Help us improve in just 2 minutes—share your thoughts in our reader survey.

California Consumer Personal Information Disclosure and Sale Initiative (2018)

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
California Consumer Personal Information Disclosure and Sale Initiative
Flag of California.png
Election date
November 6, 2018
Topic
Business regulation
Status
Not on the ballot
Type
State statute		Origin
Citizens

The California Consumer Personal Information Disclosure and Sale Initiative was not on the ballot in California as an initiated state statute on November 6, 2018.[1]

The ballot initiative would have allowed consumers to prevent certain businesses from selling or disclosing the consumer's personal information.[1]

Although proponents collected enough signatures for the initiative to appear on the ballot, initiative backers agreed to a compromise bill with legislators to keep the initiative off the ballot. On June 28, 2018, proponents withdrew the initiative.

Withdrawn

On June 28, 2018, the state government of California enacted legislation to require companies that store personal information to disclose to consumers what types of information are collected and allow consumers to prevent businesses from selling their information. The legislation, Assembly Bill 375 (AB 375), resulted from a compromise with the PAC Californians for Consumer Privacy, which agreed to withdraw its ballot initiative in exchange for the bill. Both the state House and state Senate passed the compromise bill in unanimous votes.[2][3][4]

Like the ballot initiative, the bill allows consumers to request that businesses not share or sell their personal information. The bill also allows consumers to request that a business delete their personal information—something the ballot initiative would not have done. Whereas the ballot initiative would have prohibited businesses from treating consumers who had requested that their data not be sold differently than other consumers, the compromise legislation allows companies to offer services or rates based on the information that consumers provided. For example, someone who allows businesses to sell their data could receive free access to a service, whereas those who blocked businesses would need to pay a fee to use the service. Compared to the initiative, the legislation limited the legal damages for businesses that violate the law. Businesses will be given 30 days to address and fix a violation before being fined and fines would be capped at $7,500 per intentional violation.[4][5][6]

On June 25, 2018, Secretary of State Alex Padilla said his office received more than the 365,880 required signatures, qualifying the measure for the ballot. Proponents were given until June 28, 2018, to decide whether to withdraw the initiative. With Gov. Brown signing the compromise legislation on June 28, Californians for Consumer Privacy withdrew its ballot initiative.[7]

Overview

What would this ballot initiative have changed about personal information disclosure?

The ballot initiative would have provided consumers with the ability to request:[1]

  • that a business release information the business collected about the consumer to the consumer;
  • that a business release information on how the consumer's personal information was sold or disclosed and to whom; and
  • that a business does not sell or disclose the consumer's personal information.

The ballot initiative would have applied to businesses that (1) have annual gross revenues of $50 million or more; (2) derive 50 percent or more of their revenues from selling personal information; or (3) sell the personal information of 100,000 or more individuals or devices per year.[1]

For consumers who exercised any of the above three abilities, the measure would have prohibited businesses from treating these consumers differently on that basis. Businesses would have been required to provide consumers with information about whether their personal information could be sold or disclosed commercially and how to opt out of the sale or sharing of their personal information. Consumers would have been permitted to sue businesses for security breaches of consumers’ personal information or for other violations of the measure's provisions. The initiative would have created a Consumer Privacy Fund (CPF), which would have received 20 percent of funds from civil penalties or settlements from civil actions that resulted from the initiative. The CPF would have been used to offset the state's costs related to the initiative's enforcement.[1]

How do companies collect data on consumers?

The ballot initiative would have affected businesses that, in a given year, made more than $50 million each year, derived at least 50 percent of their profits from selling personal information, or sold the personal information of 100,000 or more consumers.[1] Some of the largest companies that this definition would have impacted included Google, the world's largest online search engine, and Facebook, the world's largest social network website. As of 2018, Google and Facebook derived some of their profits from providing users' personal data to advertisers, which, according to the companies, allowed them to remain free for public use and advance technological developments.[8][9][10][11][12] According to Dylan Curran, a data consultant writing for The Guardian, Google and Facebook, along with others, collect information on your location and travels; your demographics, interests, and career; the apps you use; videos that you watch online; emails that you send and receive; your online purchases; and websites you visited.[13]

As of 2018, what were the privacy-related online rules in California?

As of 2018, California Online Privacy Protection Act of 2003 (CalOPPA) required commercial websites and online services that collect personal information on consumers in the state to post the company's privacy-related policies, including policies on the personal information collected, online tracking practices, and the types of third parties who the information could be shared with.[14][15] The ballot initiative, on the other hand, would have required businesses, upon a consumer's request, to disclose the specific information collected and allow consumers to opt out of having the information sold or disclosed.[1]

Who was behind the campaigns surrounding the ballot initiative?

Californians for Consumer Privacy led the campaign in support of the measure.[16][17] Alastair Mactaggart, a San Francisco-based real estate developer, chaired the campaign.[18] As of June 28, 2018, Californians for Consumer Privacy had raised $3.05 million, with 98.4 percent of funds from Mactaggart.[19]

The campaign in opposition to the initiative was led by the Committee to Protect California Jobs. As of June 28, 2018, the campaign had raised $2.15 million, with several electronic, telecommunications, and vehicle companies each giving $200,000. Companies including Amazon, AT&T, Comcast, Facebook, Google, Microsoft, Verizon, and Uber had donated to the campaign.[19]

Text of measure

Ballot title

The official ballot title was as follows:[20]

“ Establishes New Consumer Privacy Rights; Expands Liability for Consumer Data Breaches. Initiative Statute.[21] ”

Petition summary

The summary provided for inclusion on signature petition sheets was as follows:[20]

“ Gives consumers right to learn categories of personal information that businesses collect, sell, or disclose about them, and to whom information is sold or disclosed. Gives consumers right to prevent businesses from selling or disclosing their personal information. Prohibits businesses from discriminating against consumers who exercise these rights. Allows consumers to sue businesses for security breaches of consumers’ data, even if consumers cannot prove injury. Allows for enforcement by consumers, whistleblowers, or public agencies. Imposes civil penalties. Applies to online and brick-and-mortar businesses that meet specific criteria.[21] ”

Fiscal impact

The fiscal impact statement was as follows:[20]

“ Increased costs, potentially reaching the low tens of millions of dollars annually, to state and local governments from implementing and enforcing the measure, some or all of which would be offset by increased penalty revenue or settlement proceeds authorized by the measure. Unknown impact on state and local tax revenues due to economic effects resulting from new requirements on businesses to protect consumer information.[21] ”

Full text

The full text of the measure is available for Initiative #17-0039.

Support

Californians for Consumer Privacy logo 2018.jpg

Californians for Consumer Privacy led the campaign in support of the measure.[16][22] Supporters called the initiative the California Consumer Privacy Act. Alastair Mactaggart, a San Francisco-based real estate developer, chaired the campaign.[23] The campaign hired Mary Ross, a former CIA analyst and legal counsel for the U.S. House Intelligence Committee, as president of the campaign.[24]

Coalition

Californians for Consumer Privacy listed the following organizations as coalition members:[25]

Organizations

  • Academy of Integrative Health & Medicine
  • Campaign for a Commerical-Free Childhood
  • Catalina's List
  • Center for Digital Democracy
  • Center for Public Interest Law
  • Consumer Action
  • Consumer Federation of California
  • Consumers Union
  • Parent Coalition for Student Privacy
  • Privacy Rights Clearinghouse

Businesses

  • Abine Blur
  • DeleteMe
  • Disconnect
  • DuckDuckGo, Inc.

Arguments

Californians for Consumer Privacy, the committee behind the ballot initiative, provided the following argument in favor of the initiative:[26]

“

Your personal information is being sold to businesses you don’t even know exist.

The California Consumer Privacy Act will give you important new consumer privacy rights to take back control of your personal information. This November 2018 ballot measure says:

  • You have the right to tell a business not to share or sell your personal information.

...or at least you should. California law has not kept pace with changing business practices. Businesses not only know where you live and how many children you have, but also how fast you drive, your personality, sleep habits, health and financial information, current location, web browsing history, to name just a few things.

  • You have the right to know where and to whom your data is being sold or disclosed.

...but until you do, businesses will continue to use your personal information for their own purposes, including targeting you with ads, discriminating against you based on price or service level, and compiling your information into an extensive electronic file on you.

  • You have the right to protections against businesses who do not uphold the value of your privacy.

Passing the California Consumer Privacy Act will give you these rights. It’s your personal information. Take back control![21]

”

Opposition

Committee to Protect California Jobs led the campaign in opposition to the measure.[19]

Opponents

Organizations

  • Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, Inc.[19]
  • California Chamber of Commerce[19]

Businesses

  • Amazon.com, Inc.[19]
  • AT&T, Inc.[19]
  • Comcast Corporation[19]
  • Cox Communications, Inc.[19]
  • Google, LLC[19]
  • Microsoft Corporation[19]
  • Uber Technologies, Inc.[19]
  • Verizon Communications, Inc.[19]

Arguments

The Committee to Protect California Jobs, led the campaign in opposition to the measure, issued the following statement against the measure:[27]

“

This ballot measure disconnects California. It is unworkable, requiring the internet and businesses in California to operate differently than the rest of the world -- limiting our choices, hurting our businesses, and cutting our connection to the global economy.

The internet is a seamless and global network. Yet the proponent, a multi-millionaire real estate developer with no background in privacy regulation, is seeking to create a California-only regulatory scheme. It makes no sense to attempt to wall off our state cutting off Californians from convenient services.

The only real beneficiaries of this measure will be trial lawyers, who will be allowed to sue businesses for violation of the measure even if they cannot prove anyone has been harmed. This will open the floodgates for abusive, costly lawsuits.[21]

”

Lothar Determann, a law professor at UC Berkeley and UC Hastings, said:[28]

“

As a U.S. company, this is going to be a big hit to the business model. I don’t think we would have [Google] Maps, social media, virtual worlds, self-driving cars, if you have to give a privacy notice, an opt out. I think it would just throw everything behind.[21]

”

Position of Facebook, Inc.

On February 27, 2018, Facebook—the nation’s largest online social networking firm—contributed $200,000 to the Committee to Protect California Jobs, which was organized to oppose the ballot initiative.[19]

Alastair Mactaggart, the real estate developer behind the initiative, said the support campaign reached out to Facebook to attempt to enlist the company's support. He said the campaign did not receive a response from Facebook.[29] Mactaggart penned a letter to Mark Zuckerberg, co-founder and CEO of Facebook, saying, "We call upon you to either support our ballot measure, or to acknowledge that Facebook’s practices violate our initiative’s prohibitions, namely that you sell your users’ personal information, and that you plan to continue doing so."[30] Facebook announced on April 11, 2018, that the firm would provide no additional funds to the opposition campaign, stating, "We took this step in order to focus our efforts on supporting reasonable privacy measures in California."[31][32]

Campaign finance

See also: Campaign finance requirements for California ballot measures
Total campaign contributions:
Support: $3,053,735.00
Opposition: $2,150,000.00

There was one ballot measure committee, Californians for Consumer Privacy, registered in support of the measure. The committee had raised $3.05 million, with 98.2 percent of funds received from San Francisco-based real estate developer Alastair Mactaggart. The committee had spent $2.97 million.[19]

There was one ballot measure committee, Committee to Protect California Jobs, Sponsored by the California Chamber of Commerce, registered in opposition to the measure. The committee had raised $2.15 million, with seven electronic, telecommunications, and vehicle companies each giving $200,000. The committee spent $1.28 million.[19]

Support

The contribution and expenditure totals for the committees in support of the initiative.[19]

Committees in support of the Consumer Personal Information Disclosure and Sale Initiative
Supporting committeesCash contributionsIn-kind servicesCash expenditures
Californians for Consumer Privacy$2,753,703.00$300,032.00$2,670,196.18
Total$2,753,703.00$300,032.00$2,670,196.18
Totals in support
Total raised:$3,053,735.00
Total spent:$2,970,228.18

Donors

The following were the top donors who contributed to the support committee:[19]

Donor Cash In-kind Total
Alastair Mactaggart $2,700,000.00 $300,000.00 $3,000,000.00
Michael Erickson $49,000.00 $0.00 $49,000.00

Opposition

The contribution and expenditure totals for the committee in opposition to the initiative.[19]

Committees in opposition to the Consumer Personal Information Disclosure and Sale Initiative
Opposing committeesCash contributionsIn-kind servicesCash expenditures
Committee to Protect California Jobs, Sponsored by the California Chamber of Commerce$2,150,000.00$0.00$1,279,779.82
Total$2,150,000.00$0.00$1,279,779.82
Totals in opposition
Total raised:$2,150,000.00
Total spent:$1,279,779.82

Donors

The following were the donors who contributed $150,000 or more to the opposition committee:[19]

Donor Cash In-kind Total
Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, Inc. $200,000.00 $0.00 $200,000.00
AT&T, Inc. and its Affiliates $200,000.00 $0.00 $200,000.00
California New Car Dealers Association Issues PAC $200,000.00 $0.00 $200,000.00
Comcast Corporation $200,000.00 $0.00 $200,000.00
Facebook, Inc. $200,000.00 $0.00 $200,000.00
Google, LLC $200,000.00 $0.00 $200,000.00
Verizon Communications, Inc. and its Affiliates $200,000.00 $0.00 $200,000.00
Amazon.com, Inc. $195,000.00 $0.00 $195,000.00
Microsoft Corporation $195,000.00 $0.00 $195,000.00

Background

Cambridge Analytica's data on Facebook users

Cambridge Analytica, a political consulting firm, retained data on 50 million to 87 million Facebook users through a quiz app called thisisyourdigitallife. About 270,000 users downloaded that app, which retained their data. The app also collected data from the quiz takers' friends' profiles as well, leading to the collection of tens of millions of users' data. Cambridge Analytica worked for Ted Cruz's (R) and Donald Trump's (R) presidential campaigns in 2016. Cambridge Analytica said the data was not used in providing services to the Trump campaign.[33][34][35] In 2017, Cambridge Analytica worked for a campaign calling on voters in the United Kingdom to vote "leave" in the European Union membership referendum (also known as Brexit).[36]

Steve Weisman, a law lecturer at Bentley University, said there was nothing illegal about Cambridge Analytica using harvested data from Facebook users to target voters. He said the problem was how Cambridge Analytica obtained the data, which, according to Facebook, was without the company's permission.[37]

California state privacy laws

The constitutions of 10 states, including California, contain provisions that relate to a right to privacy.[38] Section 1 of Article I of the California Constitution provided that "All people are by nature free and independent and have inalienable rights. Among these are ... pursuing and obtaining safety, happiness, and privacy."[39]

According to the California Legislative Analyst's Office, the state had statutes governing information sharing and data disclosure. As of 2017, the privacy laws related to information and data provided the following:[40]

  • defined personal information to include (1) name, (2) social security number, (3) physical address, and (4) identifying information that allows for contacting of an individual in person or online;
  • required banks to obtain a customer’s permission before sharing the customer's financial information;
  • required internet companies that collect personal information to state their policy-related policies on their website, including a description of what type of information is collected and what entities those companies share the personal information with;
  • required businesses that collect and share consumers' personal information to disclose, upon a consumer's request, the information collected and shared;
  • required businesses that possess consumers' personal information to take reasonable security procedures to safeguard against data breaches;
  • required businesses to tell individuals if a data breach affected their personal information; and
  • empowered the state attorney general to prosecute crimes and bring civil actions against entities that violated the privacy-related laws.

Path to the ballot

See also: California signature requirements and Laws governing the initiative process in California

Process in California

In California, the number of signatures required for an initiated state statute is equal to 5 percent of the votes cast in the preceding gubernatorial election. Petitions are allowed to circulate for 180 days from the date the attorney general prepares the petition language. Signatures need to be certified at least 131 days before the general election. As the verification process can take multiple months, the secretary of state provides suggested deadlines for ballot initiatives.

The requirements to get initiated state statutes certified for the 2018 ballot:

  • Signatures: 365,880 valid signatures were required.
  • Deadline: The deadline for signature verification was June 28, 2018. However, the secretary of state suggested deadlines for turning in signatures of March 7, 2018, for initiatives needing a full check of signatures and April 24, 2018, for initiatives needing a random sample of signatures verified.

Signatures are first filed with local election officials, who determine the total number of signatures submitted. If the total number is equal to at least 100 percent of the required signatures, then local election officials perform a random check of signatures submitted in their counties. If the random sample estimates that more than 110 percent of the required number of signatures are valid, the initiative is eligible for the ballot. If the random sample estimates that between 95 and 110 percent of the required number of signatures are valid, a full check of signatures is done to determine the total number of valid signatures. If less than 95 percent are estimated to be valid, the initiative does not make the ballot.

Initiative #17-0027

On September 1, 2017, Mary Ross and Alastair Mactaggart filed a letter requesting ballot language to begin circulating Initiative #17-0027. The attorney general's office issued language on November 7, 2017, allowing petitioners to begin collecting signatures. Signatures for Initiative #17-0027 would have been due on May 7, 2018. However, Ross and Mactaggart filed a second version of the measure—Initiative #17-0039. Petitioners decided to collect signatures for the second version of the measure, rather than Initiative #17-0027.[7]

Initiative #17-0039

On October 12, 2017, Ross and Mactaggart filed Initiative #17-0039. On December 18, 2017, petitioners were given the go-ahead to begin collecting signatures. On February 6, 2018, the campaign reported collecting at least 25 percent of the required signatures. Petitioners had until July 18, 2018, to submit 365,880 valid signatures.[7]

On May 3, 2018, sponsors reported filing 625,000 signatures for the ballot initiative.[41] About 58.5 percent of the signatures needed to be found valid for the initiative to make the ballot.

Compared to the 15 ballot initiatives certified for the ballot in California in 2016, a 58.5 percent validation requirement was about 3.4 percentage points below the average for an initiative to make the ballot. The 15 ballot initiatives from 2016 had an average validation requirement of 61.9 percent, with a range between 58.1 and 67.4 percent.

On June 25, 2018, Secretary of State Alex Padilla said his office received more than the 365,880 required signatures, qualifying the measure for the ballot.

How to cast a vote

See also: Voting in California

Poll times

All polls in California are open from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Pacific Time. An individual who is in line at the time polls close must be allowed to vote.[42]

Registration requirements

Check your voter registration status here.

To vote in California, an individual must be a U.S. citizen and California resident. A voter must be at least 18 years of age on Election Day. Pre-registration is available at 16 years of age. Pre-registered voters are automatically registered to vote when they turn 18.[43]

Automatic registration

California automatically registers eligible individuals to vote when they complete a driver's license, identification (ID) card, or change of address transaction through the Department of Motor Vehicles. Learn more by visiting this website.

Online registration

See also: Online voter registration

California has implemented an online voter registration system. Residents can register to vote by visiting this website.

Same-day registration

California allows same-day voter registration.

Californians must be registered to vote at least 15 days before Election Day. If the registration deadline has passed for an upcoming election, voters may visit a location designated by their county elections official during the 14 days prior to, and including Election Day to conditionally register to vote and vote a provisional ballot, which are counted once county election officials have completed the voter registration verification process. The state refers to this process as Same Day Voter Registration.[44][45]

Residency requirements

To register to vote in California, you must be a resident of the state. State law does not specify a length of time for which you must have been a resident to be eligible.

Verification of citizenship

See also: Laws permitting noncitizens to vote in the United States

California's constitution requires that voters be U.S. citizens. When registering to vote, proof of citizenship is not required. Individuals who become U.S. citizens less than 15 days before an election must bring proof of citizenship to their county elections office to register to vote in that election. An individual applying to register to vote must attest that they are a U.S. citizen under penalty of perjury.[44]

As of November 2024, two jurisdictions in California had authorized noncitizen residents to vote for local board of education positions through local ballot measures. Only one of those jurisdictions, San Francisco, had implemented that law. Noncitizens voting for board of education positions must register to vote using a separate application from the state voter registration application.[46]

All 49 states with voter registration systems require applicants to declare that they are U.S. citizens in order to register to vote in state and federal elections, under penalty of perjury or other punishment.[47] Seven states — Alabama, Arizona, Georgia, Kansas, Louisiana, New Hampshire, and Wyoming — have laws requiring verification of citizenship at the time of voter registration, whether in effect or not. In three states — California, Maryland, and Vermont — at least one local jurisdiction allows noncitizens to vote in some local elections. Noncitizens registering to vote in those elections must complete a voter registration application provided by the local jurisdiction and are not eligible to register as state or federal voters.

Verifying your registration

The secretary of state's My Voter Status website allows residents to check their voter registration status online.

Voter ID requirements

California does not require voters to present identification before casting a ballot in most cases. However, some voters may be asked to show a form of identification when voting if they are voting for the first time after registering to vote by mail and did not provide a driver license number, California identification number, or the last four digits of their social security number.[48][49] On September 29, 2024, Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) signed SB 1174 into law prohibiting any jurisdiction in the state from adopting a local law that requires voters to present ID before voting.[50]

The following list of accepted ID was current as of October 2024. Click here for the California Secretary of State page to ensure you have the most current information.

“
  • Current and valid photo identification provided by a third party in the ordinary course of business that includes the name and photograph of the individual presenting it. Examples of photo identification include, but are not limited to, the following documents:
    • driver's license or identification card of any state;
    • passport;
    • employee identification card;
    • identification card provided by a commercial establishment;
    • credit or debit card;
    • military identification card;
    • student identification card;
    • health club identification card;
    • insurance plan identification card; or
    • public housing identification card.
  • Any of the following documents, provided that the document includes the name and address of the individual presenting it, and is dated since the date of the last general election…:
    • utility bill;
    • bank statement;
    • government check;
    • government paycheck;
    • document issued by a governmental agency;
    • sample ballot or other official elections document issued by a governmental, agency dated for the election in which the individual is providing it as proof, of residency or identity;
    • voter notification card issued by a governmental agency;
    • public housing identification card issued by a governmental agency;
    • lease or rental statement or agreement issued by a governmental agency;
    • student identification card issued by a governmental agency;
    • tuition statement or bill issued by a governmental agency;
    • insurance plan card or drug discount card issued by a governmental agency;
    • discharge certificates, pardons, or other official documents issued to the individual by a governmental agency in connection with the resolution of a criminal case, indictment, sentence, or other matter;
    • public transportation authority senior citizen and disabled discount cards issued by a governmental agency;
    • identification documents issued by governmental disability agencies;
    • identification documents issued by government homeless shelters and other government temporary or transitional facilities;
    • drug prescription issued by a government doctor or other governmental health care provider; (R) property tax statement issued by a governmental agency;
    • vehicle registration issued by a governmental agency; or
    • vehicle certificate of ownership issued by a governmental agency.[21]
 ”

State profile

Demographic data for California
 CaliforniaU.S.
Total population:38,993,940316,515,021
Land area (sq mi):155,7793,531,905
Race and ethnicity**
White:61.8%73.6%
Black/African American:5.9%12.6%
Asian:13.7%5.1%
Native American:0.7%0.8%
Pacific Islander:0.4%0.2%
Two or more:4.5%3%
Hispanic/Latino:38.4%17.1%
Education
High school graduation rate:81.8%86.7%
College graduation rate:31.4%29.8%
Income
Median household income:$61,818$53,889
Persons below poverty level:18.2%11.3%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, "American Community Survey" (5-year estimates 2010-2015)
Click here for more information on the 2020 census and here for more on its impact on the redistricting process in California.
**Note: Percentages for race and ethnicity may add up to more than 100 percent because respondents may report more than one race and the Hispanic/Latino ethnicity may be selected in conjunction with any race. Read more about race and ethnicity in the census here.

Presidential voting pattern

See also: Presidential voting trends in California

California voted for the Democratic candidate in all seven presidential elections between 2000 and 2024.


More California coverage on Ballotpedia

See also

External links

Footnotes

  1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 California Attorney General, "Initiative 17-0039," October 12, 2017
  2. ↑ The Sacramento Bee, "There's a deal to pull consumer privacy measure from the California ballot," June 21, 2018
  3. ↑ Los Angeles Times, "California lawmakers agree to new consumer privacy rules that would avert showdown on the November ballot," June 25, 2018
  4. ↑ 4.0 4.1 California State Legislature, "AB-375," accessed June 25, 2018
  5. ↑ Wired, "California Unanimously Passes Historic Privacy Bill," June 28, 2018
  6. ↑ The Verge, "California just passed one of the toughest data privacy laws in the country," June 28, 2018
  7. ↑ 7.0 7.1 7.2 California Secretary of State, "Ballot Measures," accessed August 29, 2017
  8. ↑ NBC News, "Google sells the future, powered by your personal data," May 10, 2018
  9. ↑ New York Times, "How Calls for Privacy May Upend Business for Facebook and Google," March 24, 2018
  10. ↑ New York Times, "What You Don’t Know About How Facebook Uses Your Data," April 11, 2018
  11. ↑ Vox, "Lawmakers seem confused about what Facebook does — and how to fix it," April 10, 2018
  12. ↑ Esteve, Asunción. "The business of personal data: Google, Facebook, and privacy issues in the EU and the USA." International Data Privacy Law 7, 1. (2007): 36-47.
  13. ↑ The Guardian, "Are you ready? Here is all the data Facebook and Google have on you," March 30, 2018
  14. ↑ California State Legislature, "Code: Internet Privacy Requirements," accessed June 21, 2018
  15. ↑ California Attorney General, "Privacy Laws," accessed June 21, 2018
  16. ↑ 16.0 16.1 Californians for Consumer Privacy, "Homepage," accessed March 21, 2018
  17. ↑ Los Angeles Times, "Proposed California ballot initiative would give consumers more control over their personal information online," September 1, 2017
  18. ↑ Californians for Consumer Privacy, "About Us," accessed June 21, 2018
  19. ↑ 19.00 19.01 19.02 19.03 19.04 19.05 19.06 19.07 19.08 19.09 19.10 19.11 19.12 19.13 19.14 19.15 19.16 19.17 19.18 19.19 Cal-Access, "Campaign Finance," accessed March 21, 2018
  20. ↑ 20.0 20.1 20.2 California Secretary of State, "Initiatives and Referenda Cleared for Circulation," accessed March 6, 2017
  21. ↑ 21.0 21.1 21.2 21.3 21.4 21.5 21.6 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
  22. ↑ Los Angeles Times, "Proposed California ballot initiative would give consumers more control over their personal information online," September 1, 2017
  23. ↑ Californians for Consumer Privacy, "About Us," accessed June 21, 2018
  24. ↑ New York Times, "Silicon Valley Faces Regulatory Fight on Its Home Turf," May 13, 2018
  25. ↑ Californians for Consumer Privacy, "Coalition," accessed March 21, 2018
  26. ↑ Californians for Consumer Privacy, "About," accessed June 21, 2018
  27. ↑ PR Newswire, "Statement By The Committee To Protect California Jobs On Submission Of Signatures For Internet Regulation Ballot Measure," May 3, 2018
  28. ↑ Courthouse News Service, "CA Privacy Advocates Face Off Against Tech Companies," April 19, 2018
  29. ↑ The Mercury News, "California privacy advocates ask Facebook why it’s opposing proposed ballot measure," March 22, 2018
  30. ↑ Californians for Consumer Privacy, "Sign to tell Facebook: My Life is not Your Business," accessed April 12, 2018
  31. ↑ The Verge, "Facebook says it will stop fighting a major California privacy initiative," April 12, 2018
  32. ↑ Cal Matters, "California Election 2018: Updates and Analysis," April 11, 2018
  33. ↑ ARS Technica, "Facebook’s Cambridge Analytica scandal, explained," March 20, 2018
  34. ↑ Wired, "The Cambridge Analytica story, explained," accessed June 20, 2018
  35. ↑ Vox, "The Facebook and Cambridge Analytica scandal, explained with a simple diagram," May 2, 2018
  36. ↑ The Guardian, "The Cambridge Analytica files: the story so far," March 25, 2018
  37. ↑ Fox News, "Here's why the Facebook-Cambridge Analytica controversy matters," March 23, 2018
  38. ↑ NCSL, "Privacy Protections in State Constitutions," May 5, 2017
  39. ↑ California State Legislature, "California Constitution," accessed June 21, 2018
  40. ↑ California Legislative Analyst's Office, "Initiative Analysis," December 1, 2017
  41. ↑ Spectrum News 9, "Backers of data privacy measure submit signatures for ballot," May 3, 2018
  42. ↑ California Secretary of State, "Section 3: Polling Place Hours," accessed August 12, 2024
  43. ↑ California Secretary of State, "Voter Registration," accessed August 13, 2024
  44. ↑ 44.0 44.1 California Secretary of State, "Registering to Vote," accessed August 13, 2024
  45. ↑ California Secretary of State, "Same Day Voter Registration (Conditional Voter Registration)," accessed August 13, 2024
  46. ↑ SF.gov, "Non-citizen voting rights in local Board of Education elections," accessed November 14, 2024
  47. ↑ Under federal law, the national mail voter registration application (a version of which is in use in all states with voter registration systems) requires applicants to indicate that they are U.S. citizens in order to complete an application to vote in state or federal elections, but does not require voters to provide documentary proof of citizenship. According to the U.S. Department of Justice, the application "may require only the minimum amount of information necessary to prevent duplicate voter registrations and permit State officials both to determine the eligibility of the applicant to vote and to administer the voting process."
  48. ↑ California Secretary of State, "What to Bring to Your Polling Place," accessed August 12, 2024
  49. ↑ BARCLAYS OFFICIAL CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS, "Section 20107," accessed August 12, 2024
  50. ↑ Democracy Docket, "California Governor Signs Law to Ban Local Voter ID Requirements," September 30, 2024
v • e
2018 ballot measures
I&R States
 • Alaska • Arizona • Arkansas • California • Colorado • Florida • Idaho • Maine • Maryland • Massachusetts • Michigan • Missouri • Montana • Nebraska • Nevada • New Mexico • North Dakota • Ohio • Oklahoma • Oregon • South Dakota • Utah • Washington
Non I&R States
Political topics
 • Abortion‎ • Administration of government‎ • Bond issues‎ • Business regulation‎ • Campaign finance‎ • Civil and criminal trials‎ • Civil rights‎ • Civil service‎ • Constitutional conventions‎ • Constitutional language‎ • County and municipal governance‎ • Definition of a corporation‎ • Direct democracy measures‎ • Education‎ • Elections and campaigns‎ • Energy‎ • Environment‎ • Federal constitutional issues‎ • Forests and parks‎ • Gambling‎ • Government accountability‎ • Healthcare‎ • Housing‎ • Hunting and fishing‎ • Labor and unions‎ • Law enforcement‎ • LGBT issues‎ • Marijuana‎ • Natural resources‎ • Pension‎ • Property‎ • Redistricting measures‎ • State and local government budgets, spending and finance‎ • State executive official measures‎ • State judiciary‎ • State legislatures measures‎ • Statehood‎ • Suffrage‎ • Supermajority requirements‎ • Taxes‎ • Term limits‎ • Tobacco‎ • Tort law‎ • Transportation‎ • Veterans‎ • Water‎ • Welfare‎
Other
Flag of California
v • e
State of California
Sacramento (capital)
Elections

What's on my ballot? | Elections in 2025 | How to vote | How to run for office | Ballot measures

Government

Who represents me? | U.S. President | U.S. Congress | Federal courts | State executives | State legislature | State and local courts | Counties | Cities | School districts | Public policy

Retrieved from "https://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=California_Consumer_Personal_Information_Disclosure_and_Sale_Initiative_(2018)&oldid=10223341"