BILL ANALYSIS
AB 2946
Page 1
GOVERNOR'S VETO
AB 2946 (Leno)
As Amended August 23, 2006
2/3 vote
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|ASSEMBLY: |48-32|(May 31, 2006) |SENATE: |21-13|(August 30, |
| | | | | |2006) |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|ASSEMBLY: |47-30|(August 31, | | | |
| | |2006) | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Original Committee Reference: E. & R.
SUMMARY : Prohibits the payment of an individual to collect
signatures on an initiative, referendum, or recall petition or
to register voters if that payment is on a per-signature or
per-registration basis. Specifically, this bill :
1)Makes it a misdemeanor for a person to pay or receive money or
any other thing of value based on the number of signatures
obtained on a state or local initiative, referendum, or recall
petition, based on the number of voter registration affidavits
obtained or completed, or based on the number of absentee
ballot applications obtained or completed. Provides that this
prohibition shall not be construed to prohibit payment for
signature gathering, voter registration, or absentee ballot
application distribution that is not based on the number of
signatures obtained or the number of affidavits or
applications obtained or completed.
2)Provides that any signatures collected in violation of any
provision of state law relating to the circulation of a
statewide initiative, referendum, or recall petition shall be
invalid and shall not count towards qualification of the
initiative, referendum or recall. Prohibits the doctrine of
substantial compliance from being used by any elections
AB 2946
Page 2
official or court to excuse a violation of state law relating
to the circulation of a statewide initiative, referendum, or
recall petition, except for non-substantive grammatical and
spelling errors.
3)Permits any state initiative, referendum, or recall proponent
to submit a petition to the Attorney General (AG) for approval
prior to circulation of the petition. Requires the AG to
notify the proponent within 10 days of whether or not the
petition complies with the requirements of the Elections Code.
4)Provides that if a proponent of a statewide initiative,
referendum, or recall petition has knowledge of a violation of
any provision of state law relating to the circulation of a
statewide initiative, referendum, or recall petition committed
by a person obtaining signatures on the proponent's petition,
the proponent shall be subject to a civil penalty in an amount
not exceeding the fine applicable to the violation committed
by the circulator. Provides that a proponent shall not be
liable if he or she notifies the Secretary of State within one
business day after the proponent obtains knowledge of a
potential violation.
5)Requires the ballot title and summary prepared by the AG to be
stated in complete sentences and written such that the average
voter will easily understand the purpose of the measure.
Requires the ballot label prepared by the AG to be stated in
complete sentences and written such that the average voter
will easily understand the purpose of the measure.
AB 2946
Page 3
The Senate amendments :
1)Delete a provision of the bill that required a state or local
initiative, referendum, or recall petition to contain a
disclosure statement identifying the three largest
contributors to the measure.
2)Delete a provision of the bill that required a state or local
initiative, referendum, or recall petition to indicate whether
it was being circulated by a paid signature gatherer or by a
volunteer.
3)Clarify that when a proponent of an initiative measure is held
liable for the unlawful conduct of one of his or her
circulators, the penalty shall be a fine not exceeding the
fine applicable to the violation committed by the circulator.
4)Add a severability clause.
AS PASSED BY THE ASSEMBLY , this bill was substantially similar
to the version approved by the Senate.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Senate Appropriations
Committee, enforcement costs potentially reaching $200,000
annually.
COMMENTS : According to the author, "The initiative process is
in desperate need of reform. Recent times have seen an increase
in the amount and complexity of petitions being circulated
throughout the state. The public is oftentimes asked to sign
petitions to qualify initiatives they know nothing about.
Frequently, signature gatherers are paid per signature. This
creates an incentive to lie or mislead the public as to what
they are really signing. Furthermore, when signature gatherers
are prosecuted for violations of the law, those who paid them,
trained them, and encouraged them to use deception and fraud are
not held responsible."
The Senate amendments to this bill removed various provisions of
this bill that were substantially similar to provisions in SB
1598 (Bowen), so as to avoid a conflict with that bill. SB 1598
AB 2946
Page 4
is pending a vote on concurrence in Assembly amendments on the
Senate Floor.
Please see the policy committee analysis for a full discussion
of this bill.
GOVERNOR'S VETO MESSAGE :
The California Constitution provides the People the
right to directly enact laws, approve amendments to
the Constitution, to reject laws passed by the
legislature and signed by the Governor, and to remove
those elected from office. As envisioned by Hiram
Johnson, this important democratic process gives the
people direct control over their government and is one
of our most important means to prevent out of control
special interests.
This measure is a direct assault on the People's right
to initiative, referendum and recall. By requiring
signatures to be held invalid if a petition has any
sort of defect, this bill would allow legal
technicalities to thwart the will of hundreds of
thousands of Californians who choose to sign
initiative petitions. This runs counter to the
longstanding judicial policy of applying a liberal
construction to the people's power of the initiative.
The prohibitions on per-signature payments will make
it more difficult for grass-roots organizations to get
the necessary signatures in the time allotted. As I
have said before making the process more difficult may
be fine for those opposed to the initiative process or
those who profit from it, but it is not for everyday
Californians with an idea for reform.
Analysis Prepared by: Ethan Jones / E. & R. / (916) 319-2094
AB 2946
Page 5
FN: 0017912