BILL ANALYSIS �
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 2233|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 2233
Author: Donnelly (R)
Amended: 5/13/14 in Assembly
Vote: 21
SENATE ELECTIONS & CONSTITUTIONAL AMEND. COMM : 5-0, 6/24/14
AYES: Padilla, Anderson, Hancock, Jackson, Pavley
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 70-3, 5/27/14 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Primary elections: petitions: signatures
SOURCE : Author
DIGEST : This bill reduces the number of signatures that a
candidate needs at a special vacancy election on a petition in
lieu of paying a filing fee in proportion to any reduction in
the amount of time to collect signatures.
ANALYSIS : Existing law:
1.Requires a person who seeks to have his/her name printed on
the ballot as a candidate for an office at the direct primary
election to file a declaration of candidacy and nomination
papers.
2.Requires a candidate for specified offices to pay a fee to
file the declaration of candidacy. Provides that the amount
of the fee is established as follows:
CONTINUED
AB 2233
Page
2
A. In the case of a United States Senator or any statewide
office, 2% of the first-year salary for the office;
B. In the case of a Representative in Congress, member of
the Board of Equalization, justice of the court of appeal,
state Senator, or Member of the Assembly, 1% of the
first-year salary; and
C. In the case of a county or judicial office to be voted
only wholly within one county, 1% of the annual salary of
the office provided, however, no filing fee shall be
charged for any office for which the annual salary is
$2,500 or less.
1.Permits a candidate to submit a petition containing signatures
of registered voters in lieu of paying a filing fee. Allows
any registered voter to sign an in-lieu-filing-fee petition
for any candidate for whom he/she is eligible to vote.
Requires a candidate to collect the following number of
signatures on an in-lieu-filing-fee petition in order to cover
the full amount of the filing fee that is required to be paid:
A. For the office of Member of the Assembly, 1,500
signatures;
B. For the office of state Senate or Representative in
Congress, 3,000 signatures;
C. For statewide office, 10,000 signatures; and
D. For all other offices for which a filing fee is
required:
If the number of registered voters in the district
is 2,000 or more, four signatures for each dollar of the
filing fee or 10% of the total of registered voters in
the district, whichever is less; or
If the number of registered voters in the district
is less than 2,000, four signatures for each dollar of
the filing fee or 20% of the total of registered voters
in the district, whichever is less.
This bill:
CONTINUED
AB 2233
Page
3
1.Provides that if the number of days for a candidate to collect
signatures on a petition in lieu of a filing fee for a special
election that is held to fill a vacancy is less than the
number of days that a candidate will have to collect
signatures on a petition at a regular election for the same
office, the elections official shall reduce the required
number of signatures for the petition by the same proportion
as the reduction in time for the candidate to collect
signatures.
2.Provides that in determining the proportion of time by which
the period for a candidate to collect signatures has been
reduced, the elections official shall exclude any days
allotted for filing a supplemental petition.
3.Provides that an in-lieu-filing-fee petition for a special
election held to fill a congressional or legislative vacancy
shall require not less than 100 signatures.
Background
California law requires candidates for many elective offices to
pay a filing fee at the time they obtain nomination papers from
the elections official. Filing fees are intended, in part, to
help cover the administrative costs of conducting the election,
but also serve as a means of limiting the size of the ballot in
order to reduce voter confusion, prevent overwhelming voting
systems, and allow the electorate to focus attention on a
smaller number of candidates in order that elections may better
reflect the will of the majority. Courts have long recognized
that states have a legitimate interest in regulating the number
of candidates on the ballot for these reasons.
At the same time, courts have also found that a state cannot
require candidates to pay a filing fee in order to appear on the
ballot unless the state also provides a reasonable alternative
means of ballot access. In Lubin v. Panish (1974) 415 U.S. 709,
the United States Supreme Court found that a California law that
required certain candidates for office to pay a filing fee in
order to appear on the ballot was unconstitutional because the
law did not provide an alternate means of qualifying for the
ballot for indigent candidates who were unable to pay the fee.
In finding California's filing fee law to be invalid, the court
CONTINUED
AB 2233
Page
4
noted that there were other "obvious and well known means of
testing the 'seriousness' of a candidacy which do not measure
the probability of attracting significant voter support solely
by the neutral fact of payment of a filing fee," including a
requirement for a candidate who cannot pay the filing fee to
"demonstrate the 'seriousness' of his candidacy by persuading a
substantial number of voters to sign a petition in his behalf."
In response to the Supreme Court's decision in Lubin, the
Legislature enacted and the Governor signed AB 914 (Ray
Gonzales, Chapter 454, Statutes of 1974), an urgency measure
that permitted candidates to file petitions containing the
signatures of a specified number of registered voters in lieu of
paying a filing fee. The number of signatures required to be
collected in lieu of paying a filing fee has remained largely
unchanged since the signatures-in-lieu procedure was originally
adopted in 1974, notwithstanding the fact that the number of
registered voters in California has increased by more than 77%
since that time.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No Local:
No
SUPPORT : (Verified 6/27/14)
California Alliance for Retired Americans
Coalition for Free and Open Elections
Libertarian Party of California
Peace and Freedom Party of California
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the author's office, this
is a simple bill that will allow more access to special
elections. Currently, the number of signatures required in a
special election are the same amount required in a regularly
scheduled election, even though the number of days to collect
those signatures is usually far less. By dropping the number of
signatures required in proportion to the number of days a
candidate has to collect those signatures, we would be allowing
the public better access to the ballot.
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 70-3, 05/27/14
AYES: Achadjian, Allen, Ammiano, Bigelow, Bloom, Bocanegra,
Bonta, Bradford, Brown, Buchanan, Ian Calderon, Campos, Chau,
Ch�vez, Chesbro, Conway, Cooley, Dababneh, Dahle, Daly,
CONTINUED
AB 2233
Page
5
Dickinson, Donnelly, Fong, Fox, Frazier, Beth Gaines, Garcia,
Gatto, Gomez, Gordon, Gorell, Gray, Grove, Hagman, Hall,
Harkey, Roger Hern�ndez, Holden, Jones, Jones-Sawyer, Levine,
Linder, Logue, Lowenthal, Maienschein, Mansoor, Medina,
Melendez, Mullin, Muratsuchi, Nazarian, Nestande, Olsen,
Perea, John A. P�rez, V. Manuel P�rez, Quirk, Rendon,
Ridley-Thomas, Salas, Skinner, Stone, Ting, Wagner, Waldron,
Weber, Wieckowski, Wilk, Yamada, Atkins
NOES: Alejo, Gonzalez, Williams
NO VOTE RECORDED: Bonilla, Eggman, Pan, Patterson, Quirk-Silva,
Rodriguez, Vacancy
RM:nl 6/27/14 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED