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