BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 44
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB
44 (Mullin)
As Amended April 27, 2015
Majority vote
-------------------------------------------------------------------
|Committee |Votes |Ayes |Noes |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|----------------+------+---------------------+---------------------|
|Elections |6-0 |Ridley-Thomas, | |
| | |Grove, Gatto, | |
| | |Gordon, Mullin, | |
| | |Perea | |
| | | | |
|----------------+------+---------------------+---------------------|
|Appropriations |17-0 |Gomez, Bigelow, | |
| | |Bonta, Calderon, | |
| | |Chang, Daly, Eggman, | |
| | |Gallagher, | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | |Eduardo Garcia, | |
| | |Gordon, Holden, | |
| | |Jones, Quirk, | |
| | |Rendon, Wagner, | |
| | |Weber, Wood | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
-------------------------------------------------------------------
AB 44
Page 2
SUMMARY: Creates a new state-funded recount process, as
specified. Specifically, this bill:
1)Permits any voter to request a state-funded manual recount of
all votes cast for a statewide office or state ballot measure,
as specified, if any of the following occurs:
a) The official canvass of returns in a statewide primary
election shows that the difference in the number of votes
received by the second and third place candidates for a
statewide office is less than or equal to the lesser of one
thousand votes or 0.015% of the number of all votes cast for
that office;
b) The official canvass of returns in a statewide general
election shows that the difference in the number of votes
received by the two candidates receiving the greatest number
of votes for a statewide office is less than or equal to the
lesser of one thousand votes or 0.015% of the number of all
votes cast for that office; or,
c) The official canvass of returns in a statewide election
shows that the difference in the number of votes cast for and
against a state ballot measure is less than or equal to the
lesser of one thousand votes or 0.015% of the number of all
votes cast on the measure.
2)Prohibits another recount from being conducted if a state-funded
recount is conducted pursuant to the provisions of this bill.
3)Requires the state to reimburse counties for costs resulting
from conducting a manual recount, pursuant to this bill, in an
AB 44
Page 3
expeditious manner upon the certification of those costs.
4)Requires a county elections official, while conducting a recount
pursuant to the provisions of this bill, to also review ballots
rejected in accordance with existing law to ensure that no
ballots were improperly discarded during the initial canvass.
5)Requires the elections official in each county to complete a
state-funded recount as specified.
6)Requires the Secretary of State (SOS), no later than January 1,
2018, to adopt regulations establishing uniform guidelines for
charges a county elections official may impose when conducting a
manual recount.
7)Requires a county elections official, if more than one voter
requests a recount for the same office, slate of presidential
electors, or measure, and at least one request is for a manual
recount, to conduct only one manual recount of the ballots
subject to recount, the result of which shall be controlling.
8)Repeals provisions of law that permitted a voter who files a
declaration requesting a recount to select whether the recount
is conducted manually, or by means of the voting system used
originally, or both and instead requires a voter who files a
declaration requesting a recount to only select whether the
recount is conducted manually, or by means of the voting system
used originally. Permits a county to recount vote by mail (VBM)
and provisional ballots in a manner other than that requested by
the voter.
9)Provides that if an office, slate of presidential electors, or
measure are voted on statewide, the results of any recount will
AB 44
Page 4
be declared null and void if each vote cast statewide for the
office, slates, or measure is not recounted.
10)Contains a January 1, 2023, sunset date for the state-funded
manual recount provisions of this bill.
11)Prohibits the SOS from certifying or conditionally approving a
voting system that cannot facilitate the conduct of a ballot
level comparison risk-limiting audit, as specified.
FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee, state costs to reimburse counties for a state-funded
recount would depend in part on the number of votes cast for the
particular office or measure, but would likely be from a few
million dollars to several million dollars per recount.
COMMENTS: According to the author, "In the June 2014 primary,
former Assembly Speaker John Pérez trailed Board of Equalization
Member Betty Yee by only 481 votes out of roughly four million.
This very narrow margin prompted him to request a recount, which
current law permits. When he did so, deep flaws in California's
existing recount process were revealed: it allows statewide
results to be overturned by a partial recount and it favors
candidates who can afford to pay?
"AB 44 creates a more equitable elections process by authorizing a
state-funded option for recounts, available at or below a
threshold of 1,000 votes or 0.015 percent, whichever is smaller.
When this option is utilized, the state will fund a full hand
recount of all ballots cast, while also re-examining any rejected
ballots. When the state-funded threshold is not met, the bill
permits candidates to fund their own statewide recounts,
reimbursing them if the original results are overturned. Ensuring
accurate election outcomes should be a priority for the state, and
AB 44
Page 5
by creating a state-funded option for very close contests, AB 44
accomplishes this important goal."
Please see the policy committee analysis for a full discussion on
this bill.
Analysis Prepared by:
Nichole Becker / E. & R. / (916) 319-2094 FN:
0000620