BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 293
Page 1
Date of Hearing: March 15, 2011
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON ELECTIONS AND REDISTRICTING
Paul Fong, Chair
AB 293 (Hill) - As Introduced: February 9, 2011
SUBJECT : Vote by mail ballots.
SUMMARY : Requires elections officials to establish a free
access system that allows a vote by mail (VBM) voter to find out
whether his or her ballot was counted and, if not, the reason
why the ballot was not counted.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Outlines procedures for voting by mail and establishes
requirements for elections officials to compare the signature
on a VBM ballot envelope with that appearing on the affidavit
of registration. Provides that if the ballot is rejected
because the signatures do not compare, the envelope shall not
be opened and the ballot shall not be counted. Requires the
cause of the rejection to be written on the face of the
identification envelope.
2)Requires elections officials to establish procedures to track
and confirm the receipt of VBM ballots and to make this
information available by means of online access using the
county's elections division Internet website. Provides that
if the county does not have an elections division Internet
website, the elections official shall establish a toll-free
telephone number that may be used to confirm the date a voted
VBM ballot was received.
3)Requires the Secretary of State (SOS) to establish a free
access system to allow any voter who casts a provisional
ballot to discover whether his or her provisional ballot was
counted and, if not, the reason why it was not counted.
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown. State-mandated local program; contains
reimbursement direction.
COMMENTS :
1)Purpose of the Bill : According to the author:
AB 293
Page 2
AB 293 seeks to provide the ever increasing number of
vote-by-mail voters the opportunity to determine if their
ballot was counted and, if not, the reason it was rejected.
Unlike polling place voters who can actually see their
ballot dropped in a box or otherwise registered,
vote-by-mail voters have no recourse to make sure their
ballot was counted. Currently, vote-by-mail voters can
determine if their ballot was received by elections
officials, but they have no way of knowing if their ballot
was actually counted.
Given that significant numbers of vote-by-mail ballots are
NOT counted in every election because of signature
verification problems, arriving after the deadline, or
other problems, voters should have the ability to determine
if their vote was tallied. If the ballot was rejected for
some reason, it is important for the voter to know the
reason so that it can be rectified prior to the next
election. Provisional voters have had the ability to
follow-up on their ballot for years, it is time for the
majority of Californians who vote-by-mail to have the same
protections.
The use of vote-by-mail ballots by the California
electorate has been steadily increasing for a number of
years. Less than 10% of votes cast in the 1988 Primary
were cast by mail. In the 2000 Primary that percentage was
23% of all votes cast. The Secretary of State reports that
for the 2010 Primary, more than 57% of the votes were
vote-by-mail ballots. As greater and greater numbers of
California voters utilize and rely upon vote-by-mail
ballots to have their voices heard in elections,
transparency in the process and piece-of-mind that their
ballot was included are more important than ever.
2)Reasons Why a VBM Ballot Might Not be Counted : Historically,
there have been two primary reasons why a VBM ballot that was
completed and returned to the elections officials may not be
counted. One of the most common reasons is that many ballots
are received by the elections office after election day, and
state law requires that VBM ballots be received by the close
of polls on election day in order to counted. A voter who was
under the mistaken impression that his or her ballot would be
counted as long as the envelope was postmarked by election day
could repeatedly have his or her ballot not counted, if that
AB 293
Page 3
voter regularly waited until election day to put the VBM
ballot in the mail.
The other primary reason why a VBM ballot might not be counted
is that the signature on the identification envelope does not
match the one on the voter's affidavit of registration.
Illness and age can be factors that contribute to a signature
changing over time. For example, many older voters do not
realize that the signature on file with the registrar of
voters no longer matches their current signature and as a
result their VBM ballot may not be counted. This bill
provides a mechanism for voters to verify if their ballot has
been counted and, if not, a reason why it was not counted.
Voters whose ballots were not counted would be able to take
appropriate steps to ensure their VBM ballots are counted in
the future.
3)VBM Voting in California : Since the passage of AB 1520
(Shelley), Chapter 922, Statutes of 2001, which allowed any
voter to become a permanent VBM voter, the number of voters
choosing to vote using a VBM ballot has increased
significantly. In the 2000 General election 24.5% of votes
cast were VBM ballots, compared to 41.6% in the 2008 General
election, and 59.6% in the 2010 General election. These
trends suggest that the number of voters opting to vote by VBM
ballot will continue to increase in the future.
4)Is Legislation Necessary ? Current law does not prohibit a
county elections official from providing the information
requested by this bill voluntarily. In fact, many already
provide this information upon request by a voter. The
Committee may wish to consider if legislation to mandate
county elections officials to provide this information to
voters is necessary given that it is already permissible under
state law and being done voluntarily.
5)California's Statewide Voter Registration Database : In 2002,
the Federal Government passed the Help America Vote Act (HAVA)
of 2002 (116 STAT. 1666, Public Law 107-252), which, among
other things, required every state to implement a single,
computerized statewide voter registration list. The SOS has
begun the procurement process for the implementation of
California's statewide database, to be known as VoteCal, as
required under HAVA. Once VoteCal is fully deployed, it will
include a feature to allow a VBM voter to track the status of
AB 293
Page 4
their VBM ballot and verify whether or not it was counted, and
if not, the reason why it was not counted.
6)State Mandates : The Governor's proposed 2011-2012 State Budget
includes the suspension of various state mandates as a
mechanism for cost savings. Included in the list of possible
suspensions are elections mandates. If these mandates are
suspended, counties would no longer be required to mail
ballots to people who ask to be permanent VBM voters or
tabulate VBM ballots by precinct, among other mandate
suspensions. The Committee may wish to consider whether it is
desirable to create additional mandates on counties, when
current mandates are under consideration of suspension.
7)Previous Legislation : AB 2616 (Hill) of 2010, which was
substantially similar to this bill, was vetoed by the
Governor, who wrote in his veto message, "I cannot support
mandating additional costs in this time of fiscal crisis.
Nothing in current law prohibits county elections officials
from providing this information and I would encourage them to
do so as resources allow."
AB 84 (Hill) of 2009, which was substantially similar to AB
2616, was also vetoed by the Governor who expressed concern
that it could result in additional costs to local governments.
AB 2964 (Levine) or 2008, which was substantially similar to
AB 84, was vetoed by the Governor, though the Governor did not
express any policy objections to the bill.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees,
AFL-CIO
Asian Americans for Civil Rights and Equality
Secretary of State Debra Bowen
Opposition
None on file.
Analysis Prepared by : Maria Garcia / E. & R. / (916) 319-2094
AB 293
Page 5