BILL ANALYSIS
AB 442
Page 1
GOVERNOR'S VETO
AB 442 (Arambula)
As Amended April 1, 2009
2/3 vote
JUDICIARY 6-3
-----------------------------------------------------------------
| |Feuer, Brownley, Evans, | | |
| |Jones, Lieu, Monning | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|Ayes:| | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
|Nays:|Tran, Knight, Nielsen | | |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|ASSEMBLY: |43-29|(April 20, |SENATE: |24-15|(August 24, |
| | |2009) | | |2009) |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Adds the Matricula Consular de Alta Seguridad (MCAS or
Matricula Consular), an identification card issued by the
Mexican government, to the list of documents that notaries
public may accept as proof of a person's identity for the
purpose of acknowledging a written instrument. Specifically,
this bill :
1)Authorizes a notary public to take acknowledgment of a written
instrument in reasonable reliance upon the presentation of a
Matricula Consular by the person making the acknowledgment, as
satisfactory evidence that person is the same individual
described in and executing the instrument.
2)Requires that the notary public may only reasonably rely upon
presentation of a Matricula Consular if it is current or has
been issued within the past five years.
AB 442
Page 2
FISCAL EFFECT : None
COMMENTS : This bill seeks to authorize notaries public to
reasonably rely on presentation of a Matricula Consular, a
personal identification card issued by the Mexican government
through its consulate offices, to establish the identity of a
person attempting to have a document notarized. The Matricula
Consular means "High Security Consular Registration Document" in
English and serves as the official record for Mexican citizens
living outside of Mexico.
The bill permits the notary public to accept the Matricula
Consular only if it is current or has been issued within the
past five years. According to the author:
Lack of identification prevents individuals from
accessing many services, including having their
documents notarized. Powers of Attorney, general or
living wills, grant deeds, and all documents to be
recorded require notarization. It is critical that
people can identify themselves for notarization
purposes. Documents that are notarized add
verification and authenticity that the people who
signed a document are who they say they are.
Additionally, notarized documents protect families
from litigation and fraud, and help families preserve
what is lawfully theirs.
Supporters emphasize that this bill will help solve the problem
faced by certain individuals who cannot get documents notarized
because of the lack of acceptable identification under current
law governing notaries public. For example, Gilbert Zavalas, a
notary public in Fresno, writes that, on an almost daily basis,
he has to turn away people from having their documents notarized
because their only available form of identification is the
Matricula Consular.
The California Catholic Conference also writes that allowing
notaries to accept the Matricula Consular as a form of
identification will help facilitate oaths, documents, and sworn
AB 442
Page 3
statements of citizens of Mexican nationality. The Central
Valley Partnership for Citizenship (CVP) concurs, stating that
it is critical to permit the Matricula Consular to be accepted
for notarization because it would help people access vital
services that require notarization on documents.
The American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees
(AFSCME) writes in support of the bill because it would help
ease the current housing market crisis, stating:
When selling or buying properties or real estate, it
is important to know who you are selling to or buying
from. What is not necessary is blocking someone with
a government issued identification card from the
ability to buy real estate in California. This bill
would free up the real estate market in a time when
home sales are exceptionally low.
Although this bill pertains only to use of the Matricula
Consular to establish one's identity for the purpose of having a
document notarized, supporters of the bill accurately point out
that the Matricula Consular is already recognized in California
as valid identification for some local governmental purposes.
For example, in some jurisdictions the Matricula Consular can be
used to identify oneself to law enforcement agencies, to apply
for public utilities, and to identify oneself at schools and
public libraries as a parent or user. In 2003, at least 12
counties, 25 cities, and dozens of police and sheriff's
departments in California were accepting the Matricula Consular
as a form of identification. (Senate Floor Analysis of AB 25
(N??ez), of 2003-04, dated 8/27/2003.)
Anecdotal evidence indicates increasing acceptance of the
Matricula Consular by United States (U.S.) banking institutions
for the purpose of opening new accounts. According to figures
provided by the Mexican Consulate, as of July 2004, over 175
banks in the U.S. accepted the Matricula Consular as a form of
identification. The trend includes banks in California. On
March 24, 2009, the City of Los Angeles announced a new program
to help at least 10,000 low-income households open bank accounts
every year. Banks participating in the program, including Bank
AB 442
Page 4
of America and Citibank, will not require new applicants to
produce a Social Security number and will accept other forms of
recognized identification, including the Matricula Consular.
("Program Aims to Help Low-Income Angelenos Open Bank Accounts,"
Los Angeles Times, March 24, 2009.)
The National Notary Association (NNA), a non-profit professional
association of notaries public, is strongly opposed to this bill
because of security concerns, stating:
The enactment of this legislation would require
Notaries to recognize a card of proven unreliability.
. . . will compromise the safety and security of
California consumers, and undermine the credibility of
the state's Notaries Public. Notaries in this state
must not be forced to accept a card that the U.S.
Department of Justice and the FBI declare is not a
trustworthy identifier.
The NNA then cites government research that concluded the
following:
1)The Mexican government has no centralized database to
coordinate the issuance of consular ID cards to prevent
multiple cards from being issued with the same name, address,
or photograph;
2)The Mexican government has no interconnected databases to
provide inter-consular communication to be able to verify who
has or has not applied for or received a consular ID card;
3)The Matricula Consular card is vulnerable to forgery and 90%
of the estimated two million in circulation are simply
laminated cards without security features. (Testimony of
Steve McCraw, Assistant Director of the Office of
Intelligence, FBI, before U.S. House Judiciary Subcommittee on
June 26, 2003 (See http://www.fbi.gov/congress/congress03/
mccraw062603.htm).)
The author and supporters of the bill acknowledge that security
concerns surrounding the Matricula Consular are indeed
AB 442
Page 5
important. To address some of the specific concerns raised by
FBI representative McCraw's 2003 testimony, the author has
provided materials published by the Consulate of Mexico in July
2007, that reflect recent procedural safeguards and improved
security features of the Matricula Consular card. These
materials state:
1)The Mexican government has developed a national database in
which consulates can verify if there are homonyms and if the
applicant has previously received a Matricula Consular.
2)The consulates also check the applicant's identity against a
Mexican government "stop list" containing approximately 13,000
records of persons who are not allowed to obtain documents
issued by the Mexican government.
3)All Matricula Consulares are issued for a period of five
years. As of March 2002, the MCAS incorporates cutting-edge
technology, holograms, and other embedded designs to prevent
its forgery. (Thus) by 2007, all the old matriculas will have
been replaced by the MCAS.
The materials describe, in some detail, 13 security features
built into the Matricula Consular since 2002, including
technology used by the U.S. government in its own high security
documents like Visas and FBI badges.
In short, it appears that the Mexican government has taken
substantial steps since 2002, to improve the security features
of the Matricula Consular to prevent forgery, and to implement
database procedures that safeguard against issuance of duplicate
cards. However, there remain valid concerns about the documents
that applicants may submit to consulate offices to verify their
identification when applying for a Matricula Consular,
particularly if these supporting documents are easily forged or
if the identification of the person named upon them cannot be
independently and reliably verified.
According to the author, the bill would result in more business
to notaries. Notaries public would be trained to properly
accept the Matricula Consular via the mandatory course required
AB 442
Page 6
under current law (Government Code Section 8201). The course
examination would certify that notaries public are aware of all
new or modified laws and regulations affecting their practice,
including regulations on the Matricula Consular.
GOVERNOR'S VETO MESSAGE :
"This bill provides that a notary public may reasonably rely on
a matricula consular issued by the government of the United
States of Mexico as proper identification to prove the identity
of an individual who executes a written instrument. While it is
important that individuals be able to identify themselves for
notarization purposes, the Civil Code already provides for more
secure forms of identification than the matricula
consular-including Mexican driver's licenses and passports-to
identify Mexican nationals, a fact which obviates the need for
this legislation. Additionally, California notaries should not
be required to accept a form of identification that the Federal
Bureau of Investigation and the U.S. Department of Justice
continue to consider untrustworthy."
Analysis Prepared by : Anthony Lew / JUD. / (916) 319-2334
FN: 0003287