BILL ANALYSIS
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 34|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: SB 34
Author: Corbett (D), et al
Amended: 4/14/09
Vote: 21
SENATE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE : 5-2, 4/21/09
AYES: Leno, Cedillo, Hancock, Steinberg, Wright
NOES: Benoit, Huff
SENATE ELECTIONS, REAP. & CONST. COMMITTEE : 3-2, 3/31/09
AYES: Hancock, DeSaulnier, Liu
NOES: Walters, Strickland
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : Senate Rule 28.8
SUBJECT : Petitions: compensation for signatures
SOURCE : Author
DIGEST : This bill places restrictions on the signature
gathering process for ballot initiatives, referendums or
recall petitions, and also prescribe misdemeanors penalties
as specified.
ANALYSIS :
Existing law provides that a voter or a person who is
qualified to register to vote in this state may circulate
an initiative, referendum petition or recall petition as
specified.
CONTINUED
SB 34
Page
2
Existing law does not prohibit a person from paying or
receiving money for the circulation of petitions for
signatures nor does it prohibit paying or receiving payment
based on the number of signatures gathered.
Existing law requires that state or local initiative
petitions must contain the following notice in 12-point
type: "NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC THIS PETITION MAY BE
CIRCULATED BY A PAID SIGNATURE GATHERER OR A VOLUNTEER.
YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO ASK."
This bill (1) prohibits a person from paying or receiving
money or any other thing of value based on the number of
signatures obtained on a state or local initiative,
referendum, or recall petition. Violation of this
prohibition constitutes a misdemeanor as follows: (a) a
person or organization who pays a person based on the
number of signatures obtained on a state or local
initiative, referendum, or recall petition shall be
punished by a fine not to exceed twenty-five thousand
dollars, or by imprisonment in a county jail not to exceed
one year, or by both that fine and imprisonment, and (2)
states that nothing in the bill prohibits the payment for
signature gathering not based, either directly or
indirectly, on the number of signatures obtained on a state
or local initiative, referendum, or recall petition.
Background
Bounty Hunters . To qualify an initiative to be placed on
the statewide ballot, proponents must gather hundreds of
thousands of signatures. The need to collect this large
number of signatures within a limited timeframe has given
rise to an industry of petition management firms that pay
signature gatherers a bounty based on the number of
signatures they collect.
The individuals who are paid to collect signatures on
initiative, referendum, or recall petitions are commonly
referred to as "bounty hunters." According to the
Secretary of State's Election Fraud Investigation Unit
(EFIU):
SB 34
Page
3
1. Between 1994 and 2005 the EFIU opened 184 cases of
falsified petitions.
2. There have been 22 bounty hunters convicted for
falsifying petitions following EFIU investigations.
3. There are currently 34 open cases of falsified
petitions.
4. There are four cases of falsified petitions currently
pending with District Attorney's Offices.
Other States . According to the National Conference of
State Legislatures, it is common for initiative sponsors to
pay circulators on a per-signature basis to gather petition
signatures. Payments typically range from $1 to $3 per
signature, and occasionally are as high as $10 per
signature. Critics argue that this encourages fraud since
a circulator who collects more signatures will earn more
money, circulators who are paid per-signature are more
likely to commit acts of fraud such as forging signatures
or misrepresenting the content of the petition in order to
encourage people to sign.
In three states (North Dakota, Oregon and Wyoming),
initiative sponsors are banned from paying petition
circulators per signature. Instead, they may pay a flat
fee or an hourly salary. These laws have been challenged
in the courts with mixed results. North Dakota and
Oregon's provisions have been upheld by the U.S. 9th and
8th Circuit Courts, respectively. However, similar
provisions in Idaho, Maine, Mississippi and Washington were
held unconstitutional by federal district courts.
Prior Legislation
SB 1047 (Bowen) and AB 2946 (Leno), both from the 2005-06
session, contained provisions similar to this bill that
prohibit payment on per-signature basis for individuals
circulating petitions. SB 1047 was eventually dropped by
the author while AB 2946 was vetoed. In his veto message,
the Governor stated, in part:
"The prohibitions on per-signature payments will make
SB 34
Page
4
it more difficult for grass-roots organizations to get
the necessary signatures in the time allotted. As I
have said before making the process more difficult may
be fine for those opposed to the initiative process or
those who profit from it, but it is not for everyday
Californians with an idea for reform."
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: Yes
SUPPORT : (Verified 5/1/09)
Secretary of State Debra Bowen
City of Murrieta
Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California
OPPOSITION : (Verified 5/1/09)
Capitol Resource Family Impact
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the author's office,
in California and throughout the country there are
increasing reports of ballot initiative fraud in the
signature gathering process. Quite often, signature
gathering firms compensate circulators based on the number
of signatures they gather which may encourage some
circulators to collect signatures by any means necessary.
Many circulators deliberately misrepresent information and
forge signatures of both voters and nonvoters. Specific
cases of fraud in Montana, Nevada, and Oklahoma included
circulators who forged signatures onto their petitions of
names they chose from a phonebook. Others have inserted
carbon paper and a second petition beneath the original
one, without the persons' knowledge, to get their signature
on another petition. Similar accusations of corruption are
also common in California. This bill intends to address
this issue by banning the possibility of paying per
signature.
Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California supports this
bill stating, "California's initiative process was
originally envisioned as a volunteer-based effort to pass
measures desired by a majority of the people. The current
process has shifted to a system where increasingly large
SB 34
Page
5
sums of money are required in order to qualify a measure
for the ballot. These efforts now necessitate the use of
paid signature gathers, usually employed by a professional
petition firm, at a typical cost of between $1 million and
$3 million per initiative.
"Twenty-four states exercise an initiative process and each
state prohibits unethical behavior of initiative
industries. In California and throughout the county, there
are increasing reports of ballot initiative fraud in the
signature gathering process. Quite often in this state,
signature gathering firms compensate circulators based on
the number of signatures they gather. As deadlines to file
initiatives approach, signature gathering firms raise the
price per signature for qualifying measures. This practice
may provide incentive for circulators to gather signatures
by unethical means."
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION : The Capitol Resource Family
Impact opposes this bill stating, "This bill would make
average citizens criminals by making it a misdemeanor for
anyone to pay or receive anything of value, based on the
number of signatures obtained on an initiative, referendum,
or recall petition. This applies to state and local
issues. "CRFI opposes this bill because it seeks to
restrict the people's ability to place measures on the
ballot. Every initiative, referendum, and recall petition
in California has a notice printed on the top, telling
signers that they have the right to ask whether the
signature gatherer is paid or a volunteer. Also,
qualifying a measure for the California ballot requires
hundreds of thousands of signatures. Almost every measure
that qualifies with signatures needs paid signature
gatherers. Campaign workers, who want to make their voices
heard in the California Legislature, can be paid. CRFI
maintains that voters should be fee to receive compensation
of the hours they contribute toward participating in the
initiative process.
DLW:do 5/5/09 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
SB 34
Page
6
**** END ****