BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                  ACA 14
                                                                  Page  1

          Date of Hearing:  June 23, 2009

                  ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON ELECTIONS AND REDISTRICTING
                                  Paul Fong, Chair
                ACA 14 (Hernandez) - As Introduced:  February 27, 2009
           
          SUBJECT  :  Initiative measures.

           SUMMARY  :  Prohibits more than five initiative measures from  
          appearing on the ballot at any statewide election.   
          Specifically,  this measure  :  

          1)Limits the number of initiative measures that may appear on  
            the ballot at a general election or a statewide special  
            election to not more than five measures.

          2)Provides that priority for placement on a ballot shall be  
            assigned chronologically, based on the date an initiative  
            measure qualifies for the ballot.

          3)Provides that an initiative measure that qualifies for the  
            ballot after the five measure limit for an election has been  
            reached shall not appear on the ballot at a subsequent  
            election, but provides that a new initiative measure  
            containing the same or a similar proposal may qualify to  
            appear on the ballot at a future election.

           EXISTING LAW  requires the Secretary of State to submit an  
          initiative measure to the voters at the next statewide election  
          held at least 131 days after the measure qualifies for the  
          ballot.

           FISCAL EFFECT  :  Unknown

           COMMENTS  :   

           1)Purpose of the Constitutional Amendment  :  According to the  
            author:

               A Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) survey in  
               November 2008 revealed that a majority of California voters  
               are overwhelmed by the number of ballot measures set before  
               them.  The State's current initiative process puts no  
               limits on the number of ballot measures an election may  
               generate and provides little or biased information about  








                                                                  ACA 14
                                                                  Page  2

               the proposal.

               ACA 14 places a limit on the number of initiative measures  
               on each statewide ballot to five.  Initiative measures  
               would be prioritized according to the date of  
               qualification.  

               Placing restrictions on the number of measures per ballot  
               would allow voters an opportunity to thoroughly consider  
               each proposal.  Since California's adoption of the ballot  
               initiative in 1911, over 300 ballot initiatives have been  
               voted on.  Some of these measures have asked voters to  
               consider important state policy impacting property taxes,  
               immigration, affirmative action, definition of marriage,  
               term limits, etc. It is crucial for California's well-being  
               that voters are informed before making decisions on these  
               important issues.

           2)Ballots Frequently Contain More than Five Initiative Measures  :  
             Since 2000, California has held 14 statewide elections, and  
            have voted on a total of 63 statewide initiatives - an average  
            of 4.5 initiatives per statewide election.  Five of those 14  
            elections have contained more than five initiatives - eight in  
            March 2000, 11 in March 2004, eight at the 2005 statewide  
            special election, eight in November 2006, and 10 at last  
            year's general election.  

          As a result, while the limit proposed by this constitutional  
            amendment of no more than 5 initiatives per statewide ballot  
            is roughly in line with the average number of initiative  
            measures that have been considered by voters at each statewide  
            election over the last decade, this constitutional amendment  
            could have significant impacts at certain elections by  
            delaying or preventing altogether the appearance of certain  
            initiative measures on the ballot.  
           
           3)No Limit on Number of Propositions  :  While this constitutional  
            amendment does propose to limit the number of  initiatives  that  
            can appear on the ballot at any single statewide election, it  
            does not limit the number of ballot measures that can appear  
            on the ballot at an election.  As such, this measure would not  
            limit the number of constitutional amendments, bond measures,  
            or initiative amendments that the Legislature could place on  
            the ballot at any single election, nor would it limit the  
            number of referenda that could appear on the ballot.  








                                                                 ACA 14
                                                                  Page  3

           
           4)Crowding Out Initiatives  ?  Under this constitutional  
            amendment, when more than five initiatives qualify to appear  
            on the ballot at the next statewide election, the  
            determination of which initiatives will appear on that ballot  
            is based on the chronological order in which the measures  
            qualified for the ballot - the first five initiatives to  
            qualify appear on the ballot, while any initiatives that  
            qualify subsequent to those five do not appear on the ballot  
            at the next statewide election and proponents must collect  
            signatures again if they wish for that initiative measure to  
            appear on the ballot at a future election.  As a result, this  
            system could create incentives for groups or individuals to  
            qualify initiatives for the ballot for the sole purpose of  
            preventing other initiatives from appearing on the ballot.   
            For instance, if four initiatives had already qualified for  
            the ballot at the next statewide election and an individual  
            submitted an initiative for title and summary that was  
            vehemently opposed by a specific industry, that industry could  
            prevent the initiative from appearing on the ballot by  
            submitting their own initiative and collecting signatures more  
            quickly, or by funding a signature gathering drive on any  
            other initiative that had already been submitted.

           5)Increasing Initiative Costs  ?  In addition to potentially  
            creating incentives for groups and individuals to support  
            initiative measures simply for the purpose of crowding out  
            other initiative measures, this constitutional amendment could  
            significantly increase costs for gathering signatures on  
            petitions for elections where a large number of initiatives  
            are attempting to qualify for the ballot.  For instance, if  
            there are 12 initiatives for which petitions are circulating,  
            this constitutional amendment would put pressure on the  
            proponents of each of those 12 measures to qualify their  
            measure for the ballot before the five-initiative limit was  
            reached.  This could benefit the initiative proponents who  
            were able to pay the highest amount to signature gatherers,  
            while disadvantaging grassroots or lower-budget initiative  
            efforts.  
           
           6)Arguments in Opposition  :  In opposition to this measure,  
            Capitol Resource Family Impact expresses concern that "[i]f  
            only 5 initiatives are allowed on the ballot, many grassroots  
            initiatives would rarely be on the ballot.  Instead,  
            initiatives financed by well-funded companies or organizations  








                                                                  ACA 14
                                                                  Page  4

            would get their initiatives qualified first, leaving off the  
            lesser funded but grassroots supported measures."  
           
           7)Approval of Voters  :  As a constitutional amendment, this  
            measure requires the approval of the voters to take effect.

           REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION  :   

           Support 
           
          None on file.

           Opposition 
           
          Capitol Resource Family Impact
           
          Analysis Prepared by  :    Ethan Jones / E. & R. / (916) 319-2094