BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



                                                                    AB 1494


                                                                    Page  1





          ASSEMBLY THIRD READING


          AB  
          1494 (Levine)


          As Amended  January 14, 2016


          Majority vote


           ------------------------------------------------------------------ 
          |Committee       |Votes|Ayes                  |Noes                |
          |                |     |                      |                    |
          |                |     |                      |                    |
          |                |     |                      |                    |
          |----------------+-----+----------------------+--------------------|
          |Elections       |4-3  |Ridley-Thomas,        |Harper, Travis      |
          |                |     |Gordon, Mullin,       |Allen, Gatto        |
          |                |     |Nazarian              |                    |
          |                |     |                      |                    |
          |----------------+-----+----------------------+--------------------|
          |Appropriations  |14-3 |Gomez, Bloom,         |Bigelow, Jones,     |
          |                |     |Bonilla, Bonta,       |Wagner              |
          |                |     |Calderon, Chang,      |                    |
          |                |     |Daly, Eggman,         |                    |
          |                |     |Gallagher,            |                    |
          |                |     |                      |                    |
          |                |     |                      |                    |
          |                |     |Eduardo Garcia,       |                    |
          |                |     |Holden, Quirk, Weber, |                    |
          |                |     |Wood                  |                    |
          |                |     |                      |                    |
          |                |     |                      |                    |
           ------------------------------------------------------------------ 










                                                                    AB 1494


                                                                    Page  2





          SUMMARY:  Authorizes voters to take and share photographs of  
          their marked ballots.  Specifically, this bill:  


          1)Authorizes 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)Provides that a photograph or digital image taken and  
            distributed or shared pursuant to this bill 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.


          EXISTING LAW prohibits a voter from showing his or her ballot to  
          any person, after the ballot has been marked, in such a way as  
          to reveal the ballot's contents.


          FISCAL EFFECT:  According to the Assembly Appropriations  
          Committee, negligible fiscal impact.


          COMMENTS:  According to the author, "AB 1494 allows California  
          voters to take ballot selfies and post them on social media.  A  
          ballot selfie is a [digital] image of a person's marked ballot.   
          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.   
          Laws prohibiting photos of one's marked ballot were written  
          before sharing digital images over the internet was ubiquitous.   
          AB 1494 updates the law to reflect technology and the world in  
          which we now live."  


          California Constitution Article II, Section 7 provides, "Voting  








                                                                    AB 1494


                                                                    Page  3





          shall be secret."  Notably, while this constitutional provision  
          protects the right of a voter to cast a secret ballot, it also  
          reflects distinct state interests in keeping voting secret.   
          Requiring a secret ballot helps protect the integrity of the  
          voting process by making it impossible to verify the votes cast  
          by any single voter, thereby protecting against vote buying  
          schemes and voter intimidation or coercion.


          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, since at least  
          1891, state law has prohibited 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.  Furthermore, this provision 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.


          Two recent decisions by federal courts have questioned the  
          constitutionality of laws that make it illegal for voters to  
          take and share photographs of their marked ballots.  In both  
          cases, states had enacted laws that were specifically designed  
          to prohibit voters from taking photographs or digital images of  
          their ballots and distributing or sharing those images.


          In August 2015, the United States District Court for the  
          District of New Hampshire invalidated a New Hampshire law that  
          prohibits a voter from "taking a digital image or photograph of  
          his or her marked ballot and distributing or sharing the image  
          via social media or by any other means."  In its decision, the  
          court concluded that New Hampshire's law violated the First  








                                                                    AB 1494


                                                                    Page  4





          Amendment rights of voters by imposing "a content-based  
          restriction on speech that deprives voters of one of their most  
          powerful means of letting the world know how they voted."  An  
          appeal of that case is pending in the United States Court of  
          Appeals for the First Circuit.


          In October 2015, the United States District Court for the  
          Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division, enjoined  
          the enforcement of an Indiana law that makes it illegal for a  
          voter to take a digital image or photograph of his or her ballot  
          while in a polling place or other voting location, or to  
          distribute or share such an image by social media or other  
          means.  Much like in the New Hampshire case, the court noted  
          that Indiana had "failed to demonstrate any current, ongoing or  
          actual problem posed by or related to vote buying, much less a  
          problem shown to be based on the use of digital photography to  
          facilitate vote buying."  The court thus concluded that  
          Indiana's law violates the First Amendment of the United States  
          Constitution.


          By contrast to the laws in New Hampshire and Indiana that  
          specifically prohibited voters from taking photographs or  
          digital images of their ballots and distributing or sharing  
          those images, at least two states recently took steps to clarify  
          that "ballot selfies" are permitted.  In Utah, House Bill 72 of  
          2015 made it a misdemeanor for a person to take a photograph of  
          someone else's ballot at a polling place, but also expressly  
          allows an individual to share a photograph of his or her own  
          completed ballot.  Arizona's Senate Bill 1287 of 2015 prohibited  
          a person from taking photographs or videos within 75 feet of a  
          polling place, but also expressly allowed a voter to share an  
          electronic image of his or her own ballot.


          Please see the policy committee analysis for a full discussion  
          of this bill.









                                                                    AB 1494


                                                                    Page  5








          Analysis Prepared by:                                             
                          Ethan Jones / E. & R. / (916) 319-2094  FN:  
          0002569