BILL ANALYSIS
SENATE COMMITTEE ON ELECTIONS, REAPPORTIONMENT AND
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS
Senator Loni Hancock, Chair
BILL NO: AB 101 HEARING DATE:6/16/09
AUTHOR: ANDERSON ANALYSIS BY: Frances Tibon
Estoista
AMENDED: AS INTRODUCED
FISCAL: YES
SUBJECT
Elections: vote by mail ballots
DESCRIPTION
Existing law requires all vote by mail (VBM) ballots to be
received by the elections official from whom they were
obtained or by the precinct board no later than the close
of polls on election day in order to be counted.
This bill requires elections officials to deliver a notice
to each VBM voter that a VBM ballot must actually be
received by the elections official before the polls close
on election day in order for the ballot to be counted and
that an envelope postmarked by the day of the election is
not sufficient.
This bill requires this notice to be included on the VBM
ballot identification envelope or in instructions to the
voter provided by the elections official.
BACKGROUND
According to the California Association of Clerks and
Election Officials, most counties already provide a notice
to voters similar to the one required by this bill, and
while there may be some minor costs imposed on some
counties, the information is vital to the vote by mail
process. As more voters opt to cast their ballots via the
vote by mail process, it is imperative that they understand
the necessity of returning the voted ballot in a timely
manner.
COMMENTS
1. According to the author : I authored Assembly Bill 101
to ensure that every voter who votes by mail will be
given fair notice that ballots must be received by a
polling official by the time the polls close. State law
currently requires other standard warnings, and this
bill will guarantee a fundamental one. In the words of
AB 101, it would be a disclosure "that the vote by mail
ballot must actually be received by elections officials
before the polls close on Election Day in order for the
ballot to be counted and that an envelope postmarked by
the day of the election is not sufficient." This is a
small step our government can take to preserve and
uphold the continuity and clarity the voters expect and
deserve.
2. Prior Legislation : This bill is substantially similar
to AB 1928 (Anderson) of 2008. AB 1928 was vetoed by
the Governor, though the Governor did not express any
policy objections to the bill. Instead, AB 1928 was one
of 136 bills that received the same veto message. That
veto message read as follows:
The historic delay in passing the 2008-2009 State
Budget has forced me to prioritize the bills sent to my
desk at the end of the year's legislative session.
Given the delay, I am only signing bills that are the
highest priority for California. This bill does not
meet that standard and I cannot sign it at this time.
PRIOR ACTION
Assembly Elections and Redistricting Committee: 7-0
Assembly Appropriations Committee: 16-0
Assembly Floor: 79-0
POSITIONS
Sponsor: Author
Support: California Association of Clerks and Election
Officials (CACEO)
Secretary of State
AB 101 (ANDERSON) Page
2
Oppose: None received
AB 101 (ANDERSON) Page
3