BILL ANALYSIS
SB 1047
Page 1
Date of Hearing: June 27, 2006
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON ELECTIONS AND REDISTRICTING
Tom Umberg, Chair
SB 1047 (Bowen) - As Amended: March 8, 2006
SENATE VOTE : Vote not relevant.
SUBJECT : Paid circulators: penalties.
SUMMARY : Prohibits payment on a per-piece or per-signature
basis for individuals gathering signatures or registering
voters. Specifically, this bill :
1)Makes it a misdemeanor for a person to offer to pay or to pay
money or other valuable consideration to another person, and
makes it a misdemeanor for a person to receive money or other
valuable consideration, either directly or indirectly, on a
per-affidavit basis to assist another person to register to
vote by receiving the completed affidavit of registration.
Provides that these provisions shall not be construed to
prohibit payment for assisting another person to register to
vote if the payment is not, either directly or indirectly, on
a per-affidavit basis.
2)Makes it a misdemeanor for a person to offer to pay or to pay
money or other valuable consideration to another person, and
makes it a misdemeanor for a person to receive money or other
valuable consideration, based either directly or indirectly on
the number of signatures obtained on a state, county,
municipal, or district initiative, referendum, or recall
petition. Provides that these provisions shall not be
construed to prohibit payment for petition circulation if the
payment is not based, either directly or indirectly, on the
number of signatures obtained.
3)Makes various corresponding changes.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Authorizes any person who is a voter or who is qualified to
register to vote to circulate an initiative or referendum
petition. Authorizes any person who is a voter to circulate a
recall petition.
SB 1047
Page 2
2)Requires that a state or local initiative petition contain a
notice alerting voters that the petition may be circulated by
a paid signature gatherer or a volunteer, and that voters have
the right to ask if a petition circulator is a paid gatherer
or volunteer.
3)Requires any person who accepts money or other valuable
consideration in return for assisting with voter registration
to sign and affix on the voter registration form his or her
full name, telephone number, address, and the name and phone
number of the person, company, or organization, if any, that
agrees to pay money or valuable consideration for the
completed affidavit of registration.
4)Requires any person, company, or other organization that
agrees to pay money or other valuable consideration to a
person for assisting with voter registration to maintain
specific records.
5)Requires a petition circulator to declare, under penalty of
perjury, that the circulator witnessed the petition's
signatures being written and that according to the best
information available to and belief of the circulator, each
signature is the genuine signature of the person whose name it
purports to be.
6)Establishes penalties for fraudulent activity related to
signature gathering and voter registration.
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown. State-mandated local program;
contains a crimes and infractions disclaimer.
COMMENTS :
1)Purpose of the Bill : According to the author, "petition and
voter registration fraud can best be addressed by removing the
incentive to commit it. Press reports and statistics from the
Secretary of State demonstrate the need to prohibit per
signature and per affidavit payment to circulators. Recent
federal case law permits this."
2)Bounty Hunter Enforcement Actions : Individuals who are paid
to register voters or to collect signatures on initiative,
referendum, or recall petitions are commonly referred to as
"bounty hunters." According to information from the Secretary
SB 1047
Page 3
of State (SOS), the Election Fraud Investigation Unit (EFIU)
of the SOS has opened 1023 cases involving bounty hunters
since 1994. About 66% of the cases opened by the EFIU
involved cases of fraudulent voter registration, while
approximately 18% of cases involved falsified petition
signatures.
Of the 1023 cases involving bounty hunters, 163 cases are
currently open and 15 cases are pending with various District
Attorneys' offices. Of the cases that have been closed, 67
bounty hunters were convicted following an EFIU investigation,
with 61 of those convictions for fraudulent voter registration
or falsified petition signatures.
3)Orange County Voter Registration : In March of this year, the
Orange County Register and the Los Angeles Times reported that
Orange County elections officials received several complaints
about a voter registration campaign for the Republican Party
of Orange County from voters who were re-registered with the
Republican Party without their permission. According to press
reports, the company in charge of the registration drive was
paying workers as much as $10 for every completed voter
registration card. As of late May, Orange County elections
officials reported receiving about 450 complaints of illegal
voter registrations. Similar complaints were made about voter
registration campaigns in Riverside and San Bernardino
counties. The Attorney General and SOS are investigating
those complaints.
4)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. The Meyer court, however, did not address the issue of
whether a state may regulate the manner in which circulators
are paid.
5)Other Federal Court Jurisprudence : In February 2001, the
Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that a North Dakota law
SB 1047
Page 4
prohibiting payment for signature collection on a
per-signature basis was consistent with the United States
Constitution and with the Supreme Court's rulings in Buckley
and Meyer . In reaching this decision, the court noted that
the state "produced sufficient evidence that the regulation is
necessary to insure the integrity of the initiative process,"
and also noted that no evidence was presented "that payment by
the hour, rather than on commission, would in any way burden
[the] ability to collect signatures." Initiative & Referendum
Institute v. Jaeger (2001), 241 F.3d 614.
In February 2006, the Ninth Circuit Court of appeals ruled that
an Oregon law that prohibited payment to electoral petition
signature gatherers on a piece-work or per-signature basis did
not impose a severe burden under the First Amendment, and
therefore did not unconstitutionally burden core political
speech. The court found that Oregon had an "important
regulatory interest in preventing fraud and its appearances in
its electoral processes," and that prohibiting the payment of
signature gatherers on a per-signature basis was reasonably
related to that interest. Prete v. Bradbury (2006), No.
04-35285.
6)Labor Law Implications : This bill prohibits the payment of
individuals on a per-signature or per-piece basis for
signature collection on petitions and voter registration.
Typically, in California, those individuals who are paid to
circulate petitions or register voters on a per-signature or
per-piece basis are independent contractors. However, to the
extent that this bill forces individuals who are paid to
circulate petitions or register voters to be paid an hourly
wage, this bill could also result in these individuals being
considered employees under California law. As such, the
individual, corporation, or group paying individuals to
circulate petitions may be required to pay minimum wage,
provide workers compensation insurance and unemployment
insurance, and maintain a payroll system.
7)Increased Costs : As noted in comment #6, this bill may
require those individuals or groups paying signature gatherers
to provide certain benefits such as unemployment insurance and
workers compensation insurance. This may result in higher
costs to those groups that pay individuals to circulate
petitions or register voters. In addition, prohibiting payment
of individuals on a per-piece or per-signature basis could
SB 1047
Page 5
increase costs because it may become more difficult to measure
the work product of circulators. Potential increased costs
may be partially offset if, by reducing the incentive to
submit fraudulent signatures and registrations, this
legislation results in paid circulators submitting fewer
fraudulent signatures and registrations.
8)Related Legislation : AB 2946 (Leno), includes provisions that
would make it a misdemeanor for a person to pay or receive
money or any other thing of value based on the number of
signatures obtained on a state or local initiative,
referendum, or recall petition, based on the number of voter
registration affidavits obtained or completed, or based on the
number of absentee ballot applications obtained or completed.
AB 2946 is set for hearing in the Senate Elections,
Reapportionment and Constitutional Amendments Committee on
June 28, 2006. AB 2946 was approved by this committee on
April 18, 2006 by a vote of 4-2, and was approved on the
Assembly Floor by a vote of 48-32.
SB 1598 (Bowen), also being heard in this committee today,
requires an initiative, referendum, or recall petition to
indicate whether it is being circulated by a paid circulator
or a volunteer and to include a statement identifying the five
largest contributors in support of the measure.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
None on file.
Opposition
None on file.
Analysis Prepared by : Ethan Jones / E. & R. / (916) 319-2094