BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



                                                                    AB 1494


                                                                    Page  1





          Date of Hearing:  January 21, 2016


                        ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS


                                 Jimmy Gomez, Chair


          AB  
          1494 (Levine) - As Amended January 14, 2016


           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Policy       |Elections and Redistricting    |Vote:|4 - 3        |
          |Committee:   |                               |     |             |
          |             |                               |     |             |
          |             |                               |     |             |
          |-------------+-------------------------------+-----+-------------|
          |             |                               |     |             |
          |             |                               |     |             |
          |             |                               |     |             |
          |-------------+-------------------------------+-----+-------------|
          |             |                               |     |             |
          |             |                               |     |             |
          |             |                               |     |             |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 


          Urgency:  No  State Mandated Local Program:  NoReimbursable:  No


          SUMMARY:


          This bill:


          1)Provides an exemption to current law, which prohibits a voter  








                                                                    AB 1494


                                                                    Page  2





            from showing his or her completed ballot to another person, by  
            allowing a voter to take a photograph or digital image of his  
            or her marked ballot and distribute or share the photograph or  
            image using social media or by any other means.


          2)Stipulates that the activity allowed in (1) shall not be used  
            to coerce or intimidate a voter, impede a voter's ability to  
            vote, cause voter delay in a polling place, disrupt a polling  
            place, or result in a monetary or tangible benefit for any  
            purpose.


          FISCAL EFFECT:


          Negligible fiscal impact.


          COMMENTS:


          1)Background and Purpose. The California Elections Code contains  
            a number of provisions that are intended to protect the  
            secrecy of voting. Perhaps most relevant for the purposes of  
            this bill, state law (first enacted in 1891) prohibits a voter  
            from showing his or her ballot to any person in such a way as  
            to reveal the ballot's contents after it has been marked.   
            This provision can protect a voter from being coerced or  
            intimidated into showing his or her marked ballot, thereby  
            safeguarding the voter's right to cast a secret ballot.  This  
            provision also protects against vote buying schemes by  
            prohibiting a voter from providing proof of his or her vote  
            selections. The Secretary of State's office indicates that  
            they have no records of a voter ever having been prosecuted in  
            the state for showing his or her marked ballot to another  
            person.










                                                                    AB 1494


                                                                    Page  3





            This bill would expressly provide that the existing law  
            prohibiting a voter from showing his or her completed ballot  
            to another person does not prohibit a person from taking a  
            photograph of his or her completed ballot and sharing that  
            photograph.  According to the author, "Social media is a great  
            tool for voters to share their civic participation. California  
            law should encourage voter pride, political speech, and civic  
            engagement through social media."


          2)Opposition. The Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association states,  
            "Any process that has the potential to alter the integrity of  
            the ballot should be refrained from.  Current law on this  
            subject is unambiguous and there is no compelling reason to  
            diminish that clarity at the potential risk of one's privacy."


          Analysis Prepared by:Chuck Nicol / APPR. / (916)  
          319-2081