BILL ANALYSIS
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SCA 16|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: SCA 16
Author: DeSaulnier (D)
Amended: As introduced
Vote: 27
SENATE ELECTIONS, REAP. & CONST. AMEND. COMM. : 3-2, 7/7/09
AYES: Hancock, DeSaulnier, Liu
NOES: Walters, Strickland
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 8-5, 8/27/09
AYES: Kehoe, Corbett, Hancock, Leno, Oropeza, Price, Wolk,
Yee
NOES: Cox, Denham, Runner, Walters, Wyland
SUBJECT : Initiatives: indirect initiatives
SOURCE : Author
DIGEST : This constitutional amendment provides an
alternate to the initiative process by authorizing a
measure to qualify with less signatures, providing that the
measure be reviewed by the Legislature prior to its being
placed on the ballot.
ANALYSIS : Under existing law, a proponent of any
initiative measure must first obtain the signatures of
registered voters equal in number to five percent of the
votes for all candidates for Governor at the last election.
The signature threshold to qualify initiatives proposing
constitutional amendments is eight percent. There is
CONTINUED
SCA 16
Page
2
currently no mechanism for amending an initiative once it
has been approved for circulation by the Secretary of State
or once it has qualified for the ballot.
This constitutional amendment will provide an alternate
procedure by authorizing a proponent to present to the
Secretary of State, at any time the Legislature is in
session, a petition that has been signed by three percent
of voters for all candidates for Governor at the last
gubernatorial election in the case of proposed statute, or
signed by six percent of the voters if the measure amends
the constitution. The Secretary of State will transmit the
petition to the Legislature within 10 days. The
Legislature may then amend the initiative, however, this
constitutional amendment does not define a timeline for
making those changes.
The California Constitution requires the Secretary of State
to submit statewide initiative measures at the next general
election held at least 131 days after they qualify or at
any special statewide election.
This constitutional amendment provides, if the proposed
statute, with or without change, is enacted by the
Legislature, the statute will go into effect on the
applicable date. If the Legislature approves the proposed
constitutional amendment, with or without change, by a
two-thirds vote of each house, the proposed amendment will
be submitted to the electors for approval at the first
statewide election occurring on an unspecified number of
days later.
If by an unspecified number of days, the Legislature
rejects the initiative measure or has taken no action on
it, the measure will be submitted to the voters.
This constitutional amendment is similar to SCA 10
(Ducheny) and ACA 13 (Hernandez).
Comments
According to the author's office, from 1879 to the mid-90s
California ranked first in the nation in proposed
amendments (812) and second in adopted ones (485),
SCA 16
Page
3
averaging 4.29 constitutional amendments a year. This has
led to a constitution that is now a "Winchester House" of
propositions and initiatives, cobbled together in a
piecemeal manner. It is no longer a coherent, effective
document. The number of initiatives that appear on ballots
has also lead to voter fatigue.
A December 2008 Public Policy Institute of California
(PPIC) poll found that 63 percent of voters agree that
ballot wording was too complicated and confusing and 52
percent agree that there were too many ballot initiatives
on the November 2008 ballot.
The same PPIC poll found that 77 percent of voters support
having a system of review and revision of proposed
initiatives to avoid legal issues and drafting errors. The
same number, 77 percent of voters, also favor having a time
period when the sponsor of the initiative and the
Legislature could try to reach a compromise solution before
the initiative reaches the ballot.
There are currently eight states (Maine, Massachusetts,
Michigan, Mississippi, Nevada, Ohio, Utah, and Washington)
that have an indirect initiative process. California's
constitution had a provision for an indirect statutory
initiative that was eliminated in 1966.
This constitutional amendment will reinstate the indirect
initiative process in order to provide for legislative
deliberation and debate on the issue while also examining
the effect it will have on the state budget and other
existing programs and state policy. This will provide for
a more open process and ideally will end with the
Legislature enacting a reform sufficient to the initiative
proponents and will reduce the number of initiatives on the
ballot.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: No
Results in one-time General Fund costs of approximately
$298,000 to print an analysis of the measure and arguments
for and against the measure in the statewide voter
pamphlet. The most recent cost estimates from the
SCA 16
Page
4
Secretary of State's Office are $74,500 per page for
printing and mailing, and the above fiscal impact reflects
four pages of text. Actual costs could be slightly higher
or lower depending on the final length of the ballot
measure.
DLW:mw 9/1/09 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: NONE RECEIVED
**** END ****