Your feedback ensures we stay focused on the facts that matter to you most—take our survey.

California Senate Bill 1253 (2014)

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
California Senate Bill 1253 (2014)
Flag of California.png
Legislature:California State Legislature
Text:SB 1253
Sponsor(s):Sen. Darrell Steinberg (D-6)
Legislative history
Introduced:February 20, 2014
State house:August 27, 2014
State senate:May 29, 2014
Governor:Jerry Brown
Signed:September 28, 2014
Legal environment
State law:Laws governing ballot measures
Code:Elections code


California Senate Bill 1253 was signed into law on September 28, 2014, after being introduced by its sponsor on February 20, 2014, and approved in the House - in a 55 against 23 vote - and Senate - with 29 voting in favor and eight against.[1]

Provisions

Senate Bill 1253 gives initiative proponents the power to withdraw their initiative much nearer the ballot printing deadline than previously permitted, allowing an initiative to be withdrawn at any point up until it qualifies for the ballot. The bill also provides for a 30-day public interaction and review period when the initiative is first proposed, allowing proponents to alter the proposal in response to public input. The bill allows 30 more days to collect signatures - 180 days instead of 150 - to account for the delay in circulation caused by the public review period.[2][3][4]

SB 1253 also requires the Secretary of State’s office to post online and regularly update the top 10 donors of committees in support and opposition of an initiative, as well as demanding certain additional information be added to initiative signature petition forms. Certain provisions would also allow for electronic dissemination of initiative information, rather than requiring the Secretary of State to mail initiative information to each voter.[4]

Support

Governor Brown signing SB 1253 surrounded by supporters of the bill
  • Sen. Steinberg said: “SB 1253 improves the initiative process in a simple but profound way. By allowing an initiative proponent to withdraw their measure closer to the election, it allows for the possibility of reasoned compromise and a better result between the people's elected government and the people's initiative alternative."
  • Helen Hutchison, president of the League of Women Voters of California, said: “California’s initiative process leaves little room for alternatives and compromises in making public policy. SB 1253 changes the timetable in a way that allows the Legislature to engage with proponents and find ways to implement legislative solutions. We look forward to participating in the new process and encouraging Californians to do so."
  • California Common Cause executive director Kathay Feng said: “Common Cause is pleased to stand with Gov. Brown and a broad coalition of organizations to support SB 1253. SB 1253 will give voters the chance to see what initiatives are about early in the process, address flaws if there are problems with the language, and get easy access to information about who is backing the initiatives. SB 1253 modernizes the initiative process to put voters back in driver’s seat."[4]
  • Ronald George, former Chief Justice of the California Supreme Court and Think Long Committee member, said that the approved reform has common sense provisions and will help voters understand what their votes actually mean.[4]
  • Nicolas Berggruen, chair of Think Long Committee for California, expressed approval by saying: “SB 1253 strengthens the integrity of the initiative process, which is uniquely influential in California political life. It introduces transparency of funding while also enabling broader debate and public review so that measures can be modified before they go to the ballot, avoiding unintended consequences."[4]

Opposition

Jon Fleischman, however, claimed the bill was harmful to the initiative process and was designed to make it harder and more cumbersome for initiative proponents to put measures on the ballot. Writing for Breitbart, he listed SB 1253 as one of the "top ten terrible bills Governor Brown should veto," claiming:[5]

“

This bill would make the process of putting ballot initiatives even more cumbersome and drawn out than it already is. It adds more required language on signature petitions, and mandating [sic] a new 30-day public review and comment period before circulation can begin. This measure is designed to make it more difficult to put initiatives on the ballot. (quote)

”
—Jon Fleischman[5]

AB 2219

Certain provisions of SB 1253 depended on Assembly Bill 2219, which was approved and signed by the governor, allowing SB 1253 to be fully implemented. Assembly Bill 2219 makes changes to the notices county elections officials must give to the California Secretary of State required during the signature verification process and alters the other portions of the signature verification process and requirements. The changes are largely designed to allow for the altered time frame and additional flexibility provided in 1253.[3][6]

See also

Footnotes

  1. ↑ LegiScan, "California Assembly Bill 1253 Summary," accessed September 29, 2014
  2. ↑ LegiScan, "California Senate Bill 1253," accessed September 29, 2014
  3. ↑ 3.0 3.1 California Government website, "List of signed and vetoed bills from governor," accessed September 29, 2014
  4. ↑ 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 Lake County News, "STATE: Governor signs ballot reform measure," September 29, 2014, archived September 29, 2014
  5. ↑ 5.0 5.1 Breitbart, "TOP TEN TERRIBLE BILLS GOVERNOR BROWN SHOULD VETO," September 10, 2014
  6. ↑ LegiScan, "California Assembly Bill 2219," accessed June 25, 2014
Retrieved from "https://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=California_Senate_Bill_1253_(2014)&oldid=8446648"