BILL ANALYSIS Ó AB 700 Page 1 Date of Hearing: January 21, 2015 ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS Jimmy Gomez, Chair AB 700 (Gomez) - As Amended January 14, 2016 ----------------------------------------------------------------- |Policy |Elections and Redistricting |Vote:|4 - 2 | |Committee: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |-------------+-------------------------------+-----+-------------| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |-------------+-------------------------------+-----+-------------| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | ----------------------------------------------------------------- Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: YesReimbursable: No SUMMARY: This bill amends the Political Reform Act (PRA) to enhance disclosure requirements for campaign advertisements supporting or opposing state or local ballot measures or candidates. AB 700 Page 2 Specifically, this bill: 1)Requires campaign advertisements supporting or opposing a candidate or ballot measure via radio, telephone (robocall), video (including television), print, or electronic media, to identify the committee paying for the advertisement and the committee's top three contributors (top single funder only for radio and telephone) of $50,000 or more. The specific means of disclosure are detailed in the bill for each respective medium. 2)Stipulates that the (1) does not apply to an advertisement paid for by a political party committee or a candidate controlled committee established for elective office of the controlling candidate. 3)Repeals existing, conflicting disclosure requirements for campaign advertisements. FISCAL EFFECT: The Fair Political Practices Commission will incur annual General Fund costs of around $350,000 for three positions to promulgate regulations, update educational materials, process increased requests for advice, provide additional enforcement, and for potential litigation over the bill's provisions or the resulting regulations. COMMENTS: 1)Purpose. According to the author, AB 700 will dramatically improve disclosure on who has paid for ballot measure ads and AB 700 Page 3 ads about candidates. Knowing the source of funds for ads will prevent voters from being deceived about who is truly paying for it, help voters better evaluate the credibility and content of ads, and promote greater confidence in the electoral process. 2)Prior Legislation. SB 52 (Leno) of 2014, which enhanced disclosure requirements for advertisements supporting or opposing ballot measures, was referred to the Assembly Inactive File. AB 1148 (Brownely) and AB 1648 (Brownley) of 2012 both placed new disclosure requirements on advertisement supporting or opposing ballot measures or candidates. AB 1148 failed passage in the Assembly and AB 1648 was approved by the Assembly, but was not heard by the Senate. Analysis Prepared by:Chuck Nicol / APPR / (916) 319 - 2081