BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 547
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 3, 2011
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON ELECTIONS AND REDISTRICTING
Paul Fong, Chair
AB 547 (Gatto) - As Amended: April 25, 2011
AS PROPOSED TO BE AMENDED
SUBJECT : Voting.
SUMMARY : Makes it a misdemeanor for a person who, while
providing care or direct supervision to an elder in a
state-licensed or state-subsidized facility or program, coerces
or deceives the elder into voting for or against a candidate or
measure contrary to the elder's intent or in the absence of any
intent of the elder regarding that vote. Provides that an elder
is any person residing in this state, 65 years of age or older.
EXISTING LAW provides that every person who defrauds any voter
at any election by deceiving and causing him or her to vote for
a different person for any office than he or she intended or
desired to vote for is guilty of a felony punishable by
imprisonment in the state prison for 16 months or two or three
years.
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown. State-mandated local program;
contains a crimes and infractions disclaimer.
COMMENTS :
1)Author's Amendment : In response to concerns that this bill
was very broad and had the potential to criminalize innocent
behavior between relatives, the author has agreed to accept
amendments that would narrow this bill to target elders who
are in a state-licensed or state-subsidized facility or
program. This would include, but is not limited to, elders
residing in long-term health care facilities and residential
care facilities for the elderly, as well as elders who are
recipients of in-home supportive services and adult day health
care programs. This analysis is reflective of those
amendments.
2)Purpose of the Bill : According to the author:
With the state's population of senior citizens over the age
AB 547
Page 2
of 65 expected to double over the next twenty years, policy
makers must now start to make forward looking policy
changes to anticipate the needs of that demographic in a
number of policy areas. Though most of these discussions
have centered on subjects such as health care and
retirement benefits, one area that is equally deserving of
consideration is voting and voting rights of this
population.
With a rising number of our seniors finding themselves in
living situations where they are under continuous care
and/or supervision, there has been a growing body of work
by scholars and policy makers studying how to best protect
the voting rights of this population when some may find
themselves in living situations where there is a danger of
intimidation, deception, or coercion when it comes to
participation in elections. Congress has even recognized
this as an issue of importance, commissioning a report by
the General Accounting Office (GAO) on the integrity of the
voting process in long-term care facilities �Elderly
Voters: Information on Promising Practices Could Strengthen
the Integrity of the Voting Process in Long-term Care
Facilities (GAO-10-6, Nov. 2009)]. The report noted:
?the number of elderly people who exercise their right
to vote through alternative voting methods, such as
absentee, early, and Election Day mail-in ballots may
grow as more elderly individuals reside in long-term
care facilities. These residents may also have limited
dexterity, impaired eyesight, or cognitive
impairments, such as dementia, that can make them
dependent on others to read or mark a ballot,
regardless of where the ballot is cast. This makes
them vulnerable to fraud and undue influence from
relatives, long-term care facility staff, campaign
workers, or candidate supporters, who sometimes
provide assistance when casting their vote.
Another issue relating to senior citizens and voting has to
do with those who suffer from Alzheimer's disease or
dementia in nursing homes. There have been instances
documented in the national press of staff requesting
absentee ballots for patients and submitting the ballots to
voting officials to be counted.
AB 547
Page 3
It has been difficult to document more cases of this
phenomenon due to the fact that many of these seniors are
unaware or are simply unable to comprehend that this
deception or coercion is taking place; and even in the
cases where there may be awareness, a senior may be unable
to do anything to rectify the situation, particularly if
there is intimidation going on or if there are no family
members either alive or close by to turn to.
In order to take a proactive policy stance on the voting
rights of senior citizens, AB 547 would make it a
misdemeanor for anyone providing care or direct supervision
to an individual who is 65 years of age or to coerce or
deceive the individual into voting for or against a
candidate or measure contrary to the individual's intent.
This measure would be an important first step towards
developing a more comprehensive policy on the voting rights
of California's growing population of senior citizens.
3)Aging Population : According to 2009 Census data, persons 65
years old and over represent 11.2% of California's overall
population. However, this number is expected to increase
dramatically. The California Department of Aging estimates
that by 2020, persons age 60 and older will comprise nearly
20% of the state's total population. These numbers have
several implications for the state, particularly in the field
of elections.
A September 2010 publication by the Public Policy Institute of
California on California's Likely Voters noted that adults age
55 and older constitute 30% of the state's adult population
but make up 41% of likely voters. Although this age group
includes individuals who are younger than the group targeted
by this bill, it illustrates that California's electorate is
older than the general population as a whole.
4)Alternative Voting : Elders in state-licensed or
state-subsidized facilities or programs typically have
physical and cognitive impairments-conditions that may be the
basis of their eligibility for such facilities or programs,
but conditions that may, nevertheless, limit their ability to
independently cast a vote. As a result, many elders choose to
vote via vote by mail (VBM) ballot, as opposed to going to the
polls on election day, which usually requires some form of
transportation that could be difficult to obtain. As a result
AB 547
Page 4
of the high use of VBM ballots in this population, some
questions and concerns have arisen regarding the influence
elders are receiving from caregivers in the receipt,
completion, and return of their ballots.
Although there is little information on the voting of elders who
receive supportive services in-home, there have been several
studies focused on the voting practices in long-term care
institutions. In addition to the GAO report cited by the
author above, a 2007 article in the McGeorge Law Review
entitled, "Preserving Voting Rights in Long-Term Care
Institutions" notes that for elder residents residing in
long-term care institutions, the institutional settings in
which they reside create additional barriers to voting. Staff
attitudes and beliefs at these institutions about residents
and about whether residents should vote play a critical role
in limiting access to voting. These elders are also
significantly limited in the ability to communicate with
persons outside of the institutions, as well as limited in the
ability to access outside information that serves to educate
voters about the contents and timing of upcoming elections.
All of these factors put elders at risk of being either denied
their right to vote or being unduly influenced by the limited
means available to them.
5)Existing Penalties : Current law already makes it a felony for
any person who defrauds any voter at any election by deceiving
and causing him or her to vote for a different person for any
office than the candidate for whom he or she intended or
desired to vote. The author argues that current voting rights
protection laws are focused primarily on crimes that occur at
the polls and do not target elders who receive dependent care.
In addition, the author's office argues that the egregiousness
of a crime associated with an elder deserves specific and
additional penalties.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
AARP
Opposition
None on file.
AB 547
Page 5
Analysis Prepared by : Maria Garcia / E. & R. / (916) 319-2094