BILL ANALYSIS �
SB 448
Page 1
Date of Hearing: June 21, 2011
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON ELECTIONS AND REDISTRICTING
Paul Fong, Chair
SB 448 (DeSaulnier and Hancock) - As Amended: April 26, 2011
SENATE VOTE : 25-15
SUBJECT : Elections.
SUMMARY : Requires a person who is collecting petition
signatures to wear a badge indicating whether he or she is a
paid signature gatherer or a volunteer signature gatherer, and
if and where he or she is registered to vote. Specifically,
this bill :
1)Requires an individual who receives compensation to circulate
an initiative, referendum, or recall petition to identify him
or herself as a paid signature gatherer by wearing a badge
stating "PAID SIGNATURE GATHERER." Requires a volunteer to
identify him or herself by wearing a badge stating "VOLUNTEER
SIGNATURE GATHERER."
2)Requires every signature gatherer to identify the jurisdiction
in which he or she registered to vote by placing on the badge
the name of the county in California in which the signature
gatherer is registered to vote. Provides that if he or she is
not registered to vote, the badge shall state "NOT REGISTERED
TO VOTE".
3)Requires the badge to be worn on the chest of the signature
gatherer in clear view of all individuals signing or asked to
sign the petition. Requires the print on the badge to be no
smaller than 30-point font.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Requires every state or local initiative petition to contain a
statement notifying voters of their right to inquire whether
the petition is being circulated by a paid signature gatherer
or a volunteer.
2)Establishes a process for proposing initiative measures
submitted to voters in California and sets forth
qualifications for persons who circulate initiative petitions.
SB 448
Page 2
3)Provides that a person who is a voter or who is qualified to
register to vote in this state may circulate a state
initiative or referendum petition anywhere within the state.
FISCAL EFFECT : Keyed non-fiscal by the Legislative Counsel.
COMMENTS :
1)Purpose of the Bill : According to the author: "Voters who
are approached by signature gatherers ought to have the right
to know whether the person approaching them is a paid
signature gatherer or a volunteer. SB 448 brings more
transparency to our initiative process and it gives voters
more information about who is asking them to participate in
our political process."
2)United States Supreme Court Jurisprudence : In 1988, the
United States Supreme Court ruled that a Colorado prohibition
against the use of paid circulators for initiative petitions
violated the First Amendment's guarantee of free speech.
Writing for a unanimous court, Justice Stevens noted that
"�t]he State's interest in protecting the integrity of the
initiative process does not justify the prohibition because
the State has failed to demonstrate that it is necessary to
burden appellees' ability to communicate their message in
order to meet its concerns." Meyer v. Grant (1988), 486 U.S.
414.
In 1999, the United States Supreme Court examined a Colorado law
that provided a number of other restrictions on the signature
collection process for ballot initiatives. In that case the
court ruled that there must be a compelling state interest to
justify any restrictions on initiative petition circulation.
Buckley v. American Constitutional Law Foundation (1999), 525
U.S. 182.
In Buckley , the court invalidated Colorado's requirement that
paid petition circulators wear a badge identifying themselves
and identifying that they are paid circulators. The court
stated that the requirement to wear badges inhibits
participation in the petitioning process. "Because the badge
requirement compels personal name identification at the
precise moment when the circulator's interest in anonymity is
greatest, it does not qualify for inclusion among the more
SB 448
Page 3
limited �election process] identification requirement�s]."
The Buckley court did not rule on the validity of the
requirement that a circulator wear a badge stating whether a
petition circulator was paid or a volunteer.
3)Legislative Counsel Opinion : In an April 17, 2001, opinion,
Legislative Counsel opined that a statute to require an
individual circulating a petition to disclose (verbally or by
a sign, pin, badge, hat, or other indication) whether the
individual is paid to circulate the petition is valid under
the California and United States Constitutions. In its
analysis, Legislative Counsel wrote "in our view the
disclosure of the paid or unpaid status of the petition
circulator at the time of circulation properly may be
characterized as the least drastic means to accomplish the
substantial state interest of enabling potential petition
signers to assess the sincerity of circulators."
This bill, in addition to indicating whether the signature
gatherer is paid or a volunteer, requires the badge to
identify if and where the signature gatherer is registered to
vote. The Committee is unaware of any court that has ruled on
the constitutional validity of requiring voter registration
information to be disclosed on a badge, and the Legislative
Counsel opinion discussed above does not address the
constitutionality of such a requirement.
4)Other States : According to the National Conference of State
Legislatures, at least seven states currently require
circulators to disclose whether they are paid to volunteer,
most often on the petition form itself. For example, Arizona
requires the petition to include a space where the circulator
must state whether he or she is a paid circulator or volunteer
by checking the line near the correct title. California's
disclosure requirement requires any state or local initiative
petition to contain a statement notifying the public that the
petition may be circulated by either a paid or a volunteer
signature gatherer, and that the public has the right to ask.
This bill would require the identification of paid status to
be stated on a badge to be worn by the circulator, indicating
if and where he or she is registered to vote.
5)Arguments in Support : The Ballot Initiative Strategy Center,
in support of this bill, argues that, "After 100 years of
direct democracy, Californians deserve a citizen initiative
SB 448
Page 4
process that serves them. Unfortunately, special interests
and some unscrupulous signature-gathering firms are able to
take advantage of a broken system in need of fundamental
reform. �This bill] would provide greater disclosure whether a
petition is being circulated by volunteers or paid signature
gatherers."
6)Arguments in Opposition : The Howard Jarvis Taxpayers
Association, in opposition to this bill, argues that having
signature gatherers wear a 'scarlet letter' badge will do
nothing more than unfairly prejudice the �signature gathering]
process.
7)Related Legislation : AB 481 (Gordon), requires a person who
is collecting petition signatures to wear a badge indicating
whether he or she is a paid signature gatherer or a volunteer
signature gatherer, and requires similar information be
disclosed on any state or local initiative, referendum, or
recall petition. AB 481 was approved by this committee on a
5-2 vote and is pending on the Senate Floor.
AB 651 (Hueso) requires firms that pay individuals to
circulate petitions and gather signatures to register with the
SOS, among other provisions. AB 651 was approved by this
committee on a 5-2 vote and is pending in the Senate
Appropriations Committee.
SB 168 (Corbett), which is also scheduled to be heard in this
committee today, makes it a misdemeanor for a person to pay or
to receive money or any other thing of value based on the
number of signatures collected on a state or local initiative,
referendum, or recall petition.
8)Previous Legislation : SB 1203 (DeSaulnier) of 2010, would
have required a person who was paid to gather signatures on an
initiative, referendum, or recall petition to wear a badge
that indicated that he or she is paid and disclosed whether he
or she was registered to vote and if so, the county in which
he or she was registered to vote. SB 1203 was approved by
this committee, but subsequently was gutted and amended for an
unrelated purpose.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
SB 448
Page 5
Ballot Initiative Strategy Center
Secretary of State Debra Bowen
Opposition
Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association
Analysis Prepared by : Maria Garcia / E. & R. / (916) 319-2094