BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON ELECTIONS
AND CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS
Senator Norma J. Torres, Chair
BILL NO: SB 1103 HEARING DATE: 4/22/14
AUTHOR: PADILLA ANALYSIS BY: Darren Chesin
AMENDED: AS INTRODUCED
FISCAL: YES
SUBJECT
Political Reform Act: candidacy for state office
DESCRIPTION
Existing law , pursuant to the Political Reform Act (PRA),
requires an individual to file a statement of intention to be a
candidate for an elective office, signed under penalty of
perjury, prior to soliciting or receiving a contribution or
loan.
Existing law also requires the individual to establish one
campaign contribution account, as specified, upon filing the
statement of intention to be a candidate. Furthermore, all
contributions or loans made to the candidate, to a person on
behalf of the candidate, or to the candidate's controlled
committee must be deposited in the account. Any personal funds
that will be utilized to promote the election of the candidate
must also be deposited in the account prior to expenditure and
all campaign expenditures must be made from the account.
Existing law prohibits an individual from filing nomination
papers for more than one office at the same election but does
not prohibit an individual from filing a statement of intention
and establishing a campaign contribution account for more than
one office at the same election.
This bill would not prohibit an individual from filing more than
one statement of intention for more than one office at the same
election but it would provide that if an individual has already
filed a statement of intention to be a candidate for an elective
state office, the subsequent filing of a statement of intention
to be a candidate for a different elective state office to be
voted upon at the same election would constitute a revocation of
the previously filed statement and it would prohibit the
individual thereafter from soliciting or receiving a
contribution or loan for the office associated with the first
statement filed.
This bill would also provide that if an individual has
established campaign contribution accounts for multiple elective
state offices that are to be voted upon at the same election,
the individual shall deposit contributions only into the
campaign contribution account associated with the most recently
filed statement of intention to be a candidate.
Existing law does not prohibit an individual from filing a
statement of intention to be a candidate for elective state
office at an election occurring after the next time that office
will appear on the ballot (e.g. it is currently permissible to
file a statement to be a candidate for state office for the
2018, 2020, 2022 etc. elections even though the office will next
appear on the 2016 ballot).
This bill would prohibit an individual from filing, and the
Secretary of State from accepting, a statement of intention to
be a candidate for an elective state office at an election other
than the election at which that elective state office will next
appear on the ballot.
BACKGROUND
Statements of Intention vs. Nomination Papers . A statement of
intention to be a candidate for an elective office is intended
to disclose an individual's intent to start raising campaign
contributions toward seeking a particular office. Nomination
papers, including declarations of candidacy, are filed with
elections officials in order for the individual's name to appear
on the ballot as an actual candidate for the office.
Ramifications on Contribution Limits . As stated below, the
author contends that permitting individuals to raise campaign
contributions for more than one office appearing on the same
ballot could be viewed as a way to circumvent the applicable
contribution limits in place for the individual offices.
Currently, the limits for campaign contributions to candidates
for elective state office are as follows:
To a candidate for elective state office other than a
SB 1103 PADILLA
Page 2
candidate for statewide elective office, no person may
contribute more than $4,100 per election and no small
contributor committee may contribute more than $8,200 per
election;
To a candidate for elective statewide office other than a
candidate for Governor, no person may contribute more than
$6,800 per election and no small contributor committee may
contribute more than $13,600 per election;
To a candidate for Governor, no person or small contributor
committee may contribute more than $27,200 per election.
Existing law requires the Fair Political Practices Commission
(FPPC) to adjust these contribution limits biannually to reflect
any increase or decrease in the Consumer Price Index.
COMMENTS
1.According to the Author : There is a need to build and restore
government trust in the election process. The belief that
money buys influence from elected legislators has led to laws
that attempt to diminish it. Currently, the PRA limits
campaign contributions to $4,100 per person for candidates or
office holders that are running for California State Senate
and Assembly. Candidates for statewide constitutional offices
have contribution limits of $6,800 per person with the
exception of the Governor who has a limit of $26,000. Despite
the limits, an individual who decides to open two candidate
controlled committees can cumulatively generate more money
than what is legally permitted and undermine the effectiveness
of existing campaign contribution limits. Individuals may
receive funding in two different committees from the same
source while spending for one campaign while it benefits
another one.
Currently, it is legal to declare an intention to run for more
than one office at a time. By simply expressing the intention
to run for multiple offices an official may open multiple
campaign committees. These multiple campaign committees can
potentially be used to cumulatively raise far in excess of the
established campaign contribution limits.
2.Some "Double Dipping" OK . As stated above, the author
SB 1103 PADILLA
Page 3
contends that permitting individuals to raise campaign
contributions for more than one office appearing on the same
ballot could be viewed as a way to circumvent the applicable
contribution limits in place for the individual offices.
However, this bill would not prohibit, for instance, an
individual from raising campaign contributions for a
legislative office scheduled to appear on the 2016 ballot
while simultaneously raising contributions for a statewide
office scheduled to appear on the 2018 ballot.
3.The Ted Gaines Paradox . Senator Ted Gaines was elected to the
Senate in a special run-off election held on January 4, 2011.
However, the special primary election for that race was
consolidated with the November 2, 2010 Statewide General
Election at which then-Assemblymember Gaines also appeared on
the ballot as a candidate for re-election to the Assembly.
This was not the first time such a situation had occurred.
While existing law prohibits an individual from filing
nomination papers for more than one office at the same
election this somewhat rare situation is permitted because the
regular election and the consolidated special election are
legally considered two different elections that just happen to
occur on the same day. Ergo, the restrictions imposed by this
bill would presumably not apply to candidates who might appear
twice on the same ballot under the same circumstances.
POSITIONS
Sponsor: Author
Support: None received
Oppose: None received
SB 1103 PADILLA
Page 4