AB 2296, as introduced, Low. Digital signatures.
Existing law authorizes the use of a digital signature in any written communication with a public entity, and specifies that in those communications, the use of a digital signature has the same force and effect as the use of a manual signature if it complies with specified requirements.
This bill would express the intent of the Legislature to enact legislation that would clarify that a digital signature may be used to satisfy the requirements of an electronic signature under the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act.
Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: no. State-mandated local program: no.
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
(a) The Legislature hereby finds and declares
2all of the following:
3(1) California is a world leader in innovation and harnessing
4the power of new technologies to promote efficiency, consumer
5benefits, and economic growth.
P2 1(2) The Internet and digital technologies enable government to
2provide services to the public and to transact business more
3efficiently than with paper-based processes.
4(3) In 1995, in order to promote e-commerce and digital
5transactions with public agencies, California enacted Section 16.5
6of the Government Code, which authorizes use of a “digital
7signature” in any
written communication with a public agency in
8which a signature is required or used, consistent with regulations
9to be adopted by the Secretary of State.
10(4) In 1999, California enacted the Uniform Electronic
11Transactions Act (Title 2.5 (commencing with Section 1633.2) of
12Part 2 of Division 3 of the Civil Code), which provides that an
13“electronic signature” is valid and enforceable under any law that
14requires a signature in any transaction between two or more
15persons, including a government agency.
16(5) The definition of “digital signature” in Section 16.5 of the
17Government Code and the definition of “electronic signature” in
18the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act are similar, and neither
19statute includes any cross-reference to the other, leading to
20confusion in the marketplace and among public agencies as to
21what law governs.
22(6) A lack of clarity in the law creates a barrier to public
23agencies utilizing fully digital transactions that require a signature,
24including contracts, permits, and forms to obtain service or
25participate in government programs. As a result, both government
26and the public may not realize the benefits of digital transactions
27and online services, including efficiency, cost savings,
28convenience, and paper reduction.
29(b) It is the intent of the Legislature to enact legislation that
30would amend current law to clarify that a “digital signature”
31authorized by Section 16.5 of the Government Code and subject
32to regulations adopted by the Secretary of State is one type of
33“electronic signature” that a public agency may choose to adopt
34under the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act.
O
99