BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



                                                                       AB 786


                                                                      Page  1





          ASSEMBLY THIRD READING


          AB  
          786 (Levine)


          As Amended  April 21, 2015


          Majority vote


           ------------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Committee       |Votes |Ayes                  |Noes                |
          |                |      |                      |                    |
          |                |      |                      |                    |
          |----------------+------+----------------------+--------------------|
          |Elections       |5-1   |Ridley-Thomas, Gatto, |Grove               |
          |                |      |Gordon, Mullin, Perea |                    |
          |                |      |                      |                    |
          |----------------+------+----------------------+--------------------|
          |Transportation  |12-3  |Frazier, Achadjian,   |Baker, Kim,         |
          |                |      |Bloom, Chu, Daly,     |Melendez            |
          |                |      |Dodd,                 |                    |
          |                |      |                      |                    |
          |                |      |                      |                    |
          |                |      |Eduardo Garcia,       |                    |
          |                |      |Gomez, Medina,        |                    |
          |                |      |Nazarian, O'Donnell,  |                    |
          |                |      |Santiago              |                    |
          |                |      |                      |                    |
          |----------------+------+----------------------+--------------------|
          |Appropriations  |12-4  |Gomez, Bonta,         |Bigelow, Gallagher, |
          |                |      |Calderon, Daly,       |Jones, Wagner       |
          |                |      |Eggman, Eduardo       |                    |
          |                |      |Garcia, Gordon,       |                    |
          |                |      |Holden, Quirk,        |                    |
          |                |      |Rendon, Weber, Wood   |                    |








                                                                       AB 786


                                                                      Page  2





          |                |      |                      |                    |
          |                |      |                      |                    |
           ------------------------------------------------------------------- 


          SUMMARY:  Makes changes to current law to ensure compliance with  
          the federal National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) of 1993, as  
          specified.  Specifically, this bill:  


          1)Requires the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) in coordination  
            with the Secretary of State (SOS), to the extent the State's  
            Plan for implementation of the federal NVRA is inconsistent with  
            the NVRA, to take additional steps to fully implement and  
            further comply with 52 United States Code Section 20504.  


          2)Requires the DMV, if a registered voter requests that the DMV  
            inform the SOS that the voter has moved to a different county,  
            to notify the county elections official in both the county from  
            which the voter has moved, and the county to which the voter has  
            moved, of the change of address.  Requires these provisions to  
            become inoperative on July 1, 2016, as specified. 


          FISCAL EFFECT:  According to the Assembly Appropriations  
          Committee, one-time General Fund cost of $2.35 million to the DMV  
          ($1.25 million) and SOS ($1.1 million).  This cost is based on a  
          recently-released budget proposal in the Governor's May revision  
          to provide software/hardware upgrades to the DMV's in-person  
          driver's license application process and online driver's license  
          renewal process and for related updates to the SOS' voter  
          registration systems.  The proposal does not require separate  
          legislation. 


          COMMENTS:  According to the author, "In 1993, Congress signed into  
          law a measure intended to make it easy for Americans to register  
          to vote when they apply for a driver's license.  More than two  








                                                                       AB 786


                                                                      Page  3





          decades later, California has yet to comply with that law? AB 786  
          will require the DMV to finally begin complying with the 22 year  
          old federal 'Motor Voter' law by allowing eligible voters to  
          utilize the driver's license and California ID card application or  
          renewal form as a voter registration form as well.


          "This bill also addresses recent reports indicating that voters  
          are being removed from the rolls against their will when they move  
          from one county to another.  These voters rely on DMV to process  
          their voter registration change of address.  However, DMV and the  
          county elections offices fail to process the change of address in  
          a timely manner."


          When the NVRA took effect in 1995, several states failed to take  
          the steps necessary to comply with the law and several also  
          challenged the constitutionality of the federal mandate.  Three  
          separate lawsuits concerning California's implementation of the  
          NVRA were filed in federal court:  Voting Rights Coalition v.   
          Pete Wilson, Pete Wilson v.  United States of America, and United  
          States of America v. Pete Wilson.  All three cases were combined  
          into a single proceeding and were heard before a federal district  
          court in San Jose on March 2, 1995.  The court found the NVRA  
          constitutional, despite the lack of federal funding provided to  
          states, and the court ruled that California was obligated to  
          implement the NVRA.  The court ordered the state to submit an  
          implementation plan to the court for review to ensure conformity  
          to the requirements of the NVRA.  


          The plan submitted by the state would have brought California into  
          compliance with the requirements of the NVRA, however, there was  
          one notable exception with respect to the method by which a person  
          may register to vote at the DMV. 


          The NVRA explicitly requires a driver's license or identification  
          application to be used as an application for voter registration,  








                                                                       AB 786


                                                                      Page  4





          unless the applicant fails to sign the application.  Additionally,  
          NVRA provides that the voter registration portion of a driver's  
          license application may not require any information that  
          duplicates information required in the driver's license portion of  
          the form, other than a second signature or other information that  
          is necessary to determine an individual's eligibility to register  
          to vote.


          Despite the NVRA's clear requirements, the state's court-approved  
          implementation plan instead called for a two-page application -  
          one page for the driver's license application and one page for the  
          voter registration form.  


          Prior bill analyses suggest the rationale for this two-page plan  
          was due to cost, as the NVRA did not provide states with any  
          direct funding or any mechanism for reimbursement of the costs  
          associated with its implementation.  The cost to create a single,  
          computer generated form to serve as both a driver's license and  
          voter registration application would have been significant.


          Earlier this year a letter was sent to the SOS from American Civil  
          Liberties Union Foundation of San Diego and Imperial Counties,  
          Dmos, Morrison & Forester LLP, and Project Vote stating that  
          California is engaging in continuous and ongoing violations of  
          Section 5 of the NVRA.  The letter also stated that it constituted  
          a formal notice of their intent to initiate litigation at the end  
          of the statutory 90-day waiting period should California fail to  
          remedy the violations of Section 5 of the NVRA, as specified.


          Please see the policy committee analysis for a full discussion on  
          this bill.  












                                                                       AB 786


                                                                      Page  5





          Analysis Prepared by:                                               
                          Nichole Becker / E. & R. / (916) 319-2094  FN:  
          0000646