Orange: Chinese, Korean, Spanish, Vietnamese
Riverside: Spanish
Sacramento: Chinese, Spanish
San Benito: Spanish
San Bernardino: Spanish
San Diego: Chinese, Spanish, Tagalog, Vietnamese
San Francisco: Chinese, Spanish
San Joaquin: Spanish
San Mateo: Chinese, Spanish
Santa Barbara: Spanish
Santa Clara: Chinese, Spanish, Tagalog, Vietnamese
Stanislaus: Spanish
Tulare: Spanish
Ventura: Spanish
The requirement that election materials be translated does not
extend to initiative and referendum materials or recall
petitions prior to qualification for the ballot.
4)Logistics : Current law requires the SOS to translate all
qualified ballot titles and summaries for the state voter
pamphlet, consequently the SOS already has an established
administrative process in place for translating the ballot
title and summaries. However, this bill instead places the
translation requirement on the AG, resulting in a new duty for
the AG. The committee may wish to consider how this new
process would logistically work. For example, if the AG
translates the circulating title and summary for an initiative
that ends up qualifying for the ballot - would the SOS still
SB 654
Page 9
be responsible for translating the title and summary for the
state voter pamphlet or would the translation from the AG's
office be used instead? How would that situation be
reconciled? The committee may wish to consider whether it
would be more appropriate for the SOS to prepare the
translations required by this bill.
5)Practical Application : Proponents of the bill argue that
limited English proficient voters are left out of the process
of determining which measures qualify for the ballot. This
bill, by requiring proponents to provide the AG a list of the
counties in which the proposed measures will be circulated,
will incorporate limited English proficient voters. For
example, if proponents want to collect signatures on a
proposed initiative in Sacramento County, the AG would be
required to translate the circulating title and summary into
both Spanish and Chinese. Moreover, proponents who are
soliciting signatures for a proposed statewide initiative or
referendum, would theoretically find it necessary, due to its
large population, to solicit signatures for any statewide
proposed measure in Los Angeles County. Consequently, the AG
would be required to translate the title and summary into
approximately 9 different languages and the cost of those
translations would be absorbed by the state.
Additionally, as mentioned above, this bill requires the
proponents, if they intend to circulate the initiative or
referendum measure petition, to submit to the AG a list of the
counties in which the petition will be circulated that are
covered under the federal minority language laws.
Subsequently, this bill requires the AG to prepare
translations of the circulating title and summaries of the
proposed measures. However, what happens if the proponents
decide to add a county that was left off their initial list?
Will the proponents be required to start the process all over
again or could they submit a secondary request? The committee
may wish to consider whether requiring the AG to translate the
circulating titles and summaries into every language would
make for a more efficient and seamless process for both the AG
and the proponents of the proposed measures.
6)Costs : Current law requires an initiative measure to be
translated in its entirety, including title and summary, for
the official state voter information guide, if it qualifies
for the ballot. Therefore, measures that qualify for the
SB 654
Page 10
ballot do not present an additional cost to the state. This
bill would require the translations of the title and summary
to occur earlier in the initiative process. However,
translations for an initiative or referendum measure or a
recall petition prior to qualification for the ballot will
represent new costs. According to background information
provided by the author's office, the Office of State
Publishing, which translates and prints the official state
voter information guide for the SOS, incurred the following
costs for translation services for 2012 primary and general
elections:
Spanish: 21 cents per English word ($21 for 100
word title/summary)
Japanese: 24 cents per English word ($24 for 100
word title/summary)
Chinese: 24 cents per English word ($24 for 100
word title/summary)
Vietnamese: 24 cents per English word ($24 for 100 word
title/summary)
Korean: 24 cents per English word ($24 for 100
word title/summary)
Tagalog: 24 cents per English word ($24 for 100
word title/summary)
Asian Indian (Hindi):35 cents per English word ($35 for 100
word title/summary)
Thai: 30 cents per English word ($30 for 100
word title/summary)
Khmer: 24 cents per English word ($24 for 100
word title/summary)
As noted above, eight counties are currently required to
translate election materials in one language other than
English and Spanish. The committee may wish to consider
whether the current $200 filing fee for submitting a proposed
initiative measure to the AG for the title and summary should
be raised commensurately to cover the additional costs of
translations.
7)Recall Petitions : This measure requires the SOS to translate
recall petitions for state officers. As a result, the entire
recall petition, including the explanation for the recall
effort, the officer's response to the recall, as well as other
aspects on the petition, would be required to be translated.
Although there has been a low frequency of state officer
SB 654
Page 11
recalls - approximately 10 attempts in the last decade, two of
which qualified for the ballot - this bill nonetheless would
result in a new duty for the SOS. However, as mentioned
above, the SOS already has an established administrative
process in place for translating qualified ballot titles and
summaries for the voter pamphlet and the SOS is already
involved in the recall petition process, consequently, this
new duty may not be significantly burdensome.
8)Proposed Amendment : Current law requires the AG to provide a
copy of the circulating title and summary to the SOS within 15
days after receipt of the final version of a proposed
initiative measure, or if a fiscal estimate is to be included,
within the 15 days after receipt of the fiscal estimate
prepared by the DOF and the JLBC, which have 25 days to
prepare the fiscal estimate. In addition, current law
requires the AG to provide a copy of the circulating title and
summary of a proposed referendum measure to the proponents of
the measure and the SOS within 10 days after receipt of the
proposed referendum. Existing law states that the date the
copy of the circulating title and summary is delivered or
mailed to the proponents is the "official summary date." This
bill deletes the requirement that the AG provide a copy of the
circulating title and summary of a proposed initiative or
referendum measure, as specified, to the SOS, and instead
requires the AG to provide a copy only to the proponents.
According to the SOS's office, this change would be
problematic as it delays the date by which the SOS receives
the English language version of the title and summary. The
date on which the English language version is delivered to the
proponents is the official summary date upon which deadlines
are triggered. Moreover, on the official summary date, or
within one business day, the SOS determines the official
calendar of deadlines for the initiative or referendum
petitions and informs the proponents, county elections
officials, and the public of the calendar. This bill, which
delays the date by which the SOS receives the title and
summary until after the translations have been completed will
extend that process by 15 days. Consequently, the committee
staff recommends amending this bill to ensure the SOS would
receive the English language version of the title and summary
on the same date as the proponents and require the official
summary date to begin once the AG has completed the
translations and submitted the translated title and summaries
to the SOS and the proponents. This will ensure the SOS,
SB 654
Page 12
which serves as a clearinghouse for information on state
initiatives and referendums, receives the English version of
the circulating title and summary and can begin the process of
creating the calendar of deadlines and informing county
elections officials and the public. In addition, the
amendment will ensure the official summary date is determined
after the translations are complete thereby not delaying the
process.
While the author has agreed to accept this amendment as an
author's amendment, due to a timing issue, this proposed
amendment will not be taken in the Assembly Elections and
Redistricting Committee and instead will be taken in the
Assembly Appropriations Committee if the bill passes out of
this committee.
9)Arguments in Support : The Greenlining Institute, the sponsor
of this bill, writes in support.
Over 2.6 million eligible voters in California are limited
English proficient (LEP), including over 47% of naturalized
citizens, all of whom are excluded from our so-called
"citizen democracy." The Federal Voting Rights Act of
1965, acknowledging that language barriers can be a form of
discrimination and intimidation in the electoral process,
requires such programs as bilingual poll workers and
translated voting materials to facilitate participation by
LEP voters. Under this law, California already must
provide translated voting materials in up to nine
languages: Chinese, Hindi, Japanese, Khmer (Cambodian),
Korean, Spanish, Tagalog, Thai, and Vietnamese. This
assistance is not currently provided in the initiative
system?
By providing language-accessible initiative petitions, SB
654 would promote greater civic participation among LEP
voters and help to protect LEP voters against undue
manipulation by paid signature-gathers, who may speak the
voter's language but misstate the details of a petition.
10)Previous Legislation : SB 1233 (Padilla) of 2012, which was
substantially similar to this bill, was vetoed by Governor
Brown. In his veto message, the Governor stated that while
the "provisions of this bill are well intended.
Unfortunately, however, they add substantial burdens to the
SB 654
Page 13
petition process without commensurate benefit. I would also
note that the vast majority of initiatives submitted to the
Attorney General's Office never get to the circulation stage."
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
The Greenlining Institute (sponsor)
American Civil Liberties Union of California
Asian Law Caucus
Asian Pacific American Legal Center
Asian Pacific Environmental Network
California Association of Nonprofits
California Calls
California Communities United Institute
California Immigrant Policy Center
California Labor Federation
California Nurses Association
California Teachers Association
Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights of the San Francisco Bay
Area
League of Women Voters of California
MapLight
Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund
National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials
Opposition
None on file.
Analysis Prepared by : Nichole Becker / E. & R. / (916)
319-2094