BILL ANALYSIS �
SJR 29
Page 1
SENATE THIRD READING
SJR 29 (Yee)
As Amended August 27, 2012
Majority vote
SENATE VOTE :22-12
ELECTIONS 5-0
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Fong, Bonilla, Hall, | | |
| |Mendoza, Swanson | | |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Proclaims the Legislature's support for the
investigation by the federal Department of Justice (DOJ) into
whether state legislatures are discriminating against and
suppressing the vote of minorities, senior citizens, young
adults, or those with physical disabilities or limited economic
means and denounces any law that disenfranchises society's most
disadvantaged eligible voters. Specifically, this resolution :
1)Finds that with great enthusiasm and interest, more than five
million new voters participated in the 2008 statewide general
election.
2)Finds that many new voters in 2008 were minorities, which
included African Americans, Asian Americans, and Latinos.
3)Finds that the voter participation gap between Caucasians and
minorities fell in 2008 elections.
4)Finds that African Americans and Latinos registered to vote at
nearly twice the rate of Caucasians in voter registration
drives in 2008.
5)Finds that after 2008, more than 30 state legislatures
introduced voter suppression laws that may disenfranchise an
estimated five million voters from registering to vote or
casting a ballot in the 2012 statewide general election.
6)Finds that prior to 2006, no state required an individual to
show a government-issued photo identification to vote.
SJR 29
Page 2
7)Finds that the most underserved and least powerful, which
include the poor, the homeless, minorities, the disabled, and
the elderly, are disproportionately affected by the
requirement to show a state-issued identification card, due to
the lack of financial means, time, or mobility.
8)Finds that voter registration drives are the single most
effective means of registering minority voters.
9)Finds that eliminating same-day registration in some states,
or shortening the period of time for in-person early voting in
others, deters citizens from participating in democracy.
10)Finds that nearly all instances of alleged voter fraud are
either clerical or typographical errors on the voter roll.
11)Finds that the act of fraudulently voting is a singularly
inefficient and ineffective act, carrying the risk of five
years in prison and a $10,000 fine for each offense.
12)Finds that many state legislators now argue voter fraud is
rampant, leading 16 states to enact voter suppression laws in
2011 that require state-issued identification, restrict voter
registration drives, or limit early voting by either mail or
in person.
13)Proclaims that the State of California supports the
investigation by the federal DOJ into whether state
legislatures are discriminating against and suppressing the
vote of minorities, senior citizens, young adults, or those
with physical disabilities, or limited economic means and that
the State of California denounces any law that disenfranchises
society's most disadvantaged eligible voters.
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown. This resolution is keyed non-fiscal by
the Legislative Counsel.
COMMENTS : According to the author, "Since the 2008 General
Election, many state legislatures have enacted laws to make it
more difficult to register for an upcoming election or access
the ballot box on Election Day. These laws were enacted on the
presumption that the integrity of our elections are in jeopardy
due to rampant voter fraud. Yet, only a handful of verified
SJR 29
Page 3
voter fraud cases have been documented, investigated, or
prosecuted in the last decade. Without proof of the assertion,
it should be concluded that election rules are being changed for
other purposes.
"When a lawmaker in Pennsylvania declares that their voter ID
law will deliver the state to a presidential candidate, we are
presented with proof that election laws are being changed for
political gain. We must decide whether we will allow this modern
form of voter discrimination to continue unchecked. Changes in
election laws that benefit one group over another, or clearly
limits one group over another, is unfair and undemocratic. This
is why we should support Senate Joint Resolution 29 and send a
clear message of our support for the Justice Department's
investigation into whether state legislatures are discriminating
against and suppressing the votes of minorities, senior
citizens, young adults, or those with physical disabilities or
limited economic means."
Analysis Prepared by : Nichole Becker / E. & R. / (916)
319-2094
FN: 0005819