BILL ANALYSIS
AB 1396
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 5, 2009
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON ELECTIONS AND REDISTRICTING
Paul Fong, Chair
AB 1396 (Torres) - As Introduced: February 27, 2009
SUBJECT : Elections: state central committee.
SUMMARY : Repeals various provisions of the Elections Code
governing the membership and operations of the state central
committee of the Democratic Party of California (Party), and
instead requires that the standing rules and bylaws of the Party
govern the membership and operations of the state central
committee. Specifically, this bill :
1)Repeals all provisions of the Elections Code governing the
membership and operations of the state central committee of
the Party.
2)Requires the following elements and practices of the state
central committee of the Party to be the same as set forth in
the standing rules and bylaws of the Party:
a) The membership of the state central committee.
b) The procedures for notifying members of appointments.
c) Proxy provisions.
d) The form of appointment of members to the state central
committee.
e) The officers, methods of electing officers, and their
terms.
f) Quorum requirements for meetings of the state central
committee.
g) The procedures for the conduct of committee proceedings.
h) The procedures for the adoption of a state party
platform.
3)Requires the state central committee to conduct party
campaigns for the party and on behalf of candidates of the
AB 1396
Page 2
party. Requires the state central committee to appoint
committees and appoint and employ campaign directors and
perform all other activities relating to campaign
organizations it deems suitable or desirable and in the best
interest of the Party.
4)Requires the Party to post a current copy of its standing
rules and bylaws for public inspection on its Internet Web
site.
EXISTING LAW specifies the membership of, and governs the
operations of, the state central committee of the Party.
FISCAL EFFECT : Keyed non-fiscal by the Legislative Counsel.
COMMENTS :
1)Purpose of the Bill : According to the author:
Currently, state law contains rules governing the operation
of the California Democratic Party. However the U.S.
Supreme Court has found in two cases that in most
circumstances the bylaws of a political party trump
provisions in the Elections Code.
This can lead to confusion when voters read state statute
and believe those are the rules governing the party's
operation, creating an unnecessary barrier to participation
in the political process.
AB 1396 repeals provisions that are unnecessary,
duplicative or in conflict with the state party bylaws and
specifies that the party's composition and procedures shall
be governed by its bylaws. This bill also mandates that
the California Democratic Party shall maintain a current
copy of its bylaws on the internet to assure public access
to the party's governing rules.
2)Internal Governance : In Eu v. San Francisco County Democratic
Central Committee (1989), 489 U.S. 214, the United States
Supreme Court examined the right of a state to impose laws
relating to the internal affairs of political parties. The
Court found that laws burdening the associational rights of
political parties and their members must serve a compelling
AB 1396
Page 3
state interest. Therefore, because a state has a compelling
interest in preserving the integrity of its election process,
it may properly enact laws that interfere with a political
party's internal affairs when necessary to ensure that
elections are fair and honest. (For example, a state may
properly impose certain eligibility requirements for voters in
the general election, even though they limit the ability of
political parties to garner support and members, where such
requirements are necessary to ensure that elections are fair
and honest.) However, a state cannot justify regulating a
party's internal affairs without showing that such regulation
is necessary to ensure an election that is orderly and fair.
In Eu , the Court reiterated that a political party's
determination of the structure which best allows it to pursue
its political goals is protected by the Federal Constitution
( Tashijian v. Republican Party of Connecticut (1986), 479 U.S.
208 at 224) and further held that freedom of association also
encompasses a political party's decisions about the identity
of, and the process for electing, its leaders. Thus, unless
the state can show that the particular internal party
structure would interfere with the integrity of the electoral
process or some other compelling state interest, the political
parties have a constitutional right to be free from state
regulations in the matter of their internal affairs.
As such, it has generally been the policy of this committee to
allow the provisions of state law relating to a specific party
to be amended as desired by the political party.
3)Previous Legislation : AB 965 (Anderson), Chapter 60, Statutes
of 2007, provides that the membership of the state central
committee of the California Republican Party shall be as set
forth in the standing rules and bylaws of the California
Republican Party, among other provisions.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
None on file.
Opposition
AB 1396
Page 4
None on file.
Analysis Prepared by : Ethan Jones / E. & R. / (916) 319-2094