BILL ANALYSIS
ACA 20
Page 1
Date of Hearing: June 23, 2009
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON ELECTIONS AND REDISTRICTING
Paul Fong, Chair
ACA 20 (Niello) - As Introduced: March 31, 2009
SUBJECT : Elections: initiatives and referenda.
SUMMARY : Requires the Legislative Analyst's Office (LAO),
instead of the Attorney General (AG) to prepare the title and
summary for state initiatives and referenda. Specifically, this
measure :
1)Requires the LAO, instead of the AG, to prepare a title and
summary of the chief purpose and points of a proposed state
initiative or referendum measure.
2)Makes corresponding and technical changes.
EXISTING LAW constitutionally requires the AG to prepare a title
and summary of a state initiative or referendum measure before
petitions may be circulated for that measure.
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown
COMMENTS :
1)Purpose of the Constitutional Amendment : According to the
author:
The initiative process is an integral and vital component
of the democratic process in California and is being
exercised with increasing frequency. California statute
dictates that the Attorney General shall provide a ballot
and title and summary for each initiative, which will "give
a true and impartial statement of the purpose of the
measure in such language that the ballot title shall
neither argue, nor be likely to create prejudice, for or
against the proposed measure." It is important to maintain
the credibility of the initiative process with a non
persuasive ballot title and summary.
The soundness of our initiative process is compromised when
the ballot title and summary is partial. We need voters to
be able to vest their trust in a system that is fair and
ACA 20
Page 2
reliable. Unfortunately, ballot language is susceptible to
politicization, causing it to be inaccurate and misleading.
This leads to a confused and frustrated, rather than
educated and engaged, electorate. While initiatives
themselves are inherently political, the ballot title and
summary should not be.
An effective initiative process necessitates a non-partisan
entity without political pressures to draft the ballot
title and summary. ACA 20 transfers the authority to write
the ballot title and summary from the Attorney General's
Office to the Legislative Analyst's office. The LAO is a
non-partisan organization that provides credible and
impartial analysis for the Legislature. The LAO currently
provides an unbiased and honest analysis of each
initiative. With this new duty, the LAO will create a fair
and balanced ballot title and summary for each initiative.
This measure will assure California voters that they are
not being persuaded by partial or misleading information.
2)Is the LAO the Appropriate Entity to Prepare a Title &
Summary ? While the LAO currently plays a role in the
preparation of the fiscal estimate for state ballot measures,
and while the LAO is responsible for preparing an impartial
analysis (including a fiscal analysis) that appears in the
state ballot pamphlet for every state ballot measure that will
appear on the ballot, it is not clear that it is appropriate
to shift the duties of preparing the title and summary for
state initiatives and referenda to the LAO from the AG.
The purpose of a title and summary on an initiative or
referendum petition is to provide a short overview to voters
of the primary legal changes to existing law that would be
made by a measure. This is in contrast to the analysis
prepared by the LAO, in which the LAO examines the likely
impacts of a proposed policy change.
In that respect, one could argue that it is more appropriate
that the AG be the entity to prepare the title and summary,
since the AG is the chief lawyer of the state and has legal
expertise. The LAO, on the other hand, has a great deal of
expertise with respect to analyzing the impacts of proposed
policy changes, but does not have the level of legal expertise
that the AG does in the context of summarizing the legal
ACA 20
Page 3
changes that a measure would make.
3)LAO's Role in Preparation of Fiscal Estimates of Initiative
Measures : Existing state law provides that the Joint
Legislative Budget Committee (JLBC) and the Department of
Finance (DOF) are jointly responsible for preparing a fiscal
estimate for each state initiative measure that is submitted
for title and summary if the AG determines that the measure is
likely to have a fiscal impact on state or local governments.
However, existing state law also specifies that the JLBC and
the DOF may use a statement of fiscal impact prepared by the
LAO in the preparation of the fiscal estimate.
In practice, the LAO has taken a greater role in the preparation
of the fiscal estimate than one might assume based on existing
state statutes. When the DOF and JLBC receive a notice from
the AG requesting a fiscal analysis of an initiative measure,
the LAO usually takes the lead and begins the process of
investigative research, including how programs would be
affected and how possible passage and implementation would
impact the state as a whole. Once the LAO has completed this
investigative analysis, the DOF is contacted for review and
concurrence of the LAO's analysis. If the DOF concurs and
signs off on the LAO's work, the estimate is returned to the
AG for inclusion in the title and summary.
4)Related Legislation : AB 319 (Niello), which is a companion
measure to this constitutional amendment, would require the
LAO to prepare the title and summary for state initiatives and
referenda, the fiscal estimates for proposed state initiative
measures, and the ballot titles for state measures that will
appear on the ballot, and would substantially reduce the
amount of time allowed for the preparation of fiscal estimates
for proposed state initiative measures. AB 319 failed passage
in this committee on a 2-5 vote.
5)Previous Legislation : AB 2209 (Niello) of 2008 would have
required the LAO, instead of the AG, to prepare the title and
summary for state initiatives and referenda and the ballot
title for state measures that would appear on the ballot. AB
2209 failed passage in this committee on a 2-5 vote.
ACA 18 (Adams) of 2008 was substantively identical to this
constitutional amendment. ACA 18, which was a companion
measure to AB 2209, was not referred to committee until after
ACA 20
Page 4
AB 2209 had failed passage. As such, ACA 18 was not heard in
this committee.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
None on file.
Opposition
None on file.
Analysis Prepared by : Ethan Jones / E. & R. / (916) 319-2094