CVF in the News

Below are excerpts from news stories and commentary highlighting CVF's work or featuring comments from CVF staff and board members. Archived CVF in the Media stories are also available.

 

California's health exchange to serve as voter registration hub

The Sacramento Bee, May 16, 2013

Excerpt:

Millions of Californians who contact the state's new health exchange to buy insurance will be given the opportunity to register to vote, too, a move that some Republicans fear could benefit Democrats.

Secretary of State Debra Bowen made California the first state to designate its health exchange as a voter registration agency Wednesday but others are expected to follow suit, said Shannan Velayas, Bowen's spokeswoman.

"This is about making sure that all eligible Californians are offered the chance to register to vote," Velayas said Thursday.

A 1993 federal law requires states to designate their agencies and offices that provide public assistance or disability services as voter registration agencies, Velayas said.

The federal law commonly is known as "motor voter" because it ensured that applicants for drivers' licenses nationwide would be asked if they wanted to register to vote.

- - - - - - - - -

When the state launched an online system of voter registration two months before last year's November election, the new voters who signed up were more Democratic than the voting population as a whole, according to an analysis by the California Civic Engagement Project at the University of California, Davis.

Democratic Sen. Lou Correa of Santa Ana, chairman of the Senate elections committee, said he was not aware of Bowen's designation of Covered California this week but that he supports the concept.

"I believe the foundation of democracy is voters," he said. "More voter participation means greater democracy in our country."

Lori Shellenberger, director of the Voting Rights Project of the American Civil Liberties Union of California, characterized Bowen's designation as "one of the most significant voter registration policy decisions in the state's history."

Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation, a nonprofit group promoting voter participation, said that it's natural for political parties to look at potential for partisan impact -- but she sees the stakes differently.

Nearly 6 million Californians, nearly one of every four eligible adults, are not currently registered to vote, state records show.

"I strongly believe that helping the people who are most underrepresented become active voters and part of the process is in everybody's interest," Alexander said. "You don't want huge swaths of our population alienated from society." (full story)

Alabama campaign finance reports soon to go online

The Anniston Star, By Tim Lockette, May 4, 2013

Excerpt:

Following the money in Alabama politics might soon get a whole lot easier.

Officials of the Alabama Secretary of State's office say they'll launch a searchable online database of campaign donations by the end of May — replacing the office's old system of paper filings and scanned-in documents.

State officials say the changes should make it easier for average voters to figure out who’s accepting money from whom.

“If you know Joe Schmoe in your local area, and you know Joe Schmoe Construction Company gives political donations, you can look it up,” said Julie Sinclair, elections attorney for the Secretary of State's office.

State law demands that political candidates and political action committees report their donations and spending online, beginning June 1. That law was one of several campaign finance reform bills passed by the Republican legislative supermajority in 2011, the GOP's first year controlling the House and Senate.

Under the current system, candidates file paper forms, which are then scanned in and posted online at www.sos.alabama.gov. The result was often exasperating even for experienced researchers. Candidates filed weekly, daily and monthly reports in which some donations seemed to be duplicated. Candidates who made errors had to correct them by filing additional forms. Documents sometimes didn’t get scanned in.

Perhaps most significantly, there was no way to search by donor. Donations by individuals or corporations showed up in candidates' reports, but it was nearly impossible to tell how much those individuals gave overall.

"Electronic filing helps everybody," said Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation, a group that has studied campaign finance reporting in all 50 states. "It helps voters, it helps candidates, it helps election officials. The only reason elected officials don't find it desirable is because a confusing system keeps you from finding out who’s funding them."

From 2002 to 2008, Alexander's group teamed up with the University of California Los Angeles and the Pew Research Center to grade all the states on accessibility to campaign finance records. Alabama got an F every time, Alexander says.

In 2008, the state was one of only eight without an electronic filing system. Alexander said many of those states were already working on an electronic filing system at the time.

She said highly involved, active voters would see the most benefit from the change.

"Disclosure helps voters anticipate what they're going to get," she said. "A lot of voters view voting as a hiring process. They want to know who your 'references' are." (full story)

California Democrats push voting laws that could broaden their reach

Sacramento Bee, By Torey Van Oot, April 15, 2013

Excerpt:

Fresh off their 2012 wins at the polls, California Democrats are looking to broaden their reach by advancing a new batch of bills aimed at expanding voter access and increasing turnout.

Achieving that result would likely benefit Democrats, who historically fare worse in the lower-turnout nonpresidential elections, as they defend supermajorities in the state Legislature and competitive congressional seats won last year in the 2014 election.

"We have work to do," House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi told delegates at the state party's convention over the weekend in Sacramento. "We just got started."

Some of the efforts are meant to build on the success Democrats had with using the state's new online registration system, which launched about two months ahead of the November election.

The new voters who signed up online were more Democratic and turned out at higher levels than the voting population as a whole, according to an analysis by the California Civic Engagement Project at the University of California, Davis.

Democrats highlighted those numbers at their weekend convention, making the system the subject of workshops, general session speeches and at least one party.

"When we passed online voter registration, the Republicans start running and we start grabbing online registrations and that's how we won," Democratic state Sen. and secretary of state hopeful Leland Yee, who wrote the bill to speed up implementation of online voter registration, told a cheering crowd at a "Pro-Tech the Vote" reception Friday.

During a Sunday address, Secretary of State Debra Bowen touted California's work to register more voters as a way to "show the rest of the country how to run a true democracy."

She also stressed the policy implications of increasing voter numbers, saying higher turnout will "eliminate questions about health care and education."

"If we got everyone eligible, and eligible and voting, those policies would be law in California," Bowen said. "So let's go for it."

Many of the more than two-dozen voter access and turnout-related bills introduced by Democrats in the current session appeal to key voting blocs, including young voters.

Approaches include encouraging county election officials to put polling places on college campuses and allowing Californians to pre-register to vote at age 15. One proposed constitutional amendment would let 17-year-olds vote in the primary, providing that they will turn 18 by the time the general election is held.

Another bill would allow officials to count absentee ballots as long as they are postmarked by Election Day, as opposed to the current rule requiring the ballots to arrive by that time. Other bills call for efforts to educate inmates on their post-jail voting rights and to speed up implementation of same-day registration in the state.

"As the Democratic Party, we obviously want more people voting, so the more avenues they have to get engaged, the better," said R.J. Victoria, a 34-year-old delegate from Irvine. "It's about inclusiveness."

Some observers see opportunities for both sides with the changes. Mindy Romero, director of the UC Davis project, said it's too early to tell whether the online registration system will end up benefiting Democrats in the long term. She noted that about 1 million Californians used the system last year but online registrants still make up just 4 percent of the current electorate.

"I'm not sure how much we can read into one election cycle where the stars were in perfect alignment for the Democrats," she said.

California Voter Foundation President Kim Alexander sees online registration as a "really mixed bag" for party politics on both sides, because it makes it easier for Californians, especially younger, tech-savvy voters who move frequently, to update and possibly change their registration status. She said she's glad to see the Legislature act in ways that could expand and encourage voting access for all.

"I do think that (online voter registration) is an excellent avenue for California to tap into the millions of people who are unregistered to vote and eligible," she said.

Still, the efforts have been met with resistance from Republicans, who say Democrats are playing politics with election rules. (full story)

Compton’s trashed absentee ballots call attention to voting policy

California Forward, By Cheryl Getuiza, March 29, 2013

Excerpt:

“There are state statutes of what the vote by mail procedures are but they don’t describe every single detail, so a lot of the details are left to the counties or cities. There is no standardization in their practices,” said Alexander.

“Some might have a standing agreement with the post office that they’ll cover postage if inadequate postage is provided, some might set up drop sites where people can drop off ballots or open up their elections offices on weekends to receive ballots and let people drop off ballots there. When you get to the city level, things are even more different because whatever procedures the county has in place, the city doesn’t necessarily have to follow, for their election,” said Alexander. (full story)

California Nonpartisan Districting Ousts Life Incumbents

BusinessWeek, By Michael B. Marois, March 19, 2013

Excerpt:

In the 1980s, a joke that ran through California political circles was that more turnover occurred in the Soviet Union’s Politburo than in the state’s U.S. House delegation.

The laugh-line still worked well after the Berlin Wall came down in 1989. From 2002 to 2010, the partisan re-election rate for California House seats was 99.6 percent. Only once in 265 House races in general elections during those years did a district’s representation flip parties, going from Republican to Democratic.

That stability ended last year after California (STOCA1) voters in 2010 gave a citizen’s panel the power to redraw the House districts. The impact, combined with a new primary system, was immediate. One out of four of the state’s 53 congressional incumbents departed through retirements or defeats in the 2012 primaries and elections.

“You’ve had voters shoehorned into districts for the sake of maintaining incumbency and we aren’t doing that in California anymore,” said Kim Alexander, founder and president of California Voter Foundation. “It was a big shakeout. That’s probably what would happen everywhere if you had fair redistricting.”

California, Arizona, Idaho, and Washington state have all given the authority to draw congressional boundaries to independent commissions, a model that good-government advocates say can blunt incumbent lawmakers from choosing which voters they represent.

- - - - - - - - -

The California experimentation is significant because a change in the map-makers could lead to more competitive congressional districts, which in turn may produce a less polarized U.S. House. Representatives whose electorates are disproportionately Republican or Democratic are under less pressure to find middle ground on legislation or reach out to voters who are registered with the other party.

The change California made “should have the effect both on the left and the right of moderating elements of the delegation, whereas in the past they were all in safe seats, so Republicans were free to be pretty conservative and Democrats were free to be pretty liberal and there was never any consequences of that,” said Rob Stutzman, a Republican consultant who served as deputy communications director for Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger.

‘Real Solution’

Jocelyn Benson, interim dean of the Wayne State University Law School in Detroit and a Democratic voting rights advocate, agreed. “The only real solution” to decreasing congressional polarization is for states to create “an independent redistricting commission that has the power to not only draw the map but enact it as well,” Benson said.

Still, the challenges for advocates of revising the redistricting process are formidable because partisan state legislators are loath to surrender the power. In California, voters passed on six opportunities to approve an initiative to change the process before, on the seventh try, it was approved.

“It’s a hard sell. It’s one of those arcane issues,” said Alexander. “It’s one of those issues that only comes around once every 10 years and people can get very worked up about when it’s happening and then it’s easy to forget about it once it’s all over.” (full story)

Cyberattack on Florida election is first known case in US, experts say

NBC News, By Gil Aegerter, March 18, 2013

Excerpt:

An attempt to illegally obtain absentee ballots in Florida last year is the first known case in the U.S. of a cyberattack against an online election system, according to computer scientists and lawyers working to safeguard voting security.

The case involved more than 2,500 “phantom requests” for absentee ballots, apparently sent to the Miami-Dade County elections website using a computer program, according to a grand jury report on problems in the Aug. 14 primary election. It is not clear whether the bogus requests were an attempt to influence a specific race, test the system or simply interfere with the voting. Because of the enormous number of requests – and the fact that most were sent from a small number of computer IP addresses in Ireland, England, India and other overseas locations – software used by the county flagged them and elections workers rejected them.

Computer experts say the case exposes the danger of putting states’ voting systems online – whether that’s allowing voters to register or actually vote.

“It’s the first documented attack I know of on an online U.S. election-related system that’s not (involving) a mock election,” said David Jefferson, a computer scientist at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory who is on the board of directors of the Verified Voting Foundation and the California Voter Foundation.

Other experts contacted by NBC News agreed that the attempt to obtain the ballots is the first known case of a cyberattack on voting, though they noted that there are so many local elections systems in use that it's possible that a similar attempt has gone unnoticed.

There have been allegations of election system hacking before in the U.S., but investigations of irregularities have found only software glitches, voting machine failures, voter error or inconclusive evidence. Where there has been evidence of a computer security breach -- such as a 2006 incident in Sarasota, Fla., in which a computer worm that had been around for years raised havoc with the county elections voter database -- it was unclear whether the worm's appearance was timed to interfere with the election/ (full story)

California polling places: Coming to a campus near you?

Election Online, By M. Mindy Moretti, March 7, 2013

Excerpt:

Conflicts between colleges and the towns where they are located — referred to as town and gown conflicts — have existed for as long as there have been institutions of higher learning.

Often those conflicts center around the usual annoyances of day-to-day life like parking and traffic and noise and drinking. But one of the more volatile town and gown arguments is college student participation in elections.

While some localities fight against college student participation in local elections or putting polling places on college campuses, most state-run institutions of higher education in California already host polling places and two pieces of legislation currently pending in the General Assembly would mandate that.

“We face a huge challenge in California when it comes to college students and voting,” said Kim Alexander, president and founder of the California Voter Foundation. “Many students are confused about voting-by-mail and, if they are living on campus are unsure of whether to register at their campus address or request a vote-by-mail ballot for their home address. We need to do a better job of educating students about vote-by-mail procedures.”

Sen. Leland Yee (D-8th District) introduced Senate Bill 240. Yee, who has introduced several pieces of election administration legislation through the years announced earlier that he is running for secretary of state in the 2014 race. A piece of legislation similar to SB240 is Senate Bill 267, which was introduced by Sen. Fran Pavley (D-27th District).

Currently the law leaves the location of polling sites — whether on college campuses or not — to the discretion of local elections officials. But under Yee and Pavley’s bills, local elections officials would be required to locate a polling site on the campuses of every California State University (CSU) and University of California (UC) campus. Pavley’s bill would also require community colleges to serve as polling places where Yee’s would not. (full story)

U.S. Election Assistance Commission and NIST trumpet innovation in voting technology

California Forward, By Doug Chapin, March 5, 2013

Excerpt:

Last week, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and the U.S. Election Assistance Commission hosted a Future of Voting Systems Symposium. The three-day meeting outside of Washington, DC was designed to look at the latest developments in the field of voting technology and assess how such developments mesh with the current federal structure for testing and certification.

The takeaway from the meeting was sobering and exciting; while it is increasingly clear that existing testing and certification requirements aren’t working, there is a burst of creativity underway by election officials, technologists and other stakeholders in the effort to design a different and better approach.

As usual, California was front and center on both fronts. Los Angeles County’s Dean Logan was featured on Day One of the conference, discussing the County’s Voting System Assessment Project, which aims to help the county design and deploy a new voting system that meets voters’ needs while still satisfying legal and technical requirements. Logan noted that the Legislature is considering legislation (SB360) to permit the development of such public voting technology and expressed optimism about using the process to jump-start voting technology past the current model of privately-owned, federally certified systems. That conversation was aided by a policy brief on the history of voting technology in California drafted by the California Voter Foundation’s Kim Alexander, which highlighted the challenges facing the state as it seeks to develop, test – and most importantly, pay for – a new generation of voting machines. (full story)

Saturday without mail may affect votes

San Francisco Chronicle, By Wyatt Buchanan, March 2, 2013

Excerpt:

The recent decision by the U.S. Postal Service to end Saturday deliveries was met with shrugs by some people, but elections officials say they are alarmed that it could result in fewer votes being counted.

That's because increasingly across the country - especially in California - people are choosing to vote by mail. In last fall's election, 6.7 million people cast mail ballots, more than half of those who participated, according to the secretary of state.

Elimination of Saturday mail deliveries - which postal officials said also includes eliminating pickups from mailboxes - could cause some ballots to miss the Tuesday election deadline to be valid because most voters wait until the last several days to send them, elections officials said.

"We mail out a tremendous amount of our vote-by-mail ballots for weeks before, but the ballots come back really the last nine days, and they're really loaded to the last few days," said Steve Weir, Contra Costa County clerk and former president of the California Association of Clerks and Elected Officials.

He said the most critical day is four days before an election, because that's about the average amount of time it takes for ballots to arrive by election day. More than a quarter of all ballots counted by his office arrived in the mail on that final day, though some people also dropped them off at polling places and the county office, Weir said.

With elections held on Tuesdays, four days out just happens to be Saturday.

USPS not concerned

But Postal Service officials said it's not a concern.

"You can't really say that (dropping Saturday delivery) is going to affect any of that at all," said Gus Ruiz, a spokesman for the Postal Service in the Bay Area, Sacramento and Fresno. However, he said if there is a problem, "It's something we can work through."

States differ nationwide on deadlines for receiving ballots through the mail. Most of the 32 that have such a system are similar to California, and require that ballots be received by the time the polls close. But given the change with mail delivery, there may be political support for extending that, at least in the Golden State.

State Sen. Lou Correa, D-Santa Ana, has introduced a bill, SB29, to allow the ballots to be counted up to three days after the election if they are postmarked by election day. A similar bill he introduced last year failed to win approval.

In some states, though, lawmakers have introduced bills to shorten the time ballots can be accepted. There is such a proposal in the Legislature in Washington state, where all elections are conducted via the mail.

Weir and others said they had opposed previous attempts to extend the time frame in California because of the potential for manipulating an election, but said they have changed their minds.

Too late to count

Weir said he's seen too many ballots that were postmarked plenty of days ahead of an election, but still arrived too late to be counted.

"So what's changed my mind about this? Looking at those ballots," he said.

Elections officials said they have long dealt with logistical problems in conducting elections at least partly through the mail, like slow or misdelivery of ballots, though they said they had good relationships with postal officials and work together to try to solve issues.

Planned closures of mail processing centers by the Postal Service would also create delays, elections officials said.

Cathy Darling Allen, county clerk in Shasta County and current president of the election officials organization, said the planned closure of the center in Redding would mean the mail there would be trucked 160 miles south to Sacramento where it would be sorted and then brought back for delivery.

"Frankly, we already advise folks not to mail their ballot (after) the Thursday before the election," she said.

The extra time from such closures that happened in 2011 meant as many as seven days from the time county officials mailed ballots to when they were delivered, including in Monterey County, which has mail now sorted in Santa Clara County, according to Secretary of State Debra Bowen.

'Gross exaggerations'

Bowen wrote to the postmaster general last year, asking him to delay any more such closures until after the fall election.

"This is not simply a California issue, though the USPS closure plans would disproportionately affect voters here and in other western states," she wrote.

Ruiz of the Postal Service said officials looked into Bowen's assertions and said they were "gross exaggerations."

"We found little or no evidence of anything taking seven days," he said.

Problems are well-known

But people who follow vote-by-mail issues said that problems with Postal Service delivery are well-known.

Kim Alexander, president and founder of the California Voter Foundation, said stopping Saturday delivery and pickup is a "huge concern" for coming elections.

She said her group recommends sending in ballots at least a week prior to an election, but added that it doesn't guarantee the ballot will be counted.

"The only thing worse than people not voting is people trying to vote and not being able to," Alexander said. "It's become serious." (full story)

State political watchdog agency seeks to expand searchable online conflict of interest database

San Jose Mecury News, By Tracy Seipel, February 27, 2013

Excerpt:

Seeking to improve transparency and revolutionize the way residents interact with their government, the state's political watchdog agency on Thursday will discuss a new application software that it says can help the public better gauge where potential conflicts of interest may exist with their elected officials.

At its monthly board meeting in Sacramento, officials at the Fair Political Practices Commission will propose expanding a pilot program it introduced on its website last fall that allows voters to more easily search statements of economic interest filed by state judges to include similar statements filed by all California public officials.

"One of my biggest projects is to try to bring the FPPC into the 21st century with our website by providing as much information as possible to the public in an easily accessible way," said FPPC Chairwoman Ann Ravel, a former Santa Clara County counsel. "It all ties in with my emphasis on disclosure."

A Statement of Economic Interest, or Form 700, must be filed annually by elected state officers, state legislators, judges and court commissioners, among others, by March 1, while city and county officials and certain government employees must file with their local agencies by April 1. All of the statements are ultimately sent to the FPPC.

- - - - - - - - - - -

While the paper Form 700s are maintained at city and county clerks' offices and with the FPPC, Ravel has worked to ensure they're available online. Now, she's trying to make the data easier for the public to search for pertinent information.

"If you wanted to see if a particular developer gave gifts to elected officials all over the state, it's very difficult to pull that information up now," said Ravel. "That's the kind of thing we want to be able to provide."

Last year, the FPPC leveraged a unique public-private partnership with the nonprofit Code for America, and Captricity, a Berkeley-based firm that extracts data from paper documents and transcribes it into digital spreadsheets. The collaboration led to an app that allows the Form 700 information to be searchable, and the pilot project linked to the Form 700s of state judges.

"It's one-stop shopping for all this information on our website," said Gary Winuk, chief of the FPPC's enforcement division. "The idea is to hold people accountable."

Kim Alexander, founder and president of the nonprofit California Voter Foundation, which seeks to improve the voting process to better serve the state's voters, called the FPPC's latest effort "phenomenal."

"Unfortunately, lawmakers are not chomping at the bit to make it easier for the public to view their personal finances," said Alexander. "This gives the public a chance to research and review interesting patterns they would not otherwise find." (full story)

Internet voting, the third-rail of elections

electiononline.org, By M. Mindy Moretti, February 21, 2013

Excerpt:

There are no two words that get elections officials, scholars, vendors and geeks more riled up than Internet voting.

The emotions on both sides often run so high that at times it can seem almost impossible to even have a conversation about the concept of casting a ballot online.

But with concerns about long lines on Election Day, with the U.S. Postal Service cutting services, and elections officials concerned about getting ballots to voters overseas or in times of emergency, is it possible to discuss the possibilities?

“Is there anything not controversial related to voting? If voting machines had to go through acceptance that Internet voting is facing, they wouldn’t have been rolled out,” said Brian Newby, Johnson County, Kan. election commissioner. “The movement has pretty successfully been slowed by emotion and in particular, emotion masquerading as fact.”

According to Newby, beyond the technological issues, there are some who are very impassioned because it takes away the spirit of community that comes with voting.

“I respect that opposition because at least they are saying they don’t like Internet voting because of the way they feel. That’s an emotional argument that’s fair because it’s called out from the beginning as being emotional.

Newby acknowledged that it is a difficult conversation, in part, because the country is no closer to Internet voting in the United States, really, than it was five or 10 years ago.

“Discussion has been successfully stonewalled, so why fight with success?” Newby said. ”The best argument that could be made would be that there is a growing use of Internet voting options for military and overseas voters, but even those options have been much more evolutionary than revolutionary.”

Those who have expressed concerns about the idea of Internet voting say that until the system is changed, conversations are always going to be difficult. For many of them, the conversation right now is putting the cart before the horse.

“We need a different Internet for Internet voting to be a reality. We would also likely need to give up the secret ballot,” said Kim Alexander president of the California Voter Foundation. “And we'd probably need some kind of biometric identifier to make an Internet system work securely. I don't feel these are appealing or likely options, so it seems a waste of time to focus on Internet voting, but I know people will continue to do so.”

Pam Smith, with Verified Voting said that the security issues surrounding Internet voting are a larger problem than those surrounding DREs, but that it’s hard for people to grasp because we spend so much of our daily lives online.

Smith said she’s not sure the conversation has to be as difficult and emotional as it has been for some factions.

“There can be ­— and is — some very rational discussion about the nature of the issues to be solved. If there is tension, it is between two perspectives, I think -- the desire that it be viable for use already, today, vs. certain unsolved problems have to be addressed before it actually is viable,” Smith said. “I think we all agree that Internet voting if it could be made secure would be desirable; unfortunately the technology just doesn't exist to satisfy this desire at this time. “

Smith added that the good news is there is a preponderance of evidence --and agreement-- that more research is needed. (full story)

Internet Voting: Not Ready for Prime Time?

The Canvass, February 2013

Excerpt:

Worth Noting

• February 27 is the date that the U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments in the Shelby County v. Holder case, which tests Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. That section requires certain “covered” states and jurisdictions to get pre-approval for any changes to voting procedures from the Department of Justice. Keep current on the case’s progress at the American Constitution Society’s webpage, The Voting Rights Act.

• More on Shelby County v. Holder: the Heritage Foundation is hosting a panel discussion, The (Un)Constitutionality of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, on Friday, Feb. 22.

• New York’s State Bar Association released a report in January, Voter Participation. Doug Chapin, of The Election Academy, praised the report for offering multiple suggestions for how to run elections better in the Empire State—some of which might work in other states as well.

• Ned Foley, from the Ohio State University College of Law, has recently written both The Separation of Electoral Powers, which suggests separating “the electoral powers of government from the three traditional powers: legislative, executive, and judicial;" and Virtue Over Party: Samuel Randall’s Electoral Heroism and Its Continuing Importance, which uses a historical example to promote “nonpartisan political virtue, in pursuit of the public interest.”

• California Voter’s Foundation released a brief in January, Modernizing California’s Voting Technology: A Look Back, A Look Ahead. Written by president and founder Kim Alexander, it does just what it says (including looking at Los Angeles’ County’s latest efforts). It offers policy questions that all lawmakers and election officials may want to consider, such as “Are there different approaches to certification and testing, such as states collaboratively testing equipment, that would be more efficient and economical than having California go it alone?”

• In D.C., the House Committee on Administration has eliminated its Subcommittee on Elections as a cost saving measure. It has assigned its duties to the committee as a whole. “In today’s fiscal environment, consolidation and cost cutting are not optional. However, through greater use of technology and cost-effective solutions, I believe that we can reduce overhead while maintaining the most efficient, transparent and inclusive processes,” said committee chair, Candace Miller (R-MI).

• In other election news, a new pope will be elected soon, following the resignation of Pope Benedict XVI. The Catholic Encyclopedia explains the Byzantine details well. (full story)

Hundreds Of Uncounted Vote-By-Mail Ballots Discovered Months After November Election

CBS13, February 14, 2013

Excerpt:

Hundreds of uncounted ballots were discovered from November’s election last week.

CBS13 learned that more than 400 vote-by-mail ballots were found three months after the election because they were misplaced and forgotten until last week.

“Some of the ballots from one of the precincts came back in a supply bag,” said Sacramento County Registrar of Voters Jill Lavine.

Uncounted votes are supposed to be in a pink carrier; however, the 407 ballots wound up in a red supply bag which was tossed onto a storage rack.

“As we were going through and cleaning up from the election, we found this bag full of ballots,” said LaVine.

The vote-by-mail ballots dropped off in Natomas came from 92 precincts. With two tight city council races, along with the Dan Lungren-Ami Berra contest too close to call for weeks, an election nightmare nearly came true.

- - - - - - - -

“It’s really disappointing and I’m sure if those voters found out their ballots weren’t counted, they’d be very upset,” said Kim Alexander, California Voter Foundation.

Voter advocate Alexander says the options to mail your ballot or drop it off increases the chances to make mistakes.

“We give voters these conveniences, but with those conveniences come more risks and more problems,” said Alexander.

It’s a big mistake that silenced the voices of more than 400 voters who have no idea their votes were never counted. (full story)

State needs election disaster plan, says legislator

News10, By John Myers, February 11, 2013

Excerpt:

In a state like California, where earthquakes, fires, and floods are a familiar danger, what happens if natural disaster strikes just as voters are headed to the polls?

That's what one legislator wants election officials to start thinking about with a new bill inspired by what happened last fall on the East Coast after Hurricane Sandy.

"Many people were displaced," says Asm. Nancy Skinner, D-Berkeley. "And if they'd been in California, which is of course earthquake country, it's not clear that they'd have been able to vote."

Skinner's AB 214 asks California's secretary of state to establish rules and procedures for how an election would be conducted in the wake of a natural disaster. The bill, introduced on January 31, would give Secretary of State Debra Bowen until the end of 2014 to do so.

"We want to make sure," says Skinner, "that nobody's disenfranchised" in the wake of a calamity.

Although elections are held every two years across California, there is no such thing as a statewide election. State laws provide a general framework, but the vast majority of elections decisions -- polling places and pollworker training, ballot design, and more -- are made by elections officials in each of California's 58 counties.

Some of the counties already have some crisis plans in place, though this would be a much broader plan of attack.

Elections watchers say planning is a good thing. But the bill includes one provision getting some extra attention -- and concern.

Skinner's bill says that the statewide plan should include some usage of voting via the Internet.

"There's no clear path to achieving secure online voting," says Kim Alexander of the nonprofit California Voter Foundation.

Alexander says while online voting is a popular topic, there's no way to come up with a workable system in the short time frame given in the new state legislation. And she says some elections officials tried to use an online ballot system during the Sandy storm crisis back east -- not successfully.

"It was a big failure," says Alexander.

AB 214 has yet to be assigned its first committee hearing, which won't likely come until the spring. (full story)

I. In Focus This Week

electionlineweekly, By M. Mindy Moretti, December 6, 2012

Excerpt:

On Election Day, at one precinct in Washington, D.C. the line to check-in snaked around the block in the early morning chill. Once voters made it inside to the check-in table, poll workers struggled through the paper poll books to find names.

After voters checked in, those wishing to use the one DRE machine queued up in another line that circled around itself while those wishing to cast paper ballots were only held up when the poll worker overseeing the optical scan machine was called away to help a voter using the DRE.

The average wait time for those trying to cast a ballot before lunchtime was about two hours.

While two hours pales in comparison to what some voters faced on Election Day, as many experts agree, it’s still too long for a voter to wait to cast their ballot.

What role technology — or lack thereof — played in slowing things down on Election Day remains up for review and debate, but experts agree that technology has a huge role to play in fixing what went wrong.

“For the voter, too much depends on the luck of the draw,” said Pamela Smith, president of Verified Voting. “In a jurisdiction with good contingency plans and good training, or where you didn't have to rely on a machine interface for marking your ballot, you were generally in pretty good shape. But yes, there were locations where equipment problems resulted in long lines.”

Following the election, on behalf of 29 experts in the field of technology and voting, the California Voter Foundation sent President Barack Obama a letter asking him to follow up on his promise to “do something about that” and to pay special attention to the technology aspects of elections.

“I hope our letter is read by the president and helps him develop a thoughtful and well-informed position about election reform,” Alexander said. “I hope it motivates him to invest his resources and attention into this issue area, which is so neglected and underfunded at all levels of government.”

Alexander hopes the president appoints a panel to explore the problems witnessed on Election Day and then recommend changes that would minimize the problems in the future. (full story)

County moves toward more ‘low-tech' voting methods

Tahoe Daily Tribune, By Axie Navas, November 23, 2012

Excerpt:

If you voted earlier this month, you may have noticed a lack of scanners to tally your ballot at the polling place.

That's because El Dorado County shifted away from the precinct-count voting system to a central-count voting system in January 2011. Transporting the scanners, which read marked paper ballots and tallied the results, to each polling place was difficult and expensive, County Registrar of Voters Bill Schultz said.

The scanners memory card tabulated the ballots, which would be secured with an electronic seal that couldn't be broken until the ballots arrived at the county office. There the cards from each of the precincts would be updated electronically to a computer. Election officials then switched the software that counted paper mail-in ballots with the program needed for the cards. The whole process was inefficient and time-consuming, Schultz said.

And though he thinks the technology will one day catch up to voting needs, the machines in the county aren't at that level yet.

“Everyone seems to like paper and to trust it. My personal view is that somebody is going to come up with a different method, and I think that it will be electronic,” he said.

Instead of tabulating votes at each precinct, the ballots arrive in Placerville, ready to be counted. The only potential drawback to the system that California Voter Foundation President Kim Alexander foresees is the potential for voter error to go unnoticed until it's too late. When votes are scanned in the precinct, a red flag will goes up immediately if the voter makes a mistake. That error can then be corrected at the polling place.

According to the California Voter Foundation's website — a nonprofit to advance the responsible use of technology in the voting process — many of the smaller counties have implemented a centralized counting system in the past few years. For El Dorado County, where voters cast about 87,000 cards for the Nov. 6 election, transporting the ballots to a central location makes sense. (full story)

California's uncounted mail-in ballots reach thousands

KABC-TV, By Nannette Mirande, November 13, 2012

Excerpt:

There are plenty of vote-by-mail ballots in California that won't count in the final November tally, largely because of postmarks and signatures. There's a group out to change some of those ballot rules, hoping to boost voter turnout.

Thousands of vote-by-mail ballots throughout California are sitting in county registrar offices right now and will never be counted.

Some signatures on ballot envelopes don't match the one on the voter registration card. Other ballots are from previous elections. But the most common reason a ballot doesn't get counted: it is not in the county's hands by 8 p.m. on Election Night. An Election Day postmark is not good enough.

Many counties don't notify voters their ballots won't be counted.

"I think it's a dirty little secret that we're keeping from voters, quite frankly, this vote-by-mail ballots that are too late to get counted," said Kim Alexander, founder and president, California Voter Foundation.

In 2008, nearly half a million ballots were not counted in the three statewide elections that year.

Los Angeles County currently has more than 6,000 late ballots, while Santa Clara County has nearly 2,000. Sacramento County's count is approaching 1,500. (full story)

Why aren’t you voting today?

Which Way, LA, November 6, 2012

Excerpt:

The number of registered voters in California is at a record high. Even among those who are registered, many choose not to vote. KCRW asked why:

For Paul Corning, a 27-year-old actor who moved from L.A. to New York a couple years ago, today is just another day. Well, he’s starting a new job, and he’ll be preparing a monologue for an audition on Thursday. But none of those involve voting.

He’s voted before, but he says this time around, it doesn’t feel right. He feels like he’s relatively well-informed, but he just doesn’t care which party wins. “It’s been like a sport for me that I didn’t want to participate in rooting for a team in,” Corning said.

That burst of civic pride a lot of us feel when we hand in our ballots – an estimated 46 percent of eligible voters, nearly 90 million Americans, won’t have that experience.

- - - - - - - - - - -

Kim Alexander with the California Voter Foundation says she hears that disaffection fairly often, especially from young people and minorities – groups that vote less than the population as a whole. She tells them that voting matters because it helps make politicians accountable to those like you. “And so that’s why homeowners and senior citizens and folks who live in wealthier, more affluent communities may get better representation,” Alexander says, “because they pose an electoral threat to their politicians.”

While there are those who say they won’t vote, there are those who’d like to vote, but can’t. Because they’re incarcerated on felony charges, or on parole. Here’s one, who only identified herself to us as Precious. “If you have a chance to vote but, like someone like me, who don’t have a chance to vote but you do have a chance to vote, and you know somewhere in there it’s gonna count, why not? Why not take the option to do it? Why?”

Advocates for voting have heard every argument against voting. I don’t have time. It’s really inconvenient. I don’t like the choices. My vote won’t count. They say online registration and mail-in ballots help those first two problems. The others can’t be solved on Election Day. (full story)

Can Deep Pockets Sway California Voters?

Bloomberg TV, November 5, 2012

Excerpt:

California Voter Foundation President Kim Alexander talks about California's ballot initiatives. She speaks on Bloomberg Television's "Market Makers." (Video)

Crunch Time: Getting informed before casting your California ballot

Southern California Public Radio, November 5, 2012

Excerpt:

If you haven't figured out how you're going to vote yet, don't panic. You are definitely not alone.

Here to give us some tips on how to get informed quickly is Kim Alexander, director of the California Voter Foundation. (full audio)

Insight: Election Polling / Proposition Song / Measure M / KZAP on KDVS / "For Colored Girls"

Capitol Public Radio, November 5, 2012

Excerpt:

We check in with The Field Polls Mark DiCamillo and hear The Proposition Song from the California Voter Foundation. Charter Commission measure on Sac City ballot. Former DJs reminisce about legendary local station. Sac State presents iconic poem. (Full audio)

Your Voting Questions and Update on Mystery AZ Donation

KQED, November 5, 2012

Excerpt:

As voters head to the polls, we check in with Kim Alexander of the California Voter Foundation about online registration, the increased popularity of mail-in ballots, voting technology and last-minute online resources. (full audio)

Dan Morain: Dark money comes out of shadows, a little bit

Sacramento Bee By Dan Morain, November 6, 2012

Excerpt:

A California Common Cause leader convened a press conference and demanded answers: "Why are they trying to hide where their money comes from?"

The good government advocate went on to accuse Kansas oil billionaires Charles and David Koch of being the source of secretive donations in a highly charged California initiative.

If all this sounds familiar, it is. What's happening now happened in 1992, only this time, the California Fair Political Practices Commission and the attorney general are doing something about it, with help from a unanimous California Supreme Court.

Acting on a suit by FPPC Chairwoman Ann Ravel and Attorney General Kamala Harris, the court directed that Americans for Responsible Leadership, a Phoenix corporation, disclose details about an $11 million donation to a California committee set up to defeat Gov. Jerry Brown's Proposition 30 and pass Proposition 32, which would cripple unions' ability to raise campaign money.
Rather than submit to a full FPPC audit, the corporation's lawyers on Monday gave a partial answer. Americans for Responsible Leadership got the $11 million from another corporation, Americans for Job Security, based in Virginia. But first, Americans for Job Security gave the $11 million to a third corporation, Center to Protect Patient Rights, based in Phoenix, which then flipped the money to Americans for Responsible Leadership.

To sum up: A shell within a shell within a shell, crouching in a hall of mirrors. Money laundering isn't too strong a term. Welcome to the world of Citizens United, the 2010 U.S. Supreme Court decision that emboldened the richest Americans to spend unprecedented sums to influence elections.

Exactly how the corporations got the $11 million is not altogether clear. These corporations don't make anything, other than mischief. These so-called social welfare groups are established to play politics, without following normal disclosure rules.

- - - - - - - - -

In 1992, their allies pushed a new California ballot measure, one to limit congressional terms. A Koch spokesman denied at the time that they were involved. But the group that promoted the 1992 initiative received a mailing list of potential donors from Citizens for Congressional Reform. And the initiative's official proponent managed a libertarian bookstore in San Francisco owned by a nonprofit corporation that received money from yet another nonprofit that received Koch money.

Kim Alexander was the Common Cause leader who wagged her finger at the Kochs 20 years ago. She has moved on, though she still tries to make democracy more transparent through her California Voter Foundation.

"What the Kochs figured out is that you can get a lot of public policy changes at the state level without people noticing that there is a pattern," Alexander said.

Spending $11 million to pass Proposition 32 is a great way to influence policy. Fearing Proposition 32 would eviscerate their ability to raise money for politics, unions have spent more than $60 million to defeat it, money that didn't go to help Obama and other Democrats.

Americans for Responsible Leadership has branched out beyond Proposition 32, spending $2.4 million to defeat Obama. Americans for Job Security has kicked in another $15.2 million to defeat Obama. Where they got their money, and what they're trying to hide isn't known, not exactly. (full story)

Surge in mail-in ballots could delay election results

KGO-TV, By Nannette Miranda, November 1, 2012

Excerpt:

Election Day is almost here. And although millions of Californians have already voted by mail, a record number of mail-in ballots is expected. But that creates a challenge for the vote-counters. Elections officials are expecting as many as half of all Californians will be voting by mail this election, setting up what could be some drama.

A surge of mail-in ballots has arrived at county election offices all over California. The number of California voters casting a vote-by-mail ballot this year is expected to surpass the last Presidential election in 2008 when about 42 percent, or 13.7 million ballots, were sent in.

While that sounds great with more people participating because of the ease of mail-in ballots, the downside is it could take longer to count. So for close races we might not know the results for days, maybe even weeks, "What's in the best interest for all Californians is for us to get the results right, not fast, but right," said Kim Alexander with the California Voter Foundation

About nine million mail-in ballots have been sent out statewide, roughly 20% more than 2008. Counties take time to interpret voter intent, like a bubble not filled in correctly, or choices crossed out. But one of the most time consuming activities is verifying that the signature on the envelope matches the signature on the voter registration card. Then there are those who drop off their mail-in ballot to the polling place within a couple of days of Election Day, which further delays the tally.

"Those ballots don't even get to the county registrar's office until after the polls close," said California Secretary of State Debra Bowen. "So they don't get processed until that night or perhaps the following day or even the day after."

So in those tight races, like for Proposition 30, Governor Jerry Brown's tax measure to boost funding to public education, this election can be a nail-biter.

"Nervous, anxious whether it's going to pass or not, if we're going to get funding for schools," high school student Diana Larius said.

High school student Jose Arias from Aptos added, "It's really important for us high schoolers, students, and anyone in in the state of California because it depends on our future."

In June we did not know the results of the cigarette tax for two weeks. It eventually lost by less than one percentage point. (full story)

Surge in mail-in voting could delay California results

San Jose Mercury News, By Hannah Dreier, November 1, 2012

Excerpt:

With as many as half of California voters expected to cast their ballots by mail and several statewide contests narrowing to dead heats, Election Day has the potential to morph into election week.

The number of California voters casting mail-in ballots this year is expected to surpass 2008, when about 42 percent of the 13.7 million ballots cast in the presidential election were sent by mail. By comparison, 25 percent voted by mail in 2000.

The state distributed 8.9 million mail-in ballots this election cycle, about 20 percent more than were requested in 2008.

The rise in mail-in voting means that some of the highest-profile contests, from a statewide tax initiative to nationally watched congressional races, might not be decided by the time voters go to bed on Election Day if enough of those voters wait until the last minute to turn in their ballots.

"We've given people more avenues to vote, but to ensure there's no fraud and error, we have to take more time to verify the ballots," said Kim Alexander, president of the nonpartisan California Voter Foundation. "We've traded speed for convenience."

- - - - - - - - - -

In the Central Valley, incumbent Democrat Rep. Jerry McNerney and Republican challenger Ricky Gill are prepared to wait days to know their fates. The redrawn 9th Congressional District is among the most competitive in the state.

"We're prepared for any contingency here, and that certainly could be one of them," said Gill.

Lauren Smith, spokeswoman for the McNerney campaign, said a prolonged wait would disappoint supporters.

"It's an energy and excitement thing," she said. "It's a like Christmas Eve, and all of a sudden you're told Christmas is two days later."

The rise of mail-in voting likely contributed to the wait earlier this year for a verdict on Proposition 29, which would have raised the state's tobacco tax for the first time since 1998.

The initiative on the June primary ballot lost by less than 1 percentage point during an election in which 65 percent of voters cast mail-in ballots.

County election officials are approving overtime and hiring extra workers to process the hundreds of thousands of mail-in ballots already starting to flood their offices.

Contra Costa County Registrar of Voters Steve Weir said he plans to triple his staff in the coming days.

"We'll have 80, 90 people working in every cranny of our warehouse," he said. (full story)

Surge in mail-in voting could delay Calif. results

KCRA, November 1, 2012

Excerpt:

With as many as half of California voters expected to cast their ballots by mail and several statewide contests narrowing to dead heats, Election Day has the potential to morph into election week.

The number of California voters casting mail-in ballots this year is expected to surpass 2008, when about 42 percent of the 13.7 million ballots cast in the presidential election were sent by mail. By comparison, 25 percent voted by mail in 2000.

The state distributed 8.9 million mail-in ballots this election cycle, about 20 percent more than were requested in 2008.

"I can really sit down, think about what I want to do, mark my ballot," said Geraldine Nicholson, as she dropped off her completed ballot at the Sacramento County Registrar of Voters office.

The rise in mail-in voting means that some of the highest-profile contests, from a statewide tax initiative to nationally watched congressional races, might not be decided by the time voters go to bed on Election Day if enough of those voters wait until the last minute to turn in their ballots.

"They want to make sure. They wait until the last minute in case something changes (in the political races)," Sacramento County Registrar of Voters Jill LaVine told KCRA 3.

LaVine estimated that about one-fifth of vote-by-mail ballots were left at polling places during the November 2008 general election and predicted that number would go higher during next Tuesday's election.

"We've given people more avenues to vote, but to ensure there's no fraud and error, we have to take more time to verify the ballots," said Kim Alexander, president of the nonpartisan California Voter Foundation. "We've traded speed for convenience."

Absentee ballots take longer to count because elections workers must compare the signature on the mailed envelope with the one on that voter's registration card. (full story)

Number of California voters reaches record levels

Los Angeles Times, By Patrick McGreevy and Evan Halper, October 31, 2012

Excerpt:

The number of Californians who can now vote has surged to record levels — passing 18 million for the first time — a leap that could affect the outcome of contests across the ballot next week.

More than 1.4 million new voters have signed up, nearly 50% of them online under a new law that kicked in six weeks ago allowing electronic registration. They tend to be younger and more left-leaning than the state's general voting population, according to Political Data Inc., a bipartisan firm that analyzed county reports.

That gives Democrats, who already dominate state politics, a big boost; they outnumber Republicans among the new voters by more than 2 to 1. The highest number of registered voters until now was 17.3 million, in February 2009.

The newly enfranchised could loom large in Gov. Jerry Brown's push for tax increases, which is teetering in the polls. Brown has been pitching Proposition 30 to college students lately in a blitz of campaign appearances and social media outreach efforts expected to last until election day.

Independent voters, whose numbers also have risen, are considered key to Brown's effort. A third of those who recently registered did so without a party preference or with a minor party.

The fresh registrants also could tip the balance in congressional races where Democrats hope to make gains in their uphill battle to retake control of the House; in more than a dozen House districts, Democratic registration rose slightly. And the new voters could help Democrats seeking to secure the state Senate and Assembly supermajorities required to raise taxes.

- - - - - - - -

Other factors, such as a growing pool of voting-age Californians and the registration increase that typically accompanies a presidential election, were also at work, said Kim Alexander, who heads the nonpartisan California Voter Foundation. Her group promoted the new law.

She said the online effort brought in "typically underrepresented" young residents.

In some areas, registration increased by as much as 10%. That shifts the dynamic in at least two state legislative races.

In the 40th Assembly District in San Bernardino County, Democrats have reversed a GOP registration edge. Republican incumbent Mike Morrell of Rancho Cucamonga is fighting Democrat Russ Warner, also of Rancho Cucamonga, for the newly drawn seat.

And Democrats regained an advantage they had previously lost in a hotly contested race for the 31st state Senate District, in Riverside County. Republican Assemblyman Jeff Miller of Corona is running there against Democrat Richard Roth of Riverside.

Meanwhile, GOP officials had anticipated the Democratic uptick and were working to blunt its effect by scrambling to register more Republicans. They say some new GOP voters are not reflected in the Political Data report.

"We will figure out whether it makes a material difference on election day," said Bob Huff (R-Diamond Bar), minority leader in the state Senate.

Republicans expressed doubt that the online system had effectively rooted out people not eligible to vote.

"There are not enough safeguards to prove that someone's online identity matches their true identity," said Assembly Republican leader Connie Conway of Tulare.

Where Republicans see safeguards, Democrats see barriers. Brown this year signed a law, also over GOP opposition, that a few years from now will allow Californians to register to vote on election day. (full story)

Spending for California's initiatives reaches $350 million

San Jose Mercury News, By Juliet Williams and Judy Lin, October 31, 2012

Excerpt:

The campaigns for and against the 11 initiatives on California's November ballot have raised an astonishing $350 million on causes ranging from Gov. Jerry Brown's tax increase to a labeling requirement for genetically modified food.

Californians can thank a handful of billionaires and millionaires for jamming the airwaves and mailboxes with a barrage of advertising, as individuals are the biggest mega-donors this campaign season. In many cases, the opposition campaigns are spending even more than supporters as they seek to kill initiatives that threaten their political power.

The initiative attracting many of the biggest donations is one targeting the political power of unions. Proposition 32 likely will end up with more than $120 million in spending for and against it.

Supporters are likely to spend more than $50 million backing the attempt to undercut the political clout of unions by prohibiting them from raising money from dues deducted from paychecks. Unions and other Democratic supporters opposing it have given more than $60 million so far to fight the initiative.

The rich and powerful pouring money into campaigns this year include a brother and sister with divergent political views who are approaching a combined $100 million in spending, a former hedge fund investor pushing a tax increase targeting out-of-state corporations and an insurance tycoon who is asking Californians to give insurance companies more leeway to set rates.

But unlimited spending does not assure victory, at least when it comes to initiatives, said Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation, a nonprofit that seeks to improve the election process. California voters defeat initiatives more often than they approve them.

"It's very hard to pass an initiative, but it's not that hard to defeat an initiative if you have money on your side," Alexander said. "I do credit California voters with doing the hard work to make informed choices. When people are in doubt, they often vote no or they skip propositions."

She and others said it is too soon to know whether the 2012 spending will break California campaign records.

The $350 million figure was compiled by MapLight, a nonpartisan group that seeks greater transparency in campaign spending, based on reports filed with the California secretary of state's office through Oct. 25. (full story)

Insurance billionaire defends initiative spending

San Jose Mercury News, By Hannah Dreier, October 27, 2012

Excerpt:

George Joseph, the up-by-the-bootstraps billionaire funding Proposition 33 on the November ballot, says he tried to find a way to change state insurance law without spending $32 million, but ran out of options.

After failing to win permission from the courts and the Legislature to charge drivers based on their history of coverage, the nonagenarian founder of Mercury General Corp. spent $15.8 million of company money on a 2010 ballot measure that would have accomplished the same thing. That measure lost, with 48 percent of voters supporting it, but the narrowness of the defeat convinced him to come back this year. He has spent $16 million of his own money to bankroll a nearly identical initiative on the November ballot.

"I tried to do it cheaper; I tried to do it through the Legislature," Joseph said of his latest effort to roll back a provision of California's landmark consumer protection law. "The last time we did this, we barely lost the election."

The advocacy group Consumer Watchdog, founded by the author the 1988 initiative regulating insurance rates, has fought Joseph at every turn and portrayed him alternately as an obsessive Captain Ahab and a greedy Mr. Grinch.

But Joseph, who is ranked by Forbes magazine as the 392nd-richest American, said he is not in need of vacation homes or yachts: What he wants is a way for his company steal customers from the competition.

- - - - - - - - -

Joseph said he is bankrolling this year's initiative himself because rank-and-file Mercury employees grumbled about the millions the Los Angeles-based company spent on the 2010 measure.

"A lot of our people didn't get very much of a bonus that year," Joseph said. "There was a lot of criticism that we spent this money and it didn't really help the employees any."

The former World War II bomber navigator spent 50 years turning Mercury into California's fourth largest auto insurance company, pioneering the art of risk assessment and becoming one of the state's wealthiest residents.

The campaign in support of Proposition 33 has attempted to paint him as an eccentric workaholic with a strong belief in the value of competition. But critics say voters are unlikely to separate Joseph from the special interest he represents.

"When you get to billionaire status, I think you're pretty much indistinguishable from your company," said Consumer Watchdog founder Harvey Rosenfield, who has been sparring with Joseph since the 1980s.

Joseph stepped down as Mercury's chief executive officer in 2006, pledging to spend more time lobbying for insurance industry interests. Even so, he comes to work each day in his 2007 BMW 7 Series. In addition to his direct campaign spending, he has given $2 million to the California Republican Party over the last two years.

Kim Alexander, president of the nonpartisan California Voter Foundation, said she could not recall a time when voters have approved an initiative funded exclusively by a single rich individual. But she is not surprised that California's most affluent keep trying.

"It's a gambit," she said. "People who make it in business take risks, and nothing could be riskier than the California initiative process." (full story)

Big spenders bankroll California propositions, but money doesn't guarantee passage

KABC-TV, October 26, 2012

Excerpt:

The numbers show some very wealthy people are spending a record amount of money on campaigns to either pass or defeat key state propositions on the November ballot. There's nothing critics can do to stop the spending. But big spending doesn't always pay off at the polls.

Six of the 11 statewide ballot measures Californians will be deciding next month have very wealthy people bankrolling one side.

New campaign finance reports compiled by MapLight.org identified some of the biggest donors

Molly Munger has contributed $44 million to her own Proposition 38 campaign to fund public schools through an income-tax increase.

Her brother, Charles Munger, has given $36 million to defeat his sister's rival, Governor Jerry Brown's tax measure Proposition 30. Charles also hopes the money helps win approval for Prop. 32, which curtails labor unions' influence in politics.

Venture capitalist Tom Steyer has spent $29 million of his own money for green energy projects spelled out in his Proposition 39.

And Mercury Insurance founder George Joseph has pumped $16 million into Prop. 33, which changes how car insurance rates are calculated.

The U.S. Supreme Court says it's OK to give unlimited amounts of money to ballot measures.

"I think it's telling voters that the initiative process isn't for everyone," said Kim Alexander, California Voter Foundation. "When you see this many wealthy people crowded all on one ballot together, putting in these giant sums of money, it's really unprecedented." (fully story, video)

Busting Through Ballot Confusion in California

New American Media, October 24, 2012

Excerpt:

Marielos Moreno is worried because she doesn’t understand any of the propositions that will be on the ballot in November.

“I don’t know what I’m going to do. I’m going to need help. I don’t know anything about politics,” said Moreno, a Salvadoran immigrant who works as a nanny in Vacaville, Calif., and will vote for the first time in the Nov. 6 presidential election.

Marielos isn’t alone. The average California voter doesn’t understand the ballot initiatives, especially the ones having to do with higher taxes and government reform.

PROPOSITION 30 Vs. 38: This year it’s even more complicated because there are competing initiatives. For example, Prop 30, proposed by Gov. Jerry Brown, would result in a quarter-cent increase in the state sales tax for four years. And it would raise income taxes for seven years for those making over $250,000 annually.

If voters pass Prop 30, the state would receive $6 billion to fund K-12 education, community colleges and universities. That would also free up state funds for other needs. If the measure doesn’t pass, it would trigger automatic cuts to education.

Proposition 38 seeks to increase virtually all state taxes for 12 years, from a 0.4 percent increase for low-wage earners to a 2.2 percent increase for those with a salary of more than $2.5 million. The proceeds would go for schools, to pay down the state deficit and, to a lesser extent, to fund early childhood programs. This initiative would not direct any funding to higher education.

If voters approve both Props 30 and 38, the one with more votes will go into effect where the two conflict, according to California law. For instance, if Prop 38 gets more votes, and Prop 30 also passes, the state would enact Prop 30’s section continuing state funds for public safety services transferred to local governments. That’s not included in Prop 38.

If there’s anyone who sees the difficulty for average voters in comprehending ballot propositions it’s Jaime Regalado, professor emeritus of political science at California State University, Los Angeles, and former director of the Pat Brown Institute for Public Affairs.

“They’re very confusing and difficult since they are written by lawyers, and they have technical language with titles that often have little to do with what the proposition seeks to achieve,” he explained.

- - - - - - -

"THE PROPOSITION SONG": Realizing how difficult it is for voters to understand the initiatives, the nonpartisan, nonprofit California Voter Foundation decided to make a song about it – “The Proposition Song.” The catchy tune explains each of the propositions on the ballot in one line in a simple, upbeat way.

"We hope our new proposition song gives voters an entertaining and informative alternative to the negative campaign ads that inundate our airwaves," said Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation, in a statement.

Here is the link to the proposition song.

The only drawback is that the proposition song is only in English. (full story)

California Voter Registration Likely to Hit Record High

KPBS, By Amy Quinton, October 23, 2012

Excerpt:

California’s Secretary of State said voter registration for the November election could reach a record high.

In the final 45 days leading up to this week’s deadline, more than 679,000 Californians were added to the state’s voter rolls. And county elections offices are continuing to verify thousands of additional applications.

Kim Alexander with the California Voter Foundation said of the 679,000 registrants, 381,000 registered online.

“Slightly more than half of them came into the system through the online registration system, while the other half used paper," explained Alexander. "That tells us two things, it tells us that the online system is incredibly popular and it also tells us we need to keep the paper system around because a lot of people are using that too." (full story)

California Voter Registration Likely to Hit Record High

KXJZ, By Amy Quinton, October 23, 2012

Excerpt:

While it's not official yet, California is on target to have more registered voters than its record high set back in February of 2009.

More than 679,000 people registered to vote in the final 45 days leading up to this week's registration deadline.

The Secretary of State's Office says those numbers will go up as county elections officials continue to verify applications.

Kim Alexander with the California Voter Foundation called online registration a success since more than half of the 679,000 people registered online.

ALEXANDER: "You have to re-register to vote every time you move and that particularly effects young people who are the ones who are most likely mobile, so have an online option to not only register online but to update their registration is going to enable a lot more people to participate."

The Secretary of State says final voter registration numbers will be available on November 2nd. (full story)

State measure spending among highest yet

San Francisco Chronicle, By Wyatt Buchanan, October 19, 2012

Excerpt:

Supporters and opponents of the 11 propositions on the November ballot already have contributed nearly $300 million toward passing and defeating those measures, with more than two weeks still to go until election day, according to a new analysis of campaign funding.

Groups that monitor money in politics said the funding is among the highest ever in California.

The analysis was conducted for The Chronicle by MapLight, the nonpartisan Berkeley organization that tracks money in politics. It found that as of this week, $292 million had been collected by dozens of committees advocating support or opposition to the propositions.

That total undoubtedly will climb as election day approaches.

Kim Alexander, the president and founder of the California Voter Foundation, said, "I think it's safe to say it's going to be up there amongst the most expensive ballots ever seen in California. I'm not sure it's going to break the record, but it's certainly up there in the stratosphere."

The foundation last tallied total contributions to ballot measures in the 2004 general election and concluded that a new record was set with just under $200 million. But the 2006 election also had a series of well-financed propositions that together may account for higher spending than this year's propositions, Alexander said.

Money contributed for ballot propositions does not almost continually break records, as is seen in candidate races like the contest for president. The biggest factors are the number of measures on the ballot and the size of the pockets of the interests supporting or opposing the measures.

- - - - - - - - - - - -

Alexander of the California Voter Foundation said she would like to see changes to California's storied direct democracy system to give those who aren't wealthy more of an opportunity to participate. One of those would be to lengthen the amount of time proponents have to collect signatures to put something on the ballot, which is currently 150 days and hasn't been increased since the inception of the initiative system 100 years ago.

She also said disclosure about who is funding a measure should be included in the voter guide.

Still, Californians are protective of the system, and a single monied interest has never outright bought an election, convincing voters to pass something that is not in their interest, she said.

"You can't win an initiative without money, but you can't win with only money," Alexander said. (fulll story)

California Ballot Initiatives, Born in Populism, Now Come From Billionaires

New York Times, By Norimitsu Onishi, October 18, 2012

Excerpt:

Next month, California voters will be asked to consider 11 ballot propositions whose passage would carry the full force of law, an exercise in direct democracy that traces back to the Progressive Era of the early 20th century.

This time around, though, four of them are initiatives of single rich individuals, while others are being challenged by equally wealthy critics pouring in millions of dollars to defeat them — a sign, in this era of “super PACs” and Citizens United, of the increasingly sophisticated use of the populist tool by the wealthy to influence politics in the nation’s most populous state.

Tom Steyer, the founder of Farallon Capital Management, a hedge fund based here, has spent $22 million on Proposition 39 to rescind a three-year-old tax benefit given to out-of-state companies. In an interview, Mr. Steyer said he decided to finance the initiative after leaders in the Democratic-controlled Legislature failed to eliminate the break themselves.

“I’m someone who believes that actually the best thing we can have is a highly respected and competent Legislature,” Mr. Steyer said. “But it seemed as if there was a need for somebody to do something, and I have a bad enough temper that I figured I wasn’t going to wait any longer.”

Joining Mr. Steyer on their own deep-pocketed crusades are George Joseph, a billionaire insurance executive hoping to change the state’s auto insurance laws; Chris Kelly, a former Facebook executive who has spent $2.1 million on a proposal to crack down on human traffickers that critics say is intended to burnish his own future political prospects; and Molly Munger, the wealthy daughter of Warren E. Buffett’s partner at Berkshire Hathaway, who has mounted a tax initiative aimed at derailing Gov. Jerry Brown’s tax initiative.

To be sure, rich individuals have sponsored ballot initiatives to advance pet projects in the past. But now they are doing so in greater numbers and using their resources to build coalitions with like-minded groups to increase the success rate of their initiatives and actually help set government policy, experts said.

“Their level of giving is something we haven’t seen before,” said Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation, a private organization that has long tracked the money behind ballot initiatives. “We’ve seen companies giving that much, and unions and PACs that have a lot at stake giving $10, $20 million in an election, but you didn’t see that so much for individual donors. So that’s something that is bringing us to a new level this cycle.”

Supporters say the ballot initiatives will help break the partisan gridlock in Sacramento. Critics say that the increasing involvement of rich individuals perverts the original intent of the initiatives, established by reformers like California’s Gov. Hiram W. Johnson to empower the electorate and curtail the influence of the Gilded Age’s special interests.

- - - - - - - - - -

Others have questioned the motive behind the initiative, which experts say is the kind that could pass the Legislature.

“It could be something that makes Chris Kelly say: ‘Hey, I brought you this initiative. It was backed by 80 percent of the people, and this is going to help launch my career,’ ” Mr. Kousser said.

Even before Californians vote yes or no, the self-financed initiatives are having an outsize impact on government.

With more than three weeks left before Election Day, Ms. Munger, the daughter of Charles Munger and a civil rights lawyer, has already spent $31 million on her tax-raising initiative, Proposition 38, which could derail Governor Brown’s own tax-increase plan, Proposition 30. Her brother, Charles Jr., a physicist, has funneled $22 million into efforts against the governor’s measure and in support of yet another initiative to outlaw political donations by labor unions.

Nathan Ballard, a spokesman for Proposition 38, which would redirect the extra tax revenues toward education, waved away criticism that rich individuals like Ms. Munger have an undue influence through the ballot initiatives. He said that the political establishment behind the governor’s plan was also attacking Ms. Munger, whom a leader of the campaign against Proposition 38 compared to Marie Antoinette.

“This is a classic battle between an idealistic outsider and the Praetorian Guard of the status quo,” Mr. Ballard said. (full story)

VIDEO: Sing along to 'The Proposition Song' as you mark your California ballot

Represent!, October 18, 2012

Excerpt:

It's that time of year again — when the folks at the California Voter Foundation puts out its latest version of "The Proposition Song." It's designed to help voters navigate the eleven ballot measures on the November ballot.

Trouble sorting through the ballot? Try new 'Proposition Song

Kim Alexander, founder of the non-partisan organization, calls it a "labor of love" with a "short shelf life." She wrote the lyrics, which are set to a traditional folk melody, and recruited five musician friends to perform the ditty. They've performed it at several Sacramento establishments. (full story)

Trouble sorting through the ballot? Try new 'Proposition Song'

Sacramento Bee, October 18, 2012

Excerpt:

The nonpartisan California Voter Foundation has released "The Proposition Song" to introduce voters to the 11 ballot measures whose fate will be decided in the Nov. 6 election.

The nonprofit group, which tracks the state's election process, produced similar ditties for the 2000, 2006 and 2010 elections.

Foundation President Kim Alexander wrote the lyrics to this year's song, which features a traditional folk melody. She and five musician friends recorded it Oct. 3 at Capital Public Radio's downtown Sacramento studio.

"We hope our new 'Proposition Song' gives voters an entertaining and informative alternative to the negative campaign advertising filling our state's airwaves," Alexander said in a written statement. (full story)

State hotline gave wrong information on voter registration deadline

Los Angeles Times, October 16, 2012

Excerpt:

Californians who want to cast ballots in next month's election can register to vote as late as Oct. 22, but that is not what many people heard Monday when they called a voter hotline operated by the California secretary of state's office.

Some callers to (800) 345-VOTE got a recorded message giving correct information, but others heard an inaccurate message saying, "Voter registration for the Nov. 6 election is now closed."

The incorrect message was removed from the hotline at 4:15 p.m. Monday, according to an email from Shannan Velayas, a spokeswoman for Secretary of State Debra Bowen.

Velayas said the hotline can handle 24 calls at once before rolling over to a backup phone line. The incorrect message, which was supposed to begin running Oct. 23, was mistakenly included on the rollover line, she said, adding that a communications contractor is responsible for the error is and trying to find out what caused it.

Kim Alexander of the nonprofit California Voter Foundation, which seeks to encourage people to participate in elections, said, "Registering and voting is confusing enough as it is. It's unfortunate the secretary of state's office is contributing to the confusion.''

This year, Californians can register to vote online by going to http://registertovote.ca.gov (full story)

Calif voting line gave wrong registration deadline

San Jose Mercury News, October 16, 2012

Excerpt:

Already bombarded by conflicting campaign ads and ballot propositions, some Californians became even more confused when a message on the state's official voting hotline provided a wrong deadline for voter registration, an election official said Tuesday.

Some callers heard a message Monday saying, "Voter registration for the Nov. 6 election is now closed." In fact, voters have until Oct. 22 to register.

The problem was fixed by late Monday afternoon, Secretary of State spokeswoman Shannan Velayas said.

She said the system is getting 500 calls a day and rolls over to a backup line on the rare occasions when it hits capacity. The backup line was giving out the incorrect message, Velayas said.

The state's contractor, AT&T, said it gave incorrect instructions to the person administering the hotline.

"We helped get it corrected right away," AT&T spokesman John Britton said. "We're sorry for any inconvenience."

The mix-up may have discouraged some already overwhelmed voters, said Kim Alexander, president of the nonpartisan California Voter Foundation.

"Elections are a very brief window of time when people pay attention to things like whether they're registered to vote," she said. "We have this fleeting opportunity to pull people into the process."

Californians can register to vote online for the first time this year. The new system attracted more than 400,000 users during its first three weeks. (full story)

California's online voter registration a hit

The Reporter , By Don Thompson, October 14, 2012

Excerpt:

A new law allowing Californians to register to vote online appears to be having its intended effect, attracting more than 400,000 users in its first three weeks.

That may not be good news for Republicans. Nearly a third of online registrants were younger than 26 and were 2 1/2 times more likely to register as Democrats than Republicans, according to an early sampling of nearly 51,000 online registrations by Political Data Inc., a nonpartisan company that provides detailed voter information.

About one-third were not affiliated with either major party.

If the trend holds, it could further erode Republicans' share of the California electorate, which has dipped to 30 percent of registered voters.

Young voters made up 28 percent of those registering online in the early review done by Political Data. That was seven times as many as those over age 65.

The numbers make sense, said Kim Alexander, president of the nonpartisan California Voter Foundation. Online registration tends to attract younger, more mobile voters, she said, and they are more likely to register as Democrats or independents.

One of those is 22-year-old Amy Howard of San Francisco, a senior sociology major at the University of California, Davis who registered online as a Democrat this week.

"Online is just easier to do. It's just so accessible, I didn't have to go out of my way and spend time mailing it," she said. "It appeals to younger people because they've been around computers probably since they were born or were really young."

Jane Richardson, a 22-year-old senior design major at UC Davis, is a registered Democrat from Piedmont who changed her address online. (full story)

Young voters lead surge in online registration

Ventura County Star , By Timm Herdt, October 11, 2012

Excerpt:

Californians by the tens of thousands are embracing the state's new online voter registration process, as the Secretary of State's Office reported this week that 380,000 people have used the system over its first three weeks of operation.

"It's astronomical. It's through the roof," said Kim Alexander, president and founder of the nonpartisan California Voter Foundation.

Before the website RegistertoVote.ca.gov went into operation Sept. 19, all voter registrations in the state had to be submitted on paper.

An analysis of data provided by selected counties, including Ventura, shows that the online system's greatest appeal appears to be with young voters.

Paul Mitchell of Political Data Inc. reports that of about 51,000 online registration forms submitted in counties that are separately tracking them, 28 percent have come from voters under 26. Of the existing 17.4 million registered voters statewide, only 12 percent are under 26.

Conversely, only 4 percent of online forms have come from people over 65 — an age group that makes up 19 percent of existing voters.

- - - - - - - - - -

Elections officials note the receipt of 380,000 forms does not necessarily mean an increase of that amount in the voter rolls. Those forms must be verified by county elections officials before the registration is recorded, and many are likely not new registrations, but rather updated registrations submitted by voters who have moved since the last election.

Alexander said easy access to voter registration is especially important to young voters, who tend to move much more frequently than older adults.

"It's hard to get your hands on a paper registration form in this state," she said. "This makes voter registration and registration updates far more accessible."

The analysis of state online voter registrations also suggests a partisan tilt, as 49 percent of online registrants are Democrats, compared with 40 percent of existing voters. Only 19 percent of online registrants so far have been Republicans, compared with 34 percent of existing voters. Those with no party preference account for 31 percent of online registrations, and make up 26 percent of existing voters.

Alexander cautioned against reading too much into those initial figures because they represent a relatively small sample of the total and do not include reports from the state's two largest counties, Los Angeles and San Diego.

She noted, however, that the partisan breakdown likely reflects the high rate of use of the online system by younger voters. A report released by the Public Policy Institute of California this week shows existing voters under 34 are much more likely to be Democrats (45 percent) or independents (28 percent), than to be Republicans (22 percent).

Elections officials anticipate a surge in voter registration between now and the Oct. 22 deadline to register to participate in the Nov. 6 election. (full story)

California facilita registro para votantes

LA Opinion , By Pilar Marrero, October 10, 2012

Excerpt:

Mientras en otros estados del país se aprueban leyes para dificultar el acceso al voto, en California se trabaja en todo lo contrario: tan sólo en las dos primeras semanas del nuevo sistema para registrarse en Internet, 220,000 personas utilizaron esa herramienta que tan sólo este y otros 11 estados ofrece a sus ciudadanos.

El programa comenzó el pasado 19 de septiembre y permite llenar un formulario en línea que luego es transmitido directamente a la Secretaría de Estado de California para su verificación. Antes se podía llenar el formulario de registro en línea pero había que imprimirlo y mandarlo por correo.

Shannan Velayas, portavoz de la Secretaría de Estado indicó que por el momento el programa de registro en línea ha sido un éxito, pero que la cantidad no significa que todos esos son nuevos votantes, toda cuenta que cada registro debe ser verificado primero por los funcionarios electorales y que parte de esa cantidad son "actualizaciones" de personas ya registradas anteriormente.

California tiene un sistema electoral relativamente más incluyente que otros estados, aunque dista mucho de ser perfecto, apunta Kim Alexander, directora de Cal Voter Foundation, una organización educativa no partidaria que impulsa mejoras al sistema electoral.

"En algunas cosas somos muy progresistas y en otras estamos atrasados respecto a otros estados", dijo Alexander. "Aquí, por ejemplo, damos más tiempo a la gente para que se registre y nuestros requisitos de voter I.D. no son tan escrictos. Uno puede votar por correo permanentemente y no necesita una razón válida para hacerlo como en otros estados".

En muchos estados del país ya se cumplió la fecha límite para registrarse. En California sin embargo, se puede hacer hasta el próximo 22 de octubre, dos semanas antes de la elección presidencial del 6 de Noviembre.

- - - - - - - - -

En California, a diferencia de otros estados, no hay que justificar el voto por correo y uno puede inscribirse permanentemente para recibir la boleta y votar enviándola luego por la misma vía o llevándola el día de la elección a cualquier precinto del condado donde está registrado el votante.

La fecha límite para pedir una boleta para votar por correo es el 30 de octubre.

En California, a diferencia de lo que está ocurriendo en otros estados, no hay que llevar un tipo de identificación específica para votar o registrarse. Cuando uno se registra proporciona información básica de identidad, como un número de licencia de manejar, de tarjeta de i.d. o de seguro social. Ese número se verifica electrónicamente y se comprueba así que la persona es elegible para votar.

"Solamente si la personas se registró y no dio uno de esos números o referencias al registrarse puede ser que se le pida una forma de identificación", dijo Velayas.

California es más liberal que otros estados en el tipo de identificación que se puede usar para demostrar esa elegibilidad, señaló Alexander. Mientras otros estados piden una lista muy estricta de ID´s, dificultando que algunos votantes tengan ese documento disponible, en el caso de California ese documento puede ser una factura de la luz, pasaporte, carnet estudiantil con foto, etc.

No obstante Alexander apuntó que California podría mejorar aún más su sistema si se dedicara a implementar medidas que ya se han aprobado, como establecer la base de datos estatal que permita implementar el "registro de día electoral" que ya fue aprobado, y que permitirá registrarse hasta el mismo día de las elecciones. (full story)

Top donors go all in on state ballot measures

California Watch , By Will Evans, October 12, 2012

Excerpt:

The top 10 donors to November's state ballot measures – a smattering of extremely wealthy people, powerful unions and large corporations – have dumped more than $150 million into the fight so far, according to campaign finance tracker MapLight.org.

The mega-donors include politically opposed siblings, a 91-year-old car insurance magnate, a conservative group that keeps its donors secret and a teachers union that has outspent every other special interest in the last decade. MapLight.org tracks the top donors of each ballot initiative on its Voter's Edge website.

At the top of the list this year is civil rights attorney Molly Munger, who has given nearly $30 million of her own fortune to pass Proposition 38 [PDF], which would raise taxes to fund K-12 education. Her father is a billionaire business partner of Warren Buffett at Berkshire Hathaway.

- - - - - - - - -

Joseph has been fighting for the change for years. His company spent $15.8 million on a similar 2010 initiative, but it failed at the ballot box. Opponents have criticized Joseph for trying to benefit his own company.

"I really think he wants to leave this as his legacy," said Prop. 33 spokeswoman Rachel Hooper. "He really believes that the insurance industry can be more competitive and robust."

This year stands out for the number of mega-donors and the huge gush of funding, said Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation.

"The amount of money is at levels that I haven't seen among individual donors," she said.

Deep pockets are necessary to pay signature gatherers and qualify an initiative for the ballot, but money isn't everything, Alexander said.

"You can’t win an initiative campaign without money, but you can’t win with only money, either," she said. "I have yet to see anyone buy an initiative."

Most initiatives fail. And it's easier to kill an initiative with big money than to pass one, she said.

Alexander also points to a few measures that made it to the ballot with less money. Proposition 34 [PDF] would repeal the death penalty; Proposition 36 [PDF] would alter the state's three strikes law; and Proposition 37 [PDF] would require labeling of genetically engineered foods. All raised millions, but nowhere near the amounts that the tax measures have garnered.

"None of those have a ton of money, and none of those would go anywhere in the Legislature," Alexander said. "And that’s why you have the initiative process."

The food labeling measure does have deep-pocketed opponents. Monsanto and DuPont, companies that make genetically modified seeds, have spent $7 million and $5 million, respectively, to defeat Prop. 37. Both could be affected if food companies switch to non-genetically modified ingredients, as critics of the measure fear.

In a report [PDF] this week, the Public Policy Institute of California called for more transparency in the initiative process.

"Voters are often uncertain about the identity and motives of initiative proponents and opponents," it said.

Those interests should be disclosed on official voter pamphlets and actual ballots, the report recommended. Legislation that would have listed top donors on voter pamphlets was vetoed by Brown last year. (full story)

California makes it easier for residents to vote

Sacramento Bee, By Laurel Rosenhall, October 8, 2012

Excerpt:

California is bucking a national trend this election season, making it easier for people to vote while many states are making it harder.

Those forms you may remember picking up from the library or post office are no longer necessary to register to vote. With a few mouse clicks, Californians can now register or update their registration.

Because of a law Gov. Jerry Brown signed last month, state residents also should be able to register to vote as late as Election Day by the next presidential election in 2016.

Over time, experts believe, the changes will add many new voters to the rolls – especially those who are young or non-white, groups less likely to register now.

Compare that with other parts of the country, where lawmakers are reducing registration opportunities or establishing new requirements that voters show photo identification at the polls.

The reason for the difference can be explained largely by politics.

States passing voter ID laws tend to be controlled by Republicans. They argue the need to thwart voter fraud, but also tend to benefit from a smaller, more conservative electorate.

Democrats, in charge in California, argue that the electoral process needs to be accessible to more people – a dynamic that helps their candidates' chances. Young people are driving California's population shift toward more diversity.

"If you bring in younger voters, you bring in ethnic voters, and they're more likely in California and probably in other states to vote for Democrats," said Mark DiCamillo, director of the Field Poll that tracks voter demographics. "So expanding the voter rolls will help Obama and the Democrats."

Kim Alexander, president of the nonpartisan California Voter Foundation, said the "political stars aligned" to expand voter access in California with the election of a Democratic governor in addition to the Democratic legislative majorities and secretary of state.

"That's not the case in many other states," she said.

In the last two years, the number of states requiring voters to show photo ID has grown from two to eight, according to the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University, though courts blocked the photo ID law in Pennsylvania, Texas and Wisconsin, and are reviewing it in South Carolina.

-- - - - - - - - - -

It was a successful bill last year that led to this year's creation of an online voter registration system. In the two weeks since it went live, 220,000 people have used it to register or update their registrations, according to the secretary of state's office.

"California has found a way to make it easier for people to register to vote without making it easier for people to commit fraud," Secretary of State Debra Bowen said.

She dismissed the argument that online registration would aid her Democratic Party, saying that many other states with online registration have Republican secretaries of state or Republican-dominated legislatures.

"So the argument that it is partisan and allows fraud is inaccurate," Bowen said. "I believe it will make our registration more accurate because we can tie a particular voter to their driver's license. … So it's easier to avoid duplicates that can happen when a voter moves from one county to another."

Nationwide, Republicans have led the charge in arguing that fraud at the polls is a problem that needs attention. In fact, several experts said, the most frequent kind of election fraud happens during registration. Most recently, Republicans have come under scrutiny in California, Florida, Nevada and Colorado for hiring people who allegedly fraudulently registered voters to their party.

All of it reflects a country grappling with a massive shift in the ways people vote, said Stephen Ansolabehere, a political science professor at Harvard.

"We've been moving rapidly toward expanding registration, trying to allow people to vote anywhere, and there's been this backlash – like how do we know the right people are voting?" he said.

Yet the belief that new voting laws will have a massive effect on political representation is overblown, Ansolabehere said. People who don't vote tend slightly to be lower-income and less-educated, he said, groups that frequently vote Democratic.

So expanding access for them would move the electorate "a little bit toward the Democrats," he said. "But not a lot." (full story)

Election Law and 'The Voting Wars'

KQED, By Michael Krasny, October 3, 2012

Excerpt:

In the 12 years since armies of lawyers argued over hanging chads in Florida, election-related lawsuits have more than doubled. Law professor and election law expert Richard Hasen says we should expect even more bitter, partisan disputes over election law in coming years. We'll discuss voter ID laws, claims of voter fraud and voter suppression, plus Hasen's new book, "The Voting Wars: From Florida 2000 to the Next Election Meltdown."

Host: Michael Krasny

Guests:
Richard Hasen, chancellor's professor of law and political science at the U.C. Irvine School of Law, and author of "The Voting Wars: From Florida 2000 to the Next Election Meltdown"
Kim Alexander, president and founder of the California Voter Foundation, a non-partisan nonprofit working to improve the voting process to better serve voters (audio)

The Digital Vote: States and Nonprofits Push for Voter Registration Online

American Public Media, By David Brancaccio, September 24, 2012

Excerpt:

Let's start with the anatomy of a troll: First you email. Then you follow up with a text. Then, if all else fails, you place a phone call. All of this to get your kid in college to register to vote. Technology to the rescue?

"The only thing you should be thinking about when you're voting is who you're going to vote for. We want to make it so that you don't have to worry about the what, where, what forms," says Seth Flaxman, co-founder and executive director of Turbovote, a start up based in New York. He is interested in removing what he sees as the "friction" in the process of registering.

Turbovote is of one of a host of websites that try to make sure you are on the voter rolls ahead of the election. Which is nice. But Turbovote's real strength is that it won't give up on you after this election day November 6.

"More importantly, we keep you registered and help you vote in all of your elections, local to presidential over the course of your lifetime no matter where you move," Flaxman says. He wants to make the registration process as easy as renting a DVD from Netflix.

Turbovote is a non-profit, but the company does not just give the service away. Flaxman is selling it to a dozen non-profits and about 50 colleges, full of all those early-adopter college students.

- - - - - - - -

Meanwhile just the other day, California inaugurated its own system for online voter registration. The software can verify signatures using those on file for driver licenses. It's the twelfth state to do this. Proponents are waiting to see what happens when the crunch time hits the system, when the deadline for registering in California looms on Oct 22.

"We saw a little bit of glitchiness on the first day when everyone was hitting it repeatedly, so there is ... concern about whether there's that capacity to handle what we expect to be a very heavy load," says Kim Alexander, president of the non-partisan California Voter Foundation, a non-profit which works to improve the voting system. "We have 6.9 million Californians who are eligible to vote and they have about a month to get registered if they want to vote in the Presidential election."

Computerizing registration also helps with the age-old problem of clerks having to decipher handwriting on forms filled out with pen and paper. Computerized registration is one thing. As for actual online voting? There have been pilot projects, but it will be a while before we can vote in our pajamas. Problem number one: hacking. (full story)

Calif. allows complete voter registration online

San Jose Mercury News, By Judy Lin, September 19, 2012

Excerpt:

California elections officials hope to make signing up to vote easier than ever through an online registration system that launched Wednesday.

Secretary of State Debra Bowen called the new process "great news for democracy." She was joined by state lawmakers and voter advocates in Sacramento to announce the web feature, which is being made available for the first time ahead of the November election.

Supporters say it will help more than 6 million Californians who are qualified but have not registered. Republicans had opposed the bill that created complete online registration, saying the change could lead to voter fraud and additional costs.

Under the new law, applicants can fill out a traditional paper form or complete a form online through the secretary of state's website or at www.registertovote.ca.gov. The application, which will include date of birth and the last four digits of the Social Security number, will be checked against their driver's license or the state identification card kept by the California Department of Motor Vehicles.

If the information matches, an electronic image of the applicant's DMV signature will be added to the application at the end of the process.

- - - - - - - - -

Californians have until Oct. 22 to register for the Nov. 6 general election, which features the presidential race and 11 statewide ballot initiatives.

The online application process is the result of legislation passed last year, SB397 by state Sen. Leland Yee, D-San Francisco. It comes ahead of a long-delayed statewide voter database to comply with federal requirements.
Yee said online voter registration will improve accuracy, reduce costs and allow more people to participate in elections.

"Other states in this country are looking at ways to suppress voter participation. We here in California are looking at ways of increasing that participation," he said Wednesday.

Yee was referring to several swing states including Florida, Iowa, Nevada, Ohio and Pennsylvania, which are locked in politically charged legal battles over stricter voter ID laws.

California joins 11 other states that offer online registration, according to Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation. They include Arizona, Colorado, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Maryland, Nevada, New York, Oregon, Utah and Washington.

While improving efficiency, Alexander warned there are some risks in using an online system. She said three states experienced glitches that temporarily crashed online systems.
Bowen said her staff has tested the system to ensure it will be able to handle large volumes of applicants.

As of May, 17.1 million of California's 23.7 million eligible voters—or 72 percent—were registered to vote.

Shasta County Registrar of Voters Cathy Darling Allen said she hopes online registration will entice younger voters—those between ages 18 and 27—to register because they tend to be more digitally connected.

"A year from now, we'll be able to look and see who used it more and who used it less," she said. (full story)

California begins online voter registration

Sacramento Bee, By Jim Sanders, September 19, 2012

Excerpt:

Registering to vote will be as easy as pushing a button under a long-awaited online system to be launched today by Secretary of State Debra Bowen.

The unveiling comes at a crucial time, with balloting set Nov. 6 to decide the presidency, congressional races, legislative seats and ballot measures that include two multibillion-dollar tax hikes.

"This is great news for democracy," said Shannan Velayas, Bowen's spokeswoman. "Registering to vote will be easier than ever."

Californians will have more than a month to use the push-button registration system before the Oct. 22 deadline to qualify for casting ballots this year.

More than 6 million people have the right to register to vote, but have not yet done so, according to state records.

California's voter rolls totaled 17.1 million people – 72 percent of those eligible – shortly before the June primary election.

- - - - - - - -

Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation, said the new system will "create an enormously convenient opportunity for thousands and thousands of Californians."

"I think it's going to help everybody," she said when asked which party it benefits most.

Online registration is not without risks. Handling transactions electronically raises the possibility, however remote, of someone hacking into the system, Alexander said.

"You have to take extra measures to protect those systems, but I'm confident the secretary of state has given that a lot of thought," Alexander said.

Other states with online registration include Arizona, Oregon, Washington, Nevada, Utah, New York, Colorado, Indiana, Kansas and Louisiana, Alexander said.

Phillip Ung, spokesman for California Common Cause, applauded today's unveiling.

"This new system will not only save the state and counties millions of dollars, but voter information will be secure, data will be accurate, and voters will have ease of access to register to vote," he said.

Paper applications will still be available at county elections offices, DMV offices, and many post offices, libraries and government offices. (full story)

California launches online voter registration system

Los Angeles Times, By Patrick McGreevy, September 19, 2012

Excerpt:

Californians can register to vote with the click of a mouse under a new online system launched Wednesday.

Secretary of State Debra Bowen said she hopes making it easier to register to vote will mean more participation in the Nov. 6 presidential election by many of the the 6.5 million Californians who are eligible to vote but who have not yet registered.

"I think it’s going to be huge," Bowen said of the new system, noting that 3,000 people had used it to register in the first 12 hours.

Until now, Californians had to fill out an application, sign it in paper form and mail or deliver it to an official elections office before they could be put on the voter rolls, a process that could take weeks. The online system will search the Department of Motor Vehicles database for the applicant’s driver's license or identification card number, date of birth and last four digits of her Social Security number.

If the information matches what the voter provided on the registration form, the voter can authorize elections officials to use an electronic image of their DMV signature to complete the application. After that, the voter only needs to click a "submit’’ button. County elections officials would still need to verify the information.

"Today, the Internet replaces the mailbox for thousands of Californians wishing to register to vote,'' Bowen said. "Today we are taking the next step in the never-ending evolution of democracy and reaching every Californian.''

More than a quarter of the 23.7 million Californians who are eligible to vote are not registered, said Kim Alexander, president of the nonpartisan California Voter Foundation.

"We have one of the lowest rates of registration in the country,’’ Alexander said. "We’re hoping that this new system will encourage more young people to get registered. This is going to make the process more accessible to more people.’’

Californians can register to vote up to 15 days before the election. For the Nov. 6 presidential election, the deadline for registering to vote is Oct. 22. The online voter registration system is reachable on the secretary of state's website here. (full story)

Online voter registration goes live in California

Ventura County Star, By Tim Herdt, September 19, 2012

Excerpt:

California's new one-click online voter registration went live early Wednesday, but before Secretary of State Debra Bowen could officially make that announcement at an 11:30 a.m. news conference, 3,000 new voters had used the system to register.

That response was triggered only by "a few tweets" from some county elections officials who spread the news via Twitter earlier in the morning, Bowen said.

The sign-ups indicate the kind of response she anticipates from the state's first paperless voter registration process, she said. It involves going to http://www.registertovote.ca.gov, filling out the necessary information and clicking "send."

"This is great news for democracy," she said. "One of the main reasons people don't register to vote is because they are never asked to do so. Now, someone can ask them with an email that includes a link to online registration."

Until Wednesday, Californians could fill out a form online but had to print, sign and mail a paper document to complete the registration.

California becomes the 12th state to offer one-click online registration, a step that had been delayed until the development of an electronic system that links records from the Department of Motor Vehicles and the Secretary of State's Office with elections offices in each of the state's 58 counties.

Registrants must provide their driver's license numbers and the last four digits of their Social Security numbers, which come from documents available only to U.S. citizens. Elections officials can verify the information with DMV records and also obtain a digitized signature from the DMV to use to verify voters' signatures on mail-in ballots or on sign-in rolls at voting precincts.

Bowen said submitting a registration form online is not "automatic" registration and that the forms will be subject to the same verification process used in the handling of paper registration forms.

Kim Alexander, president and founder of the nonprofit California Voter Foundation, said there are an estimated 23.7 million eligible voters in the state and that 6.5 million are not registered.

Bowen said she expects the new system will quickly start making a dent in reducing that number.

"Now, nobody has an excuse not to register to vote," she said. "I expect we'll see a big surge immediately." (full story)

California launches online voter registration

Los Angeles Times, By Patrick McGreevy, September 20, 2012

Excerpt:

Californians can register to vote with the click of a mouse in a new online system launched Wednesday.

Secretary of State Debra Bowen said she hopes making the process easier will mean more participation in the Nov. 6 election. Some 6.5 million Californians who are eligible to vote are not registered, she said.

"Today, the Internet replaces the mailbox for thousands of Californians wishing to register to vote," Bowen said at a Sacramento news conference.

The new system could shave a week or more from the paper process, according to Dean Logan, the L.A. County Registrar-Recorder. Until now, every would-be voter had to fill out an application, sign it in paper form and mail or deliver it to elections officials before being added to the voter rolls.

The online system will search the Department of Motor Vehicles database for the applicant's driver's license and other identifying information and match it to the electronic form. The potential voters can authorize elections officials to use an electronic image of their DMV signature to complete the application.

- - - - - - - - -

With more than a quarter of eligible Californians unregistered, "we have one of the lowest rates of registration in the country," said Kim Alexander, president of the nonpartisan California Voter Foundation. "We're hoping that this new system will encourage more young people to get registered. This is going to make the process more accessible to more people."

Logan said the system would be a "game changer" for the 3 million L.A. County residents who could vote if they registered.

But the new system is not without its risks, said Alexander, including the possibility — common to many computer systems — that someone might hack it.

Bowen said the new system relies on the same tough security measures already in place for those who register to vote on paper.

Of the 12 other states that have online registration, three have had systems crashes in the last year when a flood of people tried to use them just before the deadlines, Alexander said.

Bowen said she is confident California's system, which has been extensively tested, will handle the capacity. Other computer systems Bowen oversees have been plagued by crashes and other failures. (full story)

VOTER REGISTRATION: Online option now available

The Press-Enterprise, By the Editorial Board, September 19, 2012

Excerpt:

The new online registration system launched Wednesday morning. By late afternoon, Riverside County had received the applications of 150 people who had signed up with a click of the button. About 9,600 people had applied statewide as of 5 p.m. Wednesday, Sept. 19.

“Though the majority of states cannot offer online voter registration, I’m here to say that the largest state in the nation is ready to roll. Now nobody has an excuse not to register to vote,” Secretary of State Debra Bowen said in Sacramento.
Riverside County and San Bernardino counties long have had among the lowest registration rates in the state. About 1 million people collectively in both counties are eligible to vote but are not registered.

Kari Verjil, the Riverside County registrar of voters, said she hopes people will take advantage of the online option.

“This is perfect timing for close of registration coming up on Oct. 22,” Verjil said. “Our commuters can do it from home.”

- - - - - - - - -

“I think a lot of people will register this way and that means they won’t be filling out a form. When they're doing it themselves, then nobody has the ability to do something like change their party registration,” Bowen said.

Arizona, Washington and Kansas were the first states to offer online voter registration. Colorado, Utah, Nevada, Oregon, Indiana, Louisiana, Maryland and New York are among the other states.

Voter advocates in California have long contended that online registration was overdue in the home of Silicon Valley.

Online voter registration, they said, would increase voter participation by making it much easier for new voters to sign up and voters of all ages to re-register after they move. Online registration also reduces the amount of paperwork and the need to enter the information into a database, preventing typos.

“We think that this change is going to make a huge difference in making it much easier and more convenient for those 6.5 million people to register to vote,” Kim Alexander of the California Voter Foundation said. (full story)

Editorial: Democracy run amok with too many districts

Sacramento Bee, By the Editorial Board, August 28, 2012

Excerpt:

Fifty-six contests won't be on the ballot this year in Sacramento County, either because there are no opponents or no candidates at all. As The Bee's Loretta Kalb reported on Monday, in Placer County there are 62 such non-contested contests – again, because either no one filed to run or only one candidate did. In El Dorado County there are more than two dozen non-contested contests and in Yolo County, six.

Our region is not unusual. County registrars up and down California report a dearth of candidates particularly for obscure local boards and commissions. And they all say it is not a new phenomenon. Going back over several election cycles, the number of contests in which no one or only a single candidate, usually the incumbent, runs remains consistently high.

It is not necessarily a lack of civic engagement. Kim Alexander, president and founder of the nonprofit California Voter Foundation, which seeks to improve the voting process, thinks that we have "too much democracy in California, too many elections and too many elected officials." She's right.

On Nov. 6, a typical California voter will be asked to vote for candidates vying for some two dozen elected offices, everything from president of the United States to fire district boards, from U.S. senator to local school boards. And if you're a voter in the city of Sacramento this November, you will be tasked with sifting through 54 candidates running for the city charter commission. That's too much to ask. Not even the most conscientious voter can begin to know all the issues facing every elected office on the ballot, much less be expected to vet all the candidates running.

California voters are loath to give up their right to vote for any office, but the lack of any real contests for so many local races shows the urgent need to trim back. (full story)

California Democrats push to allow Election Day postmark

Sacramento Bee, August 23, 2012

Excerpt:

In a last-minute bill moving through the Legislature, Democratic lawmakers are seeking to expand the number of mail ballots counted in elections by extending the deadline for submitting them.

The bill would require counties to count ballots that are postmarked by Election Day and arrive at registrars' offices no later than three days after the close of polls. Current law requires ballots to arrive no later than the poll closing on Election Day to be counted.

Rhys Williams, spokesman for Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg, said Assembly Bill 1466 is necessary because of recent United States Postal Service closures of distribution centers. He pointed to such shutdowns in Modesto, Pasadena and Burlingame.

Democrats have drafted the bill as budget trailer legislation, which allows it to take effect before November on a majority vote of the Legislature rather than the two-thirds supermajority normally required for urgency matters. Williams said AB 1466 is being cast as a budget proposal because it has additional costs for registrars and educating voters.

"The bill is to make sure that every Californian's vote gets counted and that people aren't disenfranchised because of federal closures to post office processing centers across the state," Williams said.

But critics of the Gov. Jerry Brown's tax initiative, Proposition 30, are suspicious. Democrats already passed budget trailer legislation in June on a majority vote that helped Brown's measure leapfrog others to appear first on the November ballot. At the time, Democrats also gave good-government reasons, explaining that the change prioritized amendments to the state constitution over less permanent changes to statutes.

"Given what this Legislature has done manipulating the ballot process, I think any Eleventh Hour change in the manner in which the November election will be administered is immediately suspect," said Jon Coupal of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, who opposes Proposition 30 and filed a lawsuit challenging the previous legislative use of majority-vote budget powers.

Republicans tend to vote by mail earlier, Democrats vote at the same rate throughout the submission period, while independents turn in ballots at a higher rate in the closing days, according to mail-ballot data provided by Paul Mitchell, vice president with Political Data Inc. The data also shows that young voters and Latinos submit ballots at higher rates in the final week.

Kim Alexander of the California Voter Foundation applauded the change, saying that each election leaves piles of ballots that go uncounted because they arrived too late.

"It's very heartbreaking," Alexander said. "These are people who had every intention of voting and think mistakenly it counts if postmarked by Election Day."

County election officials said they were concerned with how the law would describe a valid postmark. In some cases, USPS does not stamp a postmark or does so illegibly, said Deborah Seiler, registrar of voters in San Diego County. She said many last-minute mail voters now feel compelled to drop off ballots because there is no postmark law. (full story)

For first time, Californians will be able to register to vote online

Ventury County Star, Timm Herdt, August 23, 2012

Excerpt:

Beginning next month, Californians for the first time will be able to use the Internet to register to vote, giving them about six weeks of online access to register in time to participate in the Nov. 6 presidential election.

In an advisory sent late Wednesday, the office of Secretary of State Debra Bowen informed the state's 58 county elections officers that the California Online Voter Registration System is in its final stages of testing and will become operational in early September. Software upgrades are scheduled to be electronically transmitted to the counties Friday, with online training for local officials to be conducted next week.

"It's really huge," said Secretary of State Debra Bowen. "I think it will be extremely popular and am very hopeful it will increase voter registration."

For about the last year, the state has offered a web-based registration process — but the last step is cumbersome. The voter must print, sign and mail the registration form that he or she filled out.

The new system will be what Bowen called "a one-click process."

"That's fantastic news for Californians," said Kim Alexander, president and founder of the nonprofit California Voter Foundation. "I think this will be very popular among eligible voters. I think it will facilitate potentially hundreds of thousands of users."

- - - - - - - - - --

A number of other states already allow for online registration, said Alexander, of the California Voter Foundation. She noted there have been no reports of problems — other than demand being so high at the close of the registration period that systems have crashed from overuse.

The names of those who register online will be immediately added to the voter roll, which will reduce the need for provisional ballots on Election Day when a newly registered voter's name has not yet been added to the list provided to poll workers, Alexander said.

Sen. Leland Yee, D-San Francisco, was the author of the bill authorizing the system that Brown signed last year. On Thursday, he said he is pleased that Bowen will be able to put it place in time for this year's election.

"If we have the opportunity to use technology to register to vote, that's something we ought to do," he said. "We want to find every which way to make it easier for people to participate and vote."

Bowen said her office will undertake an extensive public awareness campaign once the system becomes operational, but believes that candidates, campaigns and the public at large will be eager to spread the word.

"We hope the news will go viral," she said. "I think an awareness campaign will take care of itself." (full story)

Voter List Maintenance: Why, How and When

National Conference of State Legislatures, July/August, 2012

Excerpt:

The Issues and Publications webpage for the California Voter Foundation, which is useful to more than Californians. CVF has done many state-by-state studies on voter engagement, voting technology, voter privacy and campaign disclosure. Expect to find facts, rankings and best practices, especially in regard to internet access to information. CVF founder and president Kim Alexander says that by creating these reports and rankings, “states that are doing well get kudos, and the other states can see where they need to catch up.” (full story)

California still waiting on statewide voter database

Who Can Vote, Annelise Russell, July 26, 2012

Excerpt:

As the national debate over voter ID approaches fisticuffs, the state of California continues to shy away from the fight, focusing on a more pressing, local problem — the lack of a statewide voter registration database.

The state has a “cobbled county-by-county system” that makes it difficult to maintain accurate roles with such a young, mobile population, said Kim Alexander, president and founder of the non-profit California Voter Foundation.

The online database, VoteCal, has been in the works since 2006, Alexander said, and would collect voter registration into one system. The database is a requirement of the Help America Vote Act of 2002, with which California still does not comply, Alexander said.

California is one of 20 states with a Democratic governor, Jerry Brown, but Alexander said you wouldn’t know it based upon the database’s slow progress. Democrats have been “lazy and complacent,” and have squandered this opportunity, Alexander said.

A 2010 report by the Secretary of State projects the database will not be completed until 2015. (full story)

Same-day voter registration bill moves forward in Legislature

San Jose Mercury News, June 20, 2012

Excerpt:

Election seasons come and go, and with them public attention to the political process waxes and wanes.

"The really heartbreaking fact of the matter is that a lot of the excitement kicks in about two weeks before Election Day. But by then it's too late, and a lot of people are left sitting on the sidelines," said Kim Alexander, president and founder of the nonpartisan California Voter Foundation. "If we can engage people when they're excited, we have an opportunity to create a lifelong voter."

The Legislature on Tuesday moved closer toward embracing one way to help Californians seize that moment by allowing voter registration to take place through Election Day -- an approach that has sparked sharp partisan divisions in the past.

The measure -- AB 1436, by Assemblyman Mike Feuer, D-Los Angeles -- has been approved by the Assembly and next heads to the Senate Public Safety Committee, which must consider the bill because it would increase the maximum penalty for voter fraud.

Feuer said the key difference from previous attempts is the timing. His bill would not take effect until Jan. 1 of the year after a database called Vote-Cal, now being developed, becomes operational. Such a database, required by the federal government of every state, would incorporate the voter rolls of all 58 counties in the state and be linked with data from other government agencies, including the Department of Motor Vehicles and Social Security Administration.

By using the database, he said, elections officials would be able to "determine instantaneously if a voter is registered elsewhere" and whether a voter has cast a ballot in another county. (full story)

Votes still uncounted, Prop 29 losing by razor-thin margin

News 10, John Myers, June 18, 2012

Excerpt:

It's the election that just won't end, at least not anytime soon.

Elections officials across California continue to tally the votes cast on June 5 -- a process now entering its third week and a possible sign of the times as more voters now cast ballots away from the polling place.

On the contest everyone's watching, it's a very tight count; the proposed $1 per pack tobacco tax, Proposition 29, is now losing by slightly more than 17,000 votes out of almost 5 million counted statewide.

"For this election, we're seeing a huge amount of people who voted by mail," says Sacramento County elections official Brad Buyse. "More so than went to the polls."

Buyse and others say many of those ballots didn't arrive by mail, but rather to polling places on Election Day. As a result, almost 249,000 ballots statewide are still waiting to be tallied. The other largest group of uncounted votes are provisional ballots, those that could not be accurately placed by polling place or by voter name on June 5.

The popularity of vote-by-mail (VBM) in California has only risen every election since the state relaxed the rules, now allowing permanent VBM status for any reason.

"We've given voters more convenience, but it's reduced the security in our voting system," says Kim Alexander of the nonpartisan California Voter Foundation. "So to make up for that, elections officials have to do double duty, to make sure nobody's voting twice." (full story)

Elections officials: Get used to uncounted votes

San Jose Mercury News, By Juliet Williams , June 7, 2012

Excerpt:

The waiting is the hardest part.

With more than 830,000 primary ballots still uncounted, many candidates and campaigns in California remained on pins and needles Thursday awaiting the results of undecided races.

Proposition 29, the proposal to increase taxes on tobacco products to pay for cancer research, was among the contests that remained too close to call.

Election officials warned that more of the same could occur after November's general election, when the stakes are even higher, due to California's all-paper voting system and meticulous legal requirements for counties that tabulate results.

More than half of California voters now cast ballots by mail, requiring elections officials to verify signatures and voting status. Ballots delivered to polling places on Election Day cannot be verified and counted until after polls close at 8 p.m.

In addition, thousands more voters cast provisional ballots when their eligibility is in question, they move, or lose their vote-by-mail ballot.

"Our job is to ensure accuracy. It's not about the speed. We've become this `I want it now' society and people are just going to have to wait," said Gail Pellerin, president of California Association of Clerks and Election Officials and the registrar of voters for Santa Cruz County.

"We want to make sure everything's accurate and correct," Pellerin said. "It's not a simple, easy process."

- - - - - - - -

Ninety percent of ballots cast are counted by 8 a.m. the day after the election, but the final 10 percent can take three to four weeks to tabulate because of lengthy administrative procedures to ensure that nobody voted twice, said Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation, a nonpartisan voter education group. Clerks have 28 days after the election to certify results.

She said California election laws are written to make it as easy as possible to vote, including allowing voters to drop off ballots at any polling place in their county on Election Day. However, the bollots must then be transferred to the correct precinct.

The state has also returned to an all-paper voting system after serious failures of electronic voting machines that caused massive problems at polling places.

"The bottom line is that in providing more avenues for voters to vote, we've also created more work for elections officials when it comes to counting ballots. We're trading convenience for timeliness," Alexander said.

With likely more than 20 congressional and legislative candidates facing same-party runoffs in November and voters possibly deciding more than a dozen ballot initiatives, the waiting could be even longer. That election, which includes the presidential race, is expected to generate much higher turnout than the abysmal 25 to 30 percent estimated turnout for Tuesday.

Eleven of the state's largest counties reported a total of 800,000 uncounted ballots as of Wednesday, with about 4.1 million votes counted so far. The state has a total of more than 17.1 million registered voters.

Counting the ballots more quickly has a downside, noted Alexander: The increased likelihood of recounts, which take even longer and cost more. (full story)

New Primary System Shakes Up California Elections

NPR, By Tamara Keith, June 6, 2012

Excerpt:

ROBERT SIEGEL, HOST:

California voters also turned out yesterday, and one thing is clear: The state's new open primary system has shaken things up. Under the new system, the top two candidates will move onto the general election, regardless of party. And in quite a few races, this means come November, two candidates of the same party will face off. NPR's Tamara Keith has that story.

TAMARA KEITH, BYLINE: When all the votes are counted, nearly 30 congressional and state legislative races will feature a Democrat on Democrat or Republican on Republican contest this fall. By far, the highest profile intra-party battle will be a November rematch between Democratic Congressman Brad Sherman and Howard Berman. For residents of L.A.'s San Fernando Valley, that means a whole lot more of this...

- - - - - - - - - -

KEITH: In this new district dominated by Democrats, about a quarter of registered voters are Republicans. And another quarter are independent, so-called no-party-preference voters. In all of the more than two dozen races that will feature two candidates from the same party, Schnur says the rules of campaigning are changed, rewarding...

SCHNUR: Those candidates who talk not only to their most fervent ideological supporters, but those who are willing to reach out across the party spectrum in order to gain the necessary support. That can't help but to be a good thing - not necessarily for the two political parties, but certainly for the voters.

KEITH: In fact, Schnur says the two political parties fought hard against both the state's new independent redistricting system and the top two primary. Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation, says no-party preference voters will play a bigger role in the new system. They now make up about 20 percent of California's electorate and she says will have a much stronger voice in deciding races.

KIM ALEXANDER: Most of them were decided in the primary, where you only needed a plurality of the vote to win, and the general election was not competitive because the district leaned so heavily towards the Democrats or the Republicans. Now, we see in those so-called safe seats, they're going be competitive all over again because of the new open primary rules.

KEITH: Alexander says there's one word to describe the shift in California's political landscape that took shape yesterday.

ALEXANDER: We have an enormous amount of competition coming out of this election, and I think that's very exciting for California voters.

KEITH: She figures some 40 percent of the races in California this fall will be competitive - quite a change for a state where November used to be largely irrelevant. Tamara Keith, NPR News.(full story)

Low turnout despite sweeping California proposals

Real Clear Politics, Juliet Williams, June 5, 2012

Excerpt:

California's statewide primary election was marked Tuesday by light turnout at polling sites and few problems flagged by election officials even as the state tested out some sweeping changes.

The primary was providing the first statewide run on a top-two voting system and newly redrawn legislative and congressional districts. Voters also were weighing in on a cigarette tax and changes to term limits.

San Diego and San Jose _ the nation's eighth- and 10th-largest cities _ are being closely watched as voters decide on heated measures to curb retirement benefits for current government workers. San Diego also has a fierce mayoral fight.

Some such as 72-year-old San Diego resident Ursula Freeman were motivated to change local pension systems. She voted for putting limits on the pensions of current city employees.

"Go for it, absolutely," Freeman said.

Glendale preschool aide Sharon Miller said she supported the cigarette tax in a vote against Big Tobacco.

"Anything that makes cigarettes cost more money is a good thing," she said.

Others who turned out were hopeful that the new top-two system will deliver more competitive contests and more moderate candidates even as they were confronted with a longer, more complicated ballot. In some cases, candidates of the same party are vying to meet again in November.

"I think it helps to level the playing field," said attorney Susan Hyman after casting her Democratic ballot at a skilled nursing facility in Long Beach. "The districts have been too entrenched by party."

State election officials reported few problems as polls opened for the day. Voters in Sacramento County may have noticed Chinese added to English and Spanish on their ballots. The move was prompted by recent census changes, said Kim Alexander of the nonpartisan California Voter Foundation.

Deputy Secretary of State Nicole Winger said about 2,000 people had called in to a voter hotline as of Tuesday afternoon, but most callers simply wanted to know their polling site and registration status. She said the volume was low compared to general elections. (full story)

California Voter Foundation President: "This Whole Election Is Unprecedented"

Neon Tommy, By Matt Pressber , June 5, 2012

Excerpt:

Fifth-generation Californian Kim Alexander is president and founder of the California Voter Foundation, a non-partisan, non-profit organization dedicated to improving our local democracy with a focus on technological innovation and donor transparency. The California Voter Foundation has published its California Online Voter Guide, which aggregates comprehensive election information from its diaspora across government websites, every two years dating back to 1994.

Neon Tommy spoke with Alexander via telephone Monday afternoon about today’s primaries and other California election topics.

Neon Tommy: How can we better inform people as to the real money behind some of these ads?

Kim Alexander: What we would like to see is a list of the top donors for and against every proposition actually included in the ballot pamphlet itself. That’s what we think would be most helpful for California voters. Right now you have a ballot pamphlet that’s sent to every household from the Secretary of State, and it contains lots of really helpful information—there’s the actual text of each measure, the pro-con arguments, the impartial analysis by the state’s legislative analyst. But at the end of the day a lot of voters simply want to follow the money. They want to know who’s putting up the money to pay for this initiative, to qualify this initiative and to campaign against this initiative. And that’s a great shortcut for voters who are busy and maybe don’t want to spend a lot of time trying to dive into the nitty-gritty details of a proposition—they can use a shortcut like knowing who the top donors are for and against a proposition and a lot of times that’s often just what voters need to make an informed choice.

NT: This year, with Citizens United, the floodgates are open to a greater degree. What kind of unprecedented things do you think we’re going to see this fall?

KA: This whole election is unprecedented. We’re going to see Democrats competing against Democrats and Republicans competing against Republicans in the fall. We’ve never had that in California. Traditionally, the only time you see competition among people of the same party is in the primary election. Now, because we have this new top-two primary election, the two top vote-getters in the primary contest will advance to the general even if they’re of the same party, and that really throws the whole money chase for a loop, because you’re going to have Democrats trying to reach out to a broader base of support in the primary trying to get votes so they can rate in the top two candidate positions and Republican candidates are going to do the same thing. So there is likely for the Congressional contests to be a lot of outside money that comes into play, particularly for the fall, when we’re going to see a number of California Congressional seats up and highly competitive and the outcome very unclear.

NT: California famously had all the outside money coming in from Utah for Proposition 8—

KA: I want to just make a distinction. There’s outside money that you know about and there’s outside money that you don’t know about. When you talk about California propositions, we have the best disclosure laws in the country. There’s certainly room for improvement. We’d like to see listing of the funders who paid to circulate initiative petitions on the petition itself. We’d like to see top donors listed in the ballot pamphlet. But for the most part, our laws are pretty strong and voters often are generally aware of where the money’s coming from or have some idea of where the money’s coming from in proposition campaigns, even if it’s coming from out of state. At least you know who the donors are. The Citizens United decision in federal contests is going to create—is creating—large amounts of campaign ads that are underway where the source of the funding is not identifiable. So you’ve got lots of ads that are going on the attack and the voters unable to hold accountable the people who are responsible for that message, and we think that’s a crisis.

NT: Do you think California’s been doing a good job as far as getting its eligible voters to the polls and do you expect turnout to be high in the fall?

KA: No, we’re not doing a good job with voter registration. We have an archaic system; a lot of states have implemented online voter registration, which although we do not support online voting due to a number of serious security problems with that, we do support online voter registration and fortunately that is being implemented in California for the fall election. Hopefully that will get in place. Its going to help a lot of people not just register, but keep their registration up-to-date, because you have to re-register every time you move, and for a voter to try to track down a new voter registration card, fill it out, get it in in time for an election; often people just overlook the fact that they have to do that in order to vote at their current address, and then it’s too late.

So, I think moving to online voter registration is going to speed things up, but really, one of the reasons we have so many voter registration problems in California is because we are the very last state in the country to comply with a federal requirement that we have a statewide voter registration database that can be operated at the state and local level and checked against other government databases to make sure our records are up-to-date. That’s the Help America Vote Act. We have one, but it’s not completely HAVA-compliant, and our new database, [which] began back in 2006, is still at this stage out for bid.

We are way behind other states with modernizing voter registration and that’s a big reason why our registration numbers are lagging. A lot of people are simply falling through the cracks, and there’s a lot of problems at the DMV, where people don’t get on the rolls properly. Because we don’t have a HAVA-compliant registration database, we don’t have a statewide voter registration status lookup tool. We’re one of only nine states in the country that does not have a statewide tool on the Secretary of State’s website where a voter can go online and simply find out if they’re registered to vote or not at their current address. (full story)

Explaining California’s ‘Top Two’ primary

KCRW Radio, By Darrell Satzman, June 4, 2012

Excerpt:

Ballots will look a little different Tuesday than in past elections because of California’s new open primary system. Approved by voters two years ago, the open primary sends the top two finishers to the November general election, regardless of party. Backers say the system will lead to more moderate candidates… perhaps. What’s immediately clear is that this is increasing competition for all candidates, including incumbents. KCRW’s Chery Glaser spoke to Kim Alexander of the California Voter Foundation about the change. “For the first time people who are not affiliated with any party can easily get on the ballot and compete on a level playing field with partisan candidates,” said Alexander. (full story)

California’s Everybody-Into-the-Pool Primary Faces Test

Business Week, By Michael B. Marois, June 4, 2012

Excerpt:

When Californians go to the polls tomorrow for the state primary election, they won’t find three- term Senator Dianne Feinstein running against just fellow Democrats.

New rules that may alter the political landscape put Feinstein head-to-head with 23 challengers of all stripes -- Republican, Libertarian, American Independent, Peace and Freedom. The two who get the most votes, regardless of party, will move on to the general election in November.

The so-called top-two system is intended to fight partisan gridlock that has paralyzed lawmakers from Sacramento to Washington. In theory, politicians will no longer be forced to stick to party dogma to avoid being ousted in the primary, allowing voters more choices.

“The rules of the game have changed,” said Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation, a Sacramento-based nonpartisan group that has advocated for open democracy. “Democrats and Republicans no longer have a lock on the process.”

- - - - - - -

The top-two primary may mean that in heavily Democratic or Republican districts, two candidates from the same party could advance to the general election. That may be influenced by independent voters, who make up 20 percent of the electorate, and will be new to the system.

That may force Democrats and Republicans toward more moderate positions, Alexander said.

“Up until now, they have had no say in the primaries,” she said of the independents. “If some of those folks get elected we could see an impact in the power struggle in the Statehouse.”

With the primary looming, California lawmakers have withheld action on the state’s resurgent $15.7 billion budget deficit. Governor Jerry Brown, a Democrat, blamed legislators for making the deficit larger by failing to pass some budget cuts he sought in March. (full story)

California estrena el voto electoral abierto

La Opinion, By Araceli Martínez Ortega, June 2, 2012

Excerpt:

Por primera vez los californianos van a votar en las elecciones primarias abiertas de este martes por el candidato a la legislatura estatal y al Congreso que quieran, sin importar el partido político al que pertenezcan, en una boleta electoral en la que los aspirantes aparecerán listados sin que se vea su filiación partidista.

Los dos candidatos de cada contienda que obtengan el mayor número de votos se enfrentarán en la elección general del 6 de noviembre. Algo que nunca había pasado antes es que estos dos ganadores podrán ser del mismo partido, o independientes.

"Estamos muy vigilantes porque hay casi 100 contiendas y los resultados no van a ser los ideales pero vamos a estar en buenas condiciones para la elección de noviembre y le estamos poniendo muchos esfuerzos", afirmó Tenoch Flores, portavoz del Partido Demócrata en California.

Agregó que a pesar de que en la boleta electoral ya no aparecerá a qué partido pertenece el candidato, se han asegurado que los votantes sepan quiénes son demócratas y voten por ellos y sus temas.

Los votantes aprobaron en 2010 las elecciones primarias abiertas con la esperanza de que sean electos a la legislatura estatal, políticos de corte moderada y no los extremistas de los partidos políticos que estancan cada año las negociaciones presupuestales.

"No puedo predecir sí tendremos legisladores más moderados, lo que sí sé es que las elecciones abiertas primarias ponen a todos al mismo nivel; y a largo plazo vamos a ver a más independientes compitiendo", dijo Kim Alexander, fundadora y presidenta de la no lucrativa y partidista Fundación de los Votantes de California. (full story)

What do we need to know about Tuesday’s election in California?

KALW Radio, May 31, 2012

Excerpt:

On today’s Your Call, we’ll have a conversation about the two statewide ballot measures to increase the taxes on cigarettes and to change term limits for state legislators. Voters will also vote on the 2012 presidential contest, and local and statewide races. What’s at stake? What questions do you have? Join us live at 10 or send an email to feedback@yourcallradio.org. It’s Your Call, with Matt Martin and you.

Guests:

Kim Alexander, President & Founder of California Voter Foundation

Peter Schrag, the former editorial page editor and columnist of the Sacramento Bee and a frequent contributor to the California Progress Report. (full story)

"Top-Two" How-To: A Primary Primer

Capitol Public Radio, May 29, 2012

Excerpt:

The upcoming June 5th Primary is the first statewide election under California’s new “top two” primary system, and voters will see some very different looking ballots.

Okay, California voter - open up your sample ballot, and check out the U-S Senate race. There are 24 different candidates, and you get to pick one of them. The top two finishers will advance to the fall general election - hence the name "top two primary."

Alexander: "There will be more choices for everyone in the primary, but fewer choices in November."

Kim Alexander is with the California Voter Foundation. She says the old system left independent voters - or as they're now called in California, "No Party Preference" voters - without a voice in primary elections. Now, everyone can participate - whether registered with a political party or not.

Alexander: "So the bottom line is that more people are going to be participating in the decision-making process to whittle down the choices."

The new system only applies to races for Congress and the state legislature. (full story)

California moves to 'top-two' open primary election system

KABC-TV, By Nannette Miranda , May 22, 2012

Excerpt:

In two weeks California's voters go to the polls in the June primary. This will be the state's first open, or "top-two," primary. The new format will have an impact on the legislature, state policies and programs.

President Barack Obama will be the Democratic nominee for president. Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney is the presumptive Republican nominee challenging him.

But when Californians vote in the June 5 primary election, they don't have to belong to a political party to pick a nominee for congressional, legislative and statewide races.

Voters still get one vote for each office, but the first- and second-place winners, regardless of party, move on to the November general election.

"This change is going to give millions of California voters more of a say in the voting process, more power to decide who the candidates and the ultimate winner will be in political districts up and down the state," said Kim Alexander, founder and president of the California Voter Foundation. "This new process really shakes things up a lot."

The idea of a "top-two primary" is to help elect more moderate people to the legislature and other non-presidential offices to end gridlock, especially in Sacramento, by electing lawmakers who are more willing to compromise.

The new system also aims to lessen the power that party leaders have over which candidate gets to be the nominee.

But opponents say the top-two primary system could result in two candidates from the same party vying for one office, leaving little chance for smaller, less-funded parties to win. (Full Story)

 

Winning design for first ‘I Voted’ sticker contest recognized by Board of Supervisors

Valley Community Newspapers, By Mark Albertson, May 22, 2012

Excerpt:

Sacramento County voters will get a newly designed “I Voted” sticker after they cast their ballot on June 5. The winning sticker, created by an area high school student in the County’s first “I Voted” sticker contest, is also featured on the cover of the June 2012 sample ballot booklet.

First place winner Alicia Chan, C.K. McClatchy High School and runner ups Kevin Thao, Grant Union High School and Darian Rosengard, Rio Americano High School were recognized by the Board of Supervisors on May 8.

The Department of Voter Registration and Elections invited students from five area high schools to design a new “I Voted” sticker for the June Statewide Primary Election. Participating high schools were Rio Americano, Galt, Grant, McClatchy and San Juan. The response was overwhelming, with 76 entries submitted.

“The goal of the contest was to engage high school students’ talent, while at the same time encouraging their participation in a civic activity by creating a new ‘I Voted’ sticker for the voters of Sacramento County,” said Registrar of Voters Jill LaVine.

The artwork was judged by former Sacramento Mayor Anne Rudin; Kim Alexander, president and founder of the California Voter Foundation; and Debbie O’Donoghue, deputy secretary of state, voter education and outreach. (full story)

Hackathon follows the political money at Stanford

San Franciso Examiner, By Mark Albertson, May 22, 2012

Excerpt:

The weather was spectacular in the Bay Area this past weekend, but a group of scientists, engineers and journalists sat hunched over their computers in a basement room on the Stanford University campus, blissfully ignorant of the beautiful climate outside. They were hot on the trail of money, lots of money, and how it flowed weekly, daily, even hourly through the backrooms and boardrooms of the American political system.

The two-day “hackathon” was organized by Teresa Bouza, a Knight Fellow at Stanford, who received a grant to develop new tools that journalists and others could use to make sense out of the huge amounts of online data available today, drawing from multiple sources such as the FEC’s own website to information collected by independent groups like MapLight. She pulled together a number of sponsors including O’Reilly Media, Knight-Mozilla Open News, the Sunlight Foundation, Sony, Revolution Analytics, and mongoDB. With a Presidential election looming, Bouza thought a focus on campaign financing would be especially timely.

- - - - - - - - - - -

To help facilitate the exercise, Google donated unlimited access to its App Engine service and there were multiple databases the teams could draw from for the financial data they needed. But there was one major group of lawmakers for whom no online data detailing current political contributions exists today: the august members of the United States Senate.

Unlike their counterparts in the House of Representatives (who must file their reports electronically with the Federal Election Commission), Presidential contenders, and a vast majority of the statewide and local legislative candidates in the country today, current or prospective members of the Senate still file their campaign contributions by paper to the chamber’s Secretary. Access to these reports, when they are finally posted online after a lengthy and cumbersome process, is usually after Election Day.

According to Kim Alexander of the California Voter Foundation, there is a bill – S219 – that is designed to bring campaign filing for Senate candidates into the 21st century. But, as Alexander ruefully admits, “it’s not going anywhere.”

On Sunday afternoon, after the last database had been downloaded and the final graphics rendered, the tired but satisfied teams gathered to hear presentations of each other’s work. Prizes were handed out, including a brand-new 46 inch Sony television. After spending two days building tools to shine new light on the darker corners of campaign finance in the U.S., the teams saved their data, unplugged their laptops, and climbed a long set of stairs into the bright sunlight. (full story)

California Open Primary Around the Corner - What it Means to Voters"

CVF President Kim Alexander's interview with KXTV-10 Sacramento's Dan Elliott, May 9, 2012 (Video)

California looks to crack down on political bloggers paid by campaigns

Sacramento Bee, By Jim Sanders, April 20, 2012

Excerpt:

Paid political attack dogs always have found safe haven in the free-wheeling anonymity of the Internet, but California is set to challenge that.

The leader of the state's political watchdog agency said Thursday that she wants bloggers to be required to disclose payments received from campaigns.

"The public should know about such a connection in the political arena so they can properly evaluate endorsements," Chairwoman Ann Ravel said.

The proposal is sure to be watched closely nationwide for targeting a mass medium known as a bastion of anything-goes free speech.

FPPC officials said they believe California would be the first state to place strings on political commentary.

Critics contend that government could be overstepping its bounds.

"I think if people are blogging an opinion, they have a right to do it," said Assemblyman Sandre Swanson, D-Alameda. "I just think a free press is fundamental, even if people are paid to (blog)."

Assemblyman Bill Berryhill, R-Ceres, countered that voters have a right to know who is getting paid to sway their opinions.

"Transparency is always good in government," he said.

Ravel said she initially will ask the FPPC to adopt guidelines asking bloggers to disclose before the November presidential election.

Her goal for future elections is mandatory disclosure, Ravel said.

"I think this is one of those issues that's extremely controversial, so it needs to be done incrementally," Ravel said. "But my view is, it should ultimately be required."

Payments to bloggers became a public issue in the 2010 gubernatorial election after a Placer County blogger, Aaron F. Park, was removed from a conservative website when it was learned that he was paid by a consultant for Steve Poizner.

- - - - - - - - - -

Other critics of Ravel's plan say the issue is complex: What dollar value should be reported for a hyperlink from one website to another, for example? And would disclosure be required if a candidate responded to a favorable blog post by later buying advertising on the site?

Park said that bloggers could evade disclosure by working for political consultants hired by a campaign, not by the campaign itself.

"At the end of the day, even if it's a good idea, I just don't see how constitutionally, how legally, you get there," former legislator Steve Peace, who now runs a nonprofit public policy group, said of regulating Internet bloggers.

But Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation, applauded Ravel's proposal.

"I think people should have the right to say whatever they want, in any format, on any platform, unless they're being paid by someone else to make those comments," she said. "And if that's happening, you need to identify who you are and who your donors are." (full story)

New ballot to greet voters in state's June primary

San Francisco Chronicle, By Wyatt Buchanan, April 9, 2012

Excerpt:

When Californians vote in the June 5 primary, they will see an entirely new kind of ballot that some hope will lead to changes in the types of candidates who are elected to public office.

For this first year, many voter advocates and elections officials say, they are just hoping to avoid mass confusion.

"I think it's going to be bewildering for voters," said Kim Alexander, president and founder of the nonpartisan California Voter Foundation. The new election process comes as voters will be choosing candidates in newly drawn districts, a result of the once-a-decade redistricting, she noted.

"We want to come up with shorthand tips for voters, but it's very difficult," Alexander said, adding that, for some, reading the ballot may be like facing a strange algebra question. County officials on Friday began sending the first vote-by-mail ballots to people living overseas or in the military.

What voters will see is a new "top-two" primary system, which was approved via ballot initiative, Proposition 14, in June 2010. Previously, primary ballots would be separated by party - with each party winner moving to the general election. Now, all candidates will be together on a single ballot, and only the top two vote-getters will move on to the November election regardless of party.

Writing in candidates is no longer allowed in the November election.

The open primary applies to candidates for Congress, the Legislature and statewide offices such as governor.

Candidates will be listed by their "party preference," though they can also choose to have "no party preference."

Some elections officials say it is analogous to an Olympic race in which the first heat determines who gets to compete in the final, and the competitors in the final could be from the same country. That means some November races could be between candidates of the same party, or candidates unaffiliated with either party.

"In the past, the party nominee would be their guy or gal in the final race," said Gail Pellerin, president of the California Association of Clerks and Elected Officials and the Santa Cruz County clerk. "Now that power is in the hands" of all voters, she said.

There is one big exception, though, that will be in play this year. The presidential primary will be run as it has in the past, which means voters must be registered as a member of a specific party to vote for that party's nominees. Only candidates from one party will be on the ballot for president, opposite of the other races on the ballot. (full story)

New System May Increase Voter Participation

KCRA, By Danielle Leigh. February 21, 2012

Excerpt:

The Secretary of State says she hopes to unveil a new online voter registration system before Labor Day.

Last year, state legislators passed a law requiring Secretary of State Debra Bowen's office to develop an online voter registration system.

Right now, voters can register online in many counties through an assisted system, but you still have to print out a form and mail it in.

Bowen said the new system will rely on individual's signatures on file with the DMV to validate election ballots instead.

Voters’ advocates call the tool an important step toward increasing voter participation.

“We have 6.5 million Californians who are eligible to vote but not registered. That's 27 percent of our state’s voting population, and we believe if we could improve the voter registration process, it could help more people become participants,” said Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation.

Bowen said her office still has to do some testing before it unveils the new system. (full story)

Secretary Of State: Mail-In Ballots In Jeopardy

KCRA, February 20, 2012

Excerpt:

California Secretary of State Debra Bowen said she is concerned thousands of mail-in ballots will be delivered late, and wouldn't be counted in both the California primary and presidential elections because of plans from by the United States Postal Service to close more than 200 mail processing facilities to save money.

According to statements by the USPS, the closures could begin in May when a moratorium on the closures expires.

Bowen said the closure of mail processing facilities in California last year extended delivery times of mail-in ballots in Ventura and Monterey counties up to seven days, instead of the one- to three-day USPS standard.
"My fear is that we will have tens of thousands of ballots that come in Wednesday or Thursday and cannot legally be counted," Bowen said.

Records from the Secretary of State indicate more than 50 percent of Californians voted by mail in the past two elections. In the Sacramento region, the average was even higher, just more than 60 percent.

"It just hurts to think about how we have encouraged people to vote by mail, and now, this could result in their ballot not being counted," Bowen said.

Bowen is urging the postmaster general and Congress to postpone the closures until after the election.

- - - - - - - - -

Voter advocate Kim Alexander said if possible, voters should fill out their mail-in ballots and drop them off at their polling location, if they want to be sure their ballots will be counted.

"I think we are going to have to make an extra effort to educate voters," said Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation. "It is a situation that requires leadership at a statewide level by the Secretary of State if we are going to try to prevent a potential crisis this year, and make sure people can get their ballots in on time to be counted."

Bowen said legislation is pending in Congress that could postpone the closures of processing facilities.

In an email, a spokesman for the U.S. Postal Service said legislative relief could change the reductions the Postal Service needs to make. (full story)

Move over robo-calls, states sell email addresses for campaigns to reach voters

Fox News, By Kathleen Foster, February 6, 2012

Excerpt:

If your email inbox starts overflowing with messages from political campaigns this election season, it could be because your state sold you out.

A Fox News study has found 19 states plus the District of Columbia, now ask for an email address on voter registration cards. In nine of those states, email addresses from the cards are then sold to political parties, organizing groups, lawmakers and campaigns who can use them to send unsolicited emails.

If it were a Viagra ad, it be considered a crime in some states. But a political message, that's all perfectly legal.

The CAN-SPAM (Controlling the Assault of Non-Solicited Pornography and Marketing) law enacted in 2003 puts restrictions on commercial mass emailing, but not on political mass emailing. Politicians can "spam" and do. Political messages of any kind, including electronic, are protected free speech under the First Amendment.

- - - - - - - - -

Like phone numbers, email addresses are not required to register to vote anywhere in the United States. Giving the information is optional, but that may not be clear to the average voter.

"I think this is really one of those untold stories. It's all going on behind the scenes," said Kim Alexander, president of The California Voter Foundation, a nonprofit organization which produced the study "Voter Privacy in the Digital Age."

"People who are in the election business, people who are administrators, people who are in campaigns, they all know what's going on. The voters are in the dark, and that has got to change. It's disrespectful and it's deceitful," said Alexander.

In 2008, Alexander helped redesign California's voter registration card to clearly mark the word "optional" in the form's email field.

Eight of the states that collect emails fail to clearly mark the information as "optional" on their registration forms. Not one of the states that sells email addresses clearly explains on the voter form that emails could or would be sold.

"States are now getting into, essentially, the data brokering business so they understand that the more points of contact that they have for a voter, they can make more money," Dakin said. (full story)

A look into the upcoming California elections.

KPBS, January 9, 2012

Excerpt:

CAVANAUGH: First of all, when is the California primary this year?

ALEXANDER: Oh, that's a good question. It would be the first Tuesday in June. And that would know -- I'm just looking at my calendar. We should know these things. That would be June 5th. Yes. June 5th.

CAVANAUGH: Now, back in 2008, if I remember correctly, we had a California primary in February. It was part of what they were calling super Tuesday.

ALEXANDER: Right.

CAVANAUGH: Why did that change?

ALEXANDER: Well, California has experimented with our primary for the last several presidential elections. And we traditionally have had a June primary. But we moved it to first March back in 2000, we had a March primary in 2004, trying to get California to have a voice in the selection of presidential candidates. And the March primaries were still too late for California voters to weigh in on the presidential primary selection process. So California tried something new in 2008, and we had a bifurcated primary, where we had the approximate presidential in February. But we had the rest of the contest still on the ballot in June, which saw a really abysmal turnout. So that was probably one of the main reasons. It was very expensive to split the primaries, and even though it gave California a voice, it really cost the state a lot in terms of money. And we saw that really poor turnout in that primary. So I think that was one of the main reasons the state went back.

CAVANAUGH: Now, in June, we have a new open primary. How does that change things for voters?

ALEXANDER: It's going to change a lot of things for voters. And that's another thing. Not only have we varied the date of our primary, but we've changed the rules around in our primaries for the last several election cycles. And so this is something new again for voters. We have basically an open primary system that gives more choice to everyone in the primary. But less choices in November. Basically what happens is for the first time, it won't matter what party you're registered to, if you want to vote for a candidate of another party, you can crossover and do that. And you can vote for --

CAVANAUGH: So Democrats can vote for a Republican in our primary? For a Republican presidential nominee in June?

ALEXANDER: No, this applies to all contests except the presidential.

CAVANAUGH: Oh, okay.

ALEXANDER: And also party central committee contests. So it's very confusing. I talked to our local registrar here in Sacramento today about what their plans are for implementing this, and basically what voters and counties will stay across the state, there will be one ballot that has everybody on it, except for the presidential candidates and the federal committees. It'll have the major and minor party candidates for all the partisan contests for legislature and Congress. Then there will also be an additional ballot card for democratic voters to vote in the democratic primary for president. Republican voters to vote in the Republican primary for president. So the party primaries for president will still be able to be reserved just for voters of those parties, unless those parties decide to open up their primaries and allow voters of other parties or independent voters to vote in a presidential partisan primary, which the Democratic Party has done in the past, but the Republican party does not do.

CAVANAUGH: I see.

ALEXANDER: So it's very complicated. (full story)

Technology failures prompt criticism of secretary of state

By Will Evans, California Watch, December 20, 2011

Excerpt:

The latest technology snafus to hit Secretary of State Debra Bowen's office have added to growing frustration from registrars and watchdog groups, who say Bowen has been unresponsive to their concerns.

The server crash that brought down California’s campaign finance disclosure database for more than two weeks now also has incapacitated the state system for validating new voter registrations.

This, on top of a years-long delay in creating a new voter registration database, as well as other elections issues, has ratcheted up the criticism directed at Bowen, who's in her second term.

"Sometimes, I feel like we’re having to knock really hard on the door and scream that we’re out here and need time and attention and guidance and leadership," said Gail Pellerin, president of the California Association of Clerks and Election Officials. "It’s been really hard to get a seat at the table."

Bowen acknowledged the latest technology problems have been "extremely frustrating," but said she has always worked closely with county officials and advocates to formulate policy and fix problems.

- - - - - - - -

California has access to federal funding to create a new statewide voter registration database, but that process has been marred by years of delays. Bowen's office fired the contractor on that project last year and is still working to find a new one. The system isn't expected to be in place until 2015. Bowen blames the problems on the state's procurement process.

Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation, draws a connection between the various technological setbacks.

"Technology projects have appeared to have stalled out in the secretary of state's office," Alexander said. "The situation cries out for leadership."

Alexander helped write a study by the Pew Center on the States that gave low marks to California for its lack of online lookup tools for voters. Alexander said she and several other organizations recently tried to meet with Bowen to discuss a proposal for an online tool allowing voters to find out if and where they are registered. The meeting request was denied, she said.

"It’s very discouraging," Alexander said.

Bowen said 24 out of California's 58 counties, representing about 80 percent of the population, already provide a registration lookup tool, and "there's just no reason to duplicate that effort."

"It was my judgment that with extremely limited resources that we should focus on the longer-term solutions with online voter registration," Bowen said. (full story)

California website's glitches block online tracking of campaign donations

By Torey Van Oot, Sacramento Bee, December 15, 2011

Excerpt:

With just six months until the June primary election, campaign cash is starting to flow to candidate and ballot measure committees.

But for much of the past two weeks, technological difficulties have blocked the public's ability to track the transactions online.

Cal-Access, the 12-year-old portal for filing campaign finance and lobbying reports, has been down for all but 30 hours since Nov. 30.

Although staff at the secretary of state's office have been working since Monday on three separate approaches to try to restore access, Secretary of State Debra Bowen said Wednesday it's unclear when the site will be back up and running.

"We want to get it up as soon as possible, but we also want to complete the fix that will be the most stable over time," Bowen said.

In the meantime, lobbyists and political committees are reverting to the paper filing system they used for years before the 1999 creation of Cal-Access, submitting reports via mail, by fax or in person. Members of the public can call, email or visit the secretary of state's office to access the information.

But with fundraising for 2012 ballot measures and candidate campaigns ramping up, the repeated failures of the state's only online disclosure database for campaign and lobbying reports is troubling for advocates.

"The public needs access to this data sooner rather than later," said Kim Alexander, president of the nonpartisan California Voter Foundation. "We're heading into another legislative session, (and) there's going to be a lot of contested legislative and congressional races."

Bowen said that while she hopes her staff's efforts will keep the online database in place through the election, a permanent fix will require a complete overhaul. (full story)

Report: Maryland Has Nation’s Second Best Election Website

City Biz Lists, December 9, 2011

Excerpt:

Maryland has the second-best state election website in the nation, according to a report by the Pew Center on the States.

The report - represented on the Pew Center's website by a series of interactive charts and lists - ranks election websites based on how easily they can be used, how easy it is to search for information, and what kind of basic information was included. Maryland's two election sites got a score of 84 out of 100, behind only Montana.

"I do think the site reflects the election agency's dedication to serving voters," said Kim Alexander, the president and founder of the California Voter Foundation, and the lead researcher on the study.

The study looked at only each state election website and the information presented there. It did not consider campaign finance disclosure websites. Alexander said that the study's criteria came from a group of experts working on behalf of the Pew Center, the California Voter Foundation, the Center for Governmental Studies, and the Nielsen Norman Group. (full story)

California trails in online tools for voters, study finds

By Nicholas Riccardi, Los Angeles TImes, , December 8, 2011

Excerpt:

Why would you want to be in Minnesota in November rather than in sunny California?

Because Minnesota has far better online tools for voters than the Golden State, according to a new study from the Pew Center for the States.

"While many other states have made great progress in recent years utilizing the Internet as an effective and efficient tool to help voters engage in elections, California is lagging behind," Kim Alexander of the nonpartisan California Voter Foundation, which helped write the report, said in a statement.

The study found California was one of only two states that failed to give all its voters five basic online tools. (The other state was Vermont.)

The report dinged California and the secretary of state's office for giving voters no way to check their registration status, polling place, requirements to register or instructions on using special voting equipment for people with disabilities. Some counties do make such information available to voters online.

California was also criticized for providing its voter information in PDFs rather than more user-friendly HTMLs. (full story)

California’s election web site needs work

By Lisa Vorderbrueggen, Contra Costa TImes, December 8, 2011

Excerpt:

A Pew Center Center on the States’ study on election web sites found California’s in need of improvement.

Click here to read the full study, called “Being Online Is Not Enough.”

The Golden State scored below average and while researchers found some good stuff, the state is shy on key look-up tools offered elsewhere. Here’s a summary of they had to say about www.sos.ca.gov/elections and www.voterguide.sos.ca.gov:

California provides rich and detailed voting information for users, but offers none of the five recommended lookup tools, reducing its overall score. Improved navigation and content organization can help voters find needed information.

The California Secretary of State’s office operates the sites evaluated. The tools include voter registration status, polling place, ballot information, and absentee and provisional ballot status.

The California Voter Foundation, Center for Governmental Studies and the Nielsen Norman Group participated in the project.

While many other states have made great progress in recent years utilizing the Internet as an effective and efficient tool to help voters engage in elections, California is lagging behind,” wrote California Voter Foundation

director Kim Alexander. “At CVF, we are working with a number of individuals and organizations to promote a statewide voter registration status lookup tool and hope that someday soon California voters will have as

good, if not better access to modern election tools as voters in other states.” (full story)

State of Florida’s elections site scores well in Pew Center report

By Peter Schorsch, Saint Peters Blog, December 8, 2011

Excerpt:

Being Online Is Still Not Enough provides state-by-state reviews and analysis based on detailed criteria of election websites for all 50 states and the District of Columbia. It also includes recommendations for improving each site

to better inform voters, and provides a list of best practices adopted by many states to maximize their election office’s online presence. This report follows Pew’s initial 2008 study, Being Online Is Not Enough.

Assessments were based on three categories: content, lookup tools, and usability. Roll your cursor over the map below to see each state’s overall score, and scores broken down by category. (full story)

Vast majority of Santa Clara County voters opted to vote by mail

By Jessica Parks, Peninsula Press, November 16, 2011

Excerpt:

Santa Clara County voters last week were split on labor issues, school board members, council candidates and a composting facility. But there was one choice an overwhelming majority agreed upon: voting by mail.

Of the 44,403 votes cast Nov. 8 in Cupertino, Sunnyvale, Palo Alto, Orchard School District and Sunnyvale School District, more than 80 percent came via mail-in ballots, according to county election results.

Kim Alexander, founder and president of the California Voter Foundation, said it’s common to see a higher percentage of mail-in ballots in low-turnout elections. “I think that’s because there are about 3 [million] to 4 million people in the state who vote in every election, and many of those people are voting by mail,” she said.

Presidential elections, on the other hand, draw a larger number of occasional voters, who are less likely to register as permanent absentee voters.

- - - - - - -

Oregon and Washington now conduct all of their balloting by mail, a change that proponents say has reduced costs and boosted turnout.

Alexander said that system wouldn’t work for California. “We’re not Oregon or Washington. Our electorate is far more diverse,” she said. “There are a lot of people who benefit from poll-worker assistance.”

She also pointed out that Oregon has a “unified statewide voting system,” whereas in California, instructions and procedures can vary by county. Even policies set at the state level are sometimes implemented differently from one polling place to another, she said.

Santa Clara County’s Nov. 8 turnout would seem to indicate that absentee ballots increase voter turnout — the county got back 41.8 percent of the absentee ballots it distributed, while only 25.3 percent of non-absentee voters actually made it to their polling place.

But a recent study by the Pew Center on the States found that a mandatory vote-by-mail system in California would reduce an individual’s likelihood of voting by 13.2 percent, and have an even stronger dampening effect on urban and minority voters.

Critics of all-mail balloting also note that voters can confirm that their ballot was received, but they can’t always confirm that their vote was counted. They say many ballots have been misplaced in the mail, arrived after election day, or been disqualified because the voter did not sign the envelope.

In the 2008 primary election, 4.8 percent of absentee ballots submitted in Santa Clara County were not counted, according to data on the Secretary of State’s website. In the general election that followed, that rate dropped to 1.6 percent. Statewide, the percentages of uncounted absentee ballots for those elections were 2.5 and 2.8, respectively.

Absentee voting is “beneficial to those voters who are using it, but it’s not the solution for everyone,” Alexander said. Her foundation advocates a hybrid approach to election reform, both improving accountability in the absentee voting system and boosting efficiency in polling places. (full story)

KCRA 3 Examines 'Occupy' Protesters' Voting Records

KCRA.com, Novemebr 2, 2011

Excerpt:

Occupy Sacramento protesters have been expressing their anger at the government's priorities by protesting in Cesar Chavez Park and refusing to leave afterhours.

As of last week, 50 people had been arrested, some several times, according to the Sacramento Police Department.

KCRA 3 requested voting records for those people from Sacramento County.

Records provided by the Assistant Registrar of Voters confirmed nearly half, 24, are registered to vote in Sacramento County.

Of the protesters who are registered to vote, most have voted on average, two times in the past five years.

Some protesters admit they have never voted.

"I don't believe the system works," said Christina Kay, an Occupy Sacramento protester.

Other protesters, such as Mark Bradley, said they have never missed an election.

"I believe it's important that if I am going to express my opinion, that I ought to back that up with voting," Bradley said.

Kim Alexander works to increase voter participation. She said, in her experience, these voting records are typical.

"I really think that for most people who aren't voting in California, it's not that they are hardcore non-voters, they simply are busy."

Other registered voters watching the Occupy movement said they think the protesters should be voting. (full story)

I. In Focus This Week

By M. Mindy Moretti, Election Line Weekly, October 13, 2011

Excerpt:

With the stroke of a pen from Gov. Jerry Brown, California recently once again legalized online voter registration providing an additional opportunity for more than six million residents of voting age to register to vote.

California law already allows for online voter registration, however the process on the books before the new legislation was approved was contingent upon the completion of the state’s federally approved voter registration database — VoteCal.

While the state does have a statewide voter registration database, the current system does not make it possible to fully register to vote online. Tired of waiting for the state’s fully federally compliant statewide voter registration database to come online San Francisco Senator Leland Yee introduced SB 397 which would allow counties to offer online voter registration now.

“This is an important first step toward fully upgrading California’s voter registration, making use of better technological tools to make the voter registration process more accurate, less expensive, and more efficient,” said David Becker, director of the Pew Center on the States’ Election Initiatives.

Under SB 397, citizens will input their voter information online and the county elections office would use the voter’s signature from the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) to verify authenticity. That signature can be matched against the voter’s signature at the polling place.

- - - - - - -- -

When online registration is finally available in California, there will be multiple benefits. In addition to getting more people accurately registered to vote, one of the biggest impacts of the new law will be cost savings. Kim Alexander with the California Voter Foundation said that the cost savings are “potentially enormous.”

Research by the Pew’s Election Initiatives indicates that there are substantial cost savings that result from online registration.

“For instance, in Maricopa County, Ariz., where they’ve had online registration for almost a decade, it costs them only an average of 3 cents to process each online registration, as opposed to 83 cents to process a paper registration, and they’ve reduced their printing costs by 75 percent,” Becker said.

According to Becker, as a result of these kinds of savings, jurisdictions that have implemented online registration have recouped their initial investment in around two years or less.

Alexander said another cost savings may be found on provisional voting.

“California has more provisional voting than any other state - in 2008 it accounted for one third of all provisional ballots cast nationwide! One fifth of those ballots [issued in California in 2008] were not counted because those voters were not properly registered,” Alexander said.

One area of concern about the new online voter registration law is what impact not having a statewide voter registration database could have on the registration process.

Alexander said that California is one of only nine states that lacks a registration status look-up tool for voters and without that tool, there could be problems with the new online system.

“I'm concerned if we implement online registration without an accompanying registration status lookup tool then many people will end up reregistering when they actually don't need to, and this will lead to extra, unnecessary work for counties processing those registrations,” Alexander said.

The state has already applied for a federal grant to help pay for the process and representatives from the secretary of state’s office are working with their counterparts in the state’s Department of Motor Vehicles to create the new online process. (full story)

Editorial: Initiative process deserves reform

Visalia Times-Delta, October 12, 2011

Excerpt:

Anyone who has voted in a statewide election in California knows that the initiative process has become corrupted from its noble intentions.

Now there is hard evidence.

According to "Democracy by Initiative," a report by the Center for Governmental Studies, the initiative process has been taken over by special interests and big business to promote their interests. In addition, various nonprofit and citizen watchdog groups have found that California's initiative process has strayed a long way from the populist reform adopted by the state under Gov. Hiram Johnson 100 years ago.

In the beginning, initiatives were used sparingly to correct corruptive abuses by government itself. Now they promote specific causes and values, often for the advantage of big business or special interests.

According to "Democracy by Initiative," a report by the Center for Governmental Studies, two-thirds of all ballot initiative contributions came in amounts of $100,000 or more in 1990. By 2006, two-thirds of all contributions came in amounts of $1 million or more.

"Ironically, we're sort of back where we started when Hiram Johnson started the initiative process," said Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation. "It's dominated by the very special interests he sought to overcome through the initiative process."

Many specific remedies have been proposed to reform the initiative process. It's time some of those were tried. The process is subverting the legislative process, and it's only getting worse. (full story)

At 100, California Direct Democracy Gets Facelift

KCRA.com, October 10, 2011

Excerpt:

Political watchers gathered in Sacramento on Monday morning to mark the 100-year anniversary of California's initiative process and discuss the potential impact of legislation recently signed by Gov. Jerry Brown.

Brown signed SB 202 by Democratic Sen. Loni Hancock of Berkeley on Friday. The law moves all statewide initiatives and referendums to November general elections ballots. Previously, such votes also could take place during primary elections in June.

"I think it's a significant change," said Kim Alexander, of the California Voter Foundation.

Alexander was one of about 50 people who attended a day-long conference on the initiative process at the Sheraton Grand Hotel in downtown Sacramento.

In signing the bill into law, Brown said it "restores the original understanding" that initiatives were to be considered at a general election and involve more people.

Alexander said that may be true, but added that the November-only rule could also have unintended consequences.

"Rather than looking at eight measures in June and 10 measures in November, people are going to end up with 18 measures on one ballot," Alexander said. "And that could be very challenging for voters." (full story)

Corporations, wealthy dominate initiative process

By Judy Lin, San Jose Mercury News, October 9, 2011

Excerpt:

California's initiative process was intended to give people a way to arm themselves against corruption, whether it was from lawmakers in the Capitol or the special interests that controlled them.

But in the 100 years since former Gov. Hiram Johnson rallied against the corrupt politics that permeated state government, corporations and wealthy individuals have adapted to California's initiative process—and in some years dominate it—by qualifying ballot measures that benefit them.

Insurance, oil, pharmaceutical and utility companies are among the well-funded interests that have spent tens of millions of dollars in recent years to promote their causes through California initiatives. In 2008, for example, Texas oilman T. Boone Pickens' company contributed 98 percent of the $22.8 million spent to promote an initiative regarding the use of natural gas in vehicles, a move that would have benefited the billionaire's business interests. Voters rejected it.

In the June 2010 primary, the only two initiatives not placed on the ballot by the Legislature were funded primarily by two corporations—Pacific Gas & Electric Co. and Mercury Insurance. The largest donation given to any one initiative campaign came from Hollywood producer Steven Bing, who gave $48 million in support of Proposition 87, an unsuccessful alternative energy initiative on the November 2006 ballot.

- - - - - - - - - -

According to "Democracy by Initiative," a report by the Center for Governmental Studies, two-thirds of all ballot initiative contributions came in amounts of $100,000 or more in 1990. By 2006, two-thirds of all contributions came in amounts of $1 million or more.

"Ironically, we're sort of back where we started when Hiram Johnson started the initiative process," said Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation. "It's dominated by the very special interests he sought to overcome through the initiative process."

Mercury Insurance illustrates how narrow interests have laid claim to the process.

In 2010, the company sunk $15 million into Proposition 17, an attempt to overturn state law banning auto insurance companies from considering a driver's insurance history in setting rates.

While that measure failed, Mercury Insurance Chairman George Joseph has donated nearly $8.1 million to a political action aiming to place a similar initiative on the ballot next June. American Agents Alliance, which runs the PAC, says the proposal will allow customers to receive a discount for having consistent coverage in the past and is allowed in almost every other state. (full story)

Era of Reform May Lead to More Changes in Sacramento

By Joe Moore, Valley Public Radio, October 4, 2011

Excerpt:

One hundred years ago this month, California’s experiment in direct democracy was born with the introduction of the ballot initiative and referendum process. Now, a century later, Californians are again looking at new ideas to fix what many feel is a broken system in Sacramento. So what might the next 100 years have in store?

If you take a moment to compare California of 2011, to that of 1911, the differences are huge. Back then, the state was home to only 2 million people, and Hollywood, industrial scale agriculture and Silicon Valley simply didn’t exist. But there’s also some striking similarities to the present day, at least politically.

“I think that the state capital is just as much controlled by special interests today as it was one hundred years ago. It may not be one single interest, but the rules of the game have not changed,” says Kim Alexander, president and founder of the California Voter Foundation.

“It still takes a lot of money to run for office, the capital is filled with lobbyists, and the legislative docket is filled with bills from lobbying groups and industries. It was true 100 years ago and it’s true today.”

Back then, Sacramento was controlled by the powerful Southern Pacific Railroad. California voters responded to the situation by electing a reform minded governor, Hiram Johnson, who led the charge to let citizens take lawmaking into the own hands. The result was the initiative, the referendum and the recall.

In the past ten decades, thousands of initiatives have qualified for the ballot, and while a relatively small number have actually become law, the process remains popular.

“Most Californians think that the initiative process does a better job of making policy tha the governor and the legislature,” says Mark Baldasarre, President and CEO of the Public Policy Institute of California. In the PPIC’s most recent public opinion poll, released last month, sixty two percent of Californians say they are satisfied with the initiative process. Compare that to the state Legislature, which gets an approval rate of just 26 percent.

- - - - - - - - -

In the new PPIC poll, six in ten voters supported the concept of changing the current limit of eight years in the State Senate and six in the Assembly, to a total of twelve years in any of the two houses. A initiative to that effect has already qualified for the 2012 ballot.

Even the initiative process itself is not without its problems and potential fixes.

“The problem is we’re making initiative policy in a vacuum, and voters aren’t really being given the full picture, the way the Legislature is when they pass a budget. They’re looking at the whole budget, the whole state and all the programs. Voters are just looking at one proposal at a time,” says Alexander.

She says there are proposals in the Legislature that would help voters weigh the cost of initiatives in advance. Other reform suggestions involve the way measures qualify for the ballot, to reduce the reliance on paid signature gatherers.

“We have a very short qualification period and we haven’t changed that in the 100 years of California’s initiative process. There could be a different approach where we give proponents more time to gather signatures so they don’t have to be so dependent on money.”

Jim Boren says he’d like to see more transparency in the process to determine legal and fiscal problems with initiatives before Californians vote on them. “I’d like to see a system where if an initiative is qualified for the ballot it that has to have Legislative hearings so you could find out the problems in it,” says Boren.

But regardless of the changes that may come to state government in the coming years, one thing is certain, California’s century old initiative process isn’t going anywhere.

As Alexander says, “Californians have a love hate relationship with the initiative process. We love to complain about it but don’t you dare talk about taking it away.” (full story)

After 100 years, does California's initiative process need a tune-up?

By Timm Herdt, Ventura County Star, September 24, 2011

Excerpt:

Paul Jacob, president of Virginia-based Citizens in Charge Foundation, may be the fiercest defender of direct democracy in America. He's helped organize more than 150 petition drives in 47 states, and feels so strongly about the righteousness of the initiative process that he risked going to prison by defying an Oklahoma law prohibiting the use of paid signature-gatherers in that state.

When Jacob comes to California, he feels right at home. He gives the state's initiative process an A grade.

"The essential thing is that there be a chance for people to represent themselves," Jacob said. "Most states get a D or an F. California has a very robust process."

Bruno Kaufmann, president of the Initiative and Referendum Institute Europe, has studied direct democracy around the world, especially in Switzerland, where direct democracy dates to the 14th century and was the inspiration for California's system. When he looks at California, he shakes his head.

"It may be the only place in the world where I would recommend less, not more, direct democracy," he said. "The California process is not about solving conflict. It's an inflexible way of dealing with constitutional affairs. What you have is the hammer and not the screwdriver."

- - - - - - - - -

But voters have proved to be a hard sell. They rejected the prohibition of alcohol four times and twice shot down the legalization of marijuana for recreational use. They sided with the medical profession over public hysteria by voting down a plan to eliminate compulsory vaccinations and, 65 years later, to quarantine people with AIDS. They also said no to assisted suicide.

"Only one out of three initiatives has passed," noted Kim Alexander, founder and president of the nonprofit California Voter Foundation. "Voters really have pretty high standards."

Jacob, Kaufmann and Alexander were among the panelists at a forum — titled "How do we put people back in the initiative process?" — sponsored by the civic engagement group Zócalo Public Square last week in San Francisco.

Most initiatives don't deal with such emotional topics as those cited above. Rather, most address issues at the intersection of people and their government: taxes, spending priorities and the rules that govern elections and the legislative process.

Over the last 35 years, Californians through ballot initiatives have restricted property taxes, required a two-thirds vote of the Legislature for tax increases, established legislative term limits, set a floor for spending on K-12 education, approved the borrowing of money to pay for parks and stem cell research, and set aside untouchable pots of funds to pay for early childhood development, after-school programs and services for the mentally ill.

Critics say all these stand-alone measures have had the cumulative effect of tying the hands of legislators in dealing with the state budget and contributed to the dysfunction of state government. (full story)

Patt Morrison Asks: Balloteer Kim Alexander

By Pat Morrison, Los Angeles Times, September 17, 2011

Excerpt:

Rik Keller Photography

What's a nice girl like you doing in a mess like this?

I love elections; I grew up with elections. My dad ran for Culver City City Council when I was 7. Election night, we had a big party and my dad was the underdog and someone was on the phone getting the numbers and I [wrote] the numbers on the chalkboard. To me, politics has been about community service.

You also learned about the political version of trick or treat.

Someone showed up at the door with a $500 [campaign contribution] check. For a Culver City election, that was a lot of money. My dad sent him away. He said: "I don't know that man, I don't want to know him and I don't want him to think I owe him anything." My first lesson in how money in politics works!

We have former Secretary of State March Fong Eu to thank for banning pay toilets -- and for the California Voter Foundation?

[It was] an offshoot of the secretary of state's office, to raise charitable funds for extra voter outreach. By 1993, it was [defunct], out of compliance with various tax filings. In college I'd worked for Gary K. Hart when he ran for Congress. It was grueling: high stakes, consultants, opposition research -- that stuff is really unpleasant. I wanted to be for all the voters, not just some of the voters. So this opportunity to restart the California Voter Foundation fell into my lap.

Even voter registration has become politicized. Someone on a right-wing website wrote that it is "profoundly … un-American'' to register welfare recipients to vote.

It's unfortunate. In a lot of the world you're automatically [registered] when you become 18 and you're a citizen. Here we have this extra hurdle.

Across the country, voting rights are not shared among all Americans. In California there's a variety of practices between the counties, an unevenness. That's a big problem.

You almost weren't allowed to vote in 2008.

They told me my polling place had moved. I got my sample ballot and went back and said, "This is my polling place." They were turning other people away.

Elections are run as if they're one-day sales. We run polling places for 12, 14 hours, staffed by people with very little training working very long hours on a job they only do once or twice a year. We should have people vote over several days in an environment staffed by well-trained people. I think about elections year-round; most people only think about them for maybe two months. It's hard to sustain the momentum to implement election reform.

What kinds of problems have you encountered at other polling places?

In 2006, when the electronic voting battle was raging, I went in with a crew from [the PBS] "Newshour" to a polling place in Stockton, with cameras. It was complete chaos. [A poll worker] hadn't shown up; they literally had pulled someone in off the street to help. All these security seals on the electronic voting machines, poll workers just tore [them] off, because they didn't know what they were doing.

I went to another polling place in the same county that afternoon without the cameras. I gave them my card and they thought I was some government official. The poll worker opened the machine up at to show me the paper trail spool – exactly the opposite of what they were supposed to do.

The biggest fiasco I witnessed was paperless electronic voting in March 2004. We found out that San Diego County bought its equipment from Diebold before it was even certified by the state or the federal government. The second largest county in the state. They deployed thousands of voting machines and more than half [in] their polling places were not operating at some point during [election] day. People were literally told to go home and come back later when maybe the machines would be working.

Voting is a constitutional right, but some states demand that voters show official IDs, to stop fraud. Critics say that's about suppressing the vote.

It's a solution in search of a problem. There's this myth of voter fraud.You see hardly any instances.

First-time voters [already] have to show ID when they vote. When you sign the poll book, you're doing so under penalty of perjury. I'd like a happy medium where maybe you don't show a photo ID but some [document] with your name on it. (full story)

California set to move its presidential primary back to June

By David Siders, Sacramento Bee, July 29, 2011

Excerpt:

Tired of presidential candidates treating California like an ATM, raising vast sums of money here but spending it in states where campaigns cost less and matter more, state officials four years ago agreed to hold the 2008 primary in February.

The early date, they hoped, might focus more attention on the Golden State. "Now California is important again in presidential nominating politics," Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said at the time.

But more than 20 other states moved their primaries up, too, and California, if not the afterthought it was in previous elections, was marginalized yet again.

Now, Gov. Jerry Brown is expected to sign legislation moving next year's presidential primary back to June, consolidating it with the statewide primary election.

- - - - -- - - - - -

Fong's bill would return California's presidential primary to June, where it lasted for decades before being moved to March in 1996 and 2000. The February vote in 2008 was the earliest in state history.

Turnout in that election was historically high, but without the presidential candidates at the top of the ticket in June, turnout for the statewide primary plummeted.

Critics in 2008 said the switch to February was motivated at least in part by lawmakers' hope that a proposition to alter the state's term limit rules could pass in time for termed-out lawmakers to file for re-election.

Debate about Fong's bill has not been without political overtones. With Obama in the White House, the presidential primary next year matters to Republicans far more than Democrats.

"The Democrats right now, I think, will feel a little bit differently four years from now, because they already have their nominee," Strickland said. "I guarantee you four years from now the same state Legislature – different players, obviously, because of term limits – will argue to move it forward."

Kim Alexander of the nonpartisan California Voter Foundation hopes they don't. Holding one primary instead of two is less confusing for voters, she said. If Brown signs the change, she'd like California to stick to it.

"From the voters' perspective, the one thing you can anticipate about primaries in California is that it won't be the same as last time," Alexander said. "What benefits voters is consistency, and we do not have that in California." (full story)

Americans Elect backing effort for nonpartisan Web-based presidential convention

By Torey Van Oot, Sacramento Bee, July 28, 2011

Excerpt:

Voters dissatisfied with choosing between President Barack Obama and his Republican challengers next year could find themselves turning to the Web to pick the nation's next commander in chief.

A national effort has emerged to hold a virtual convention in June 2012, when the major party nominees will be all but decided, to select an alternative, bipartisan ticket to run on the November ballot in all 50 states.

Americans Elect, which is organizing the drive, says it is committed to creating a nonpartisan process that will use the Internet "to give every single voter – Democrat, Republican or independent – the power to nominate a presidential ticket in 2012."

The Washington, D.C.-based group takes a major step today toward making its vision a reality as it starts submitting 1.6 million voter signatures to California election officials in an attempt to ensure that the candidates chosen through its nominating process will appear on the state's ballot.

The group's chief operating officer, Elliot Ackerman, called the movement "an effort to elevate our political discourse and get our politics into a position where it's really solution-oriented."

"There's a lot of Americans that feel they're a bit more nuanced than the prescriptive positions that the two parties offer right now," he said.

Observers say an outside choice – and a 21st century system for choosing nominees – could appeal to voters fed up with partisan gridlock in Washington, pointing to the stalemate over the debt ceiling as elected officials' latest offense. And unlike in 1995, when the Reform Party launched by Ross Perot gained ballot access across the country, the current effort can rely on the networking capabilities of the Internet and social media to deliver its message and drum up support.

"Their effort is debuting at a perfect time. ... There is a spirit of independence, political independence, within American politics that this group may successfully tap into and provide a constructive path for people looking for alternatives," said Kim Alexander, president of the nonpartisan California Voter Foundation. (full story)

Vote-by-mail service under threat in budget cuts

By Lisa Vorderbrueggen, San Jose Mercury News, July 26, 2011

Excerpt:

California's beloved vote-by-mail system will remain largely intact, despite state legislators' raid on its relatively small pot of dollars.
County election clerks say they likely will scrape up the $33 million the state sliced from the budget for elections.

Permanent vote-by-mail allows voters to sign up once and automatically receive ballots. Under the old system, voters who wished to vote by mail requested a ballot each election.

Nearly half of the 10.3 million residents who cast ballots in November did so through the mail. The percentage topped the halfway mark in most counties, offering further evidence that voting by mail has become an indispensable feature for many.

However, the fact that the fate of permanent vote-by-mail service rests with each of California's 58 counties now that the state suspended reimbursement is prompting voting rights advocates to rekindle their calls for a stronger state role in elections.

California's decentralized election system means counties could "decide to eliminate the permanent vote-by-mail option," said Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation. "Voter access is already uneven from county to county, and the suspension of the mandates is only going to make it worse.

"What do we tell voters when they want to know if they can vote by mail?"

California law mandates that counties offer permanent vote-by-mail, but the law also requires the state to pay for it.

With no state funding, counties may opt out -- although it appears none plan to do so. (full story)

With Brown in office, Democrats renew efforts for ballot initiative reform

By Will Evans, California Watch, July 25, 2011

Excerpt:

One hundred years after California adopted the ballot initiative process, legislation to reform it is steadily making its way through the state Legislature. Reform proponents hope they have a new opportunity to change the process with Gov. Jerry Brown, after previous efforts were vetoed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.

A bill that would ban signature gatherers from getting paid per signature is waiting on Brown's desk. Another bill, which would have paid signature gatherers wear a badge to distinguish them from volunteers, passed the state Senate on a party-line vote and was slightly amended in the Assembly.

Yet another bill would require that the top financial backers and opponents of ballot measures be disclosed on the ballot pamphlets voters receive. Senate Democrats also passed that bill over Republican opposition.

"The playing field is different because we have a new governor," said Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation. "There’s good reason why lawmakers are having a second go at (these) bills."

State Sen. Mark DeSaulnier, D-Walnut Creek, who wrote the badge bill and funding disclosure bill, said abuse of the initiative system is one of the biggest problems in California governance.

His bills are "baby steps to getting the general public to realize that the initiative process has been hijacked by moneyed interests on the left and right," he said. "It's just transparency."

Opponents say the reform effort is a power grab by Democratic legislators who want to make citizen legislating harder (full story)

For redistricting commissioners, what's a conflict of interest?

By Timm Herdt, Ventura County Star, July 20, 2011

Excerpt:

In the spring of 2010, when he applied to become a member of the California Citizens Redistricting Commission, Gabino Aguirre of Santa Paula described himself as a "community activist" who had been an "advocate for a variety of causes."

Aguirre survived the rigorous screening process conducted by the State Auditor's Office and was ultimately chosen as one of 14 commissioners selected from a pool that originally included 25,000 applicants.

Now, with the commission poised to adopt political district maps that are certain to displease many Californians, Aguirre, one of five Democrats on the panel, has become the subject of sharp attacks from Republican Party leaders who accuse him of being a community activist who has been an advocate for a variety of causes.

The attacks raise anew questions that the State Auditor Elaine Howle struggled with in 2009 as she developed guidelines and regulations for the selection of commissioners, a task with which she was charged under Proposition 11, the initiative that created the independent redistricting process.

Kim Alexander, president and founder of the nonpartisan California Voter Foundation, said she believes the auditor "struck the right balance" in disqualifying those whose political connections were so strong as to make them potentially beholden to a particular party or politician while at the same time keeping the process open to those who had been engaged in civic activities.

"No one involved in crafting this commission expected you to have applicants who had zero political involvement in their history," she said. (full story)

Delaware courts: Chris Tigani campaign finance case runs into weak laws

By Jeff Montgomery and Maureen Milford, June 10, 2011

Excerpt:

Christopher J. Tigani's guilty plea to federal election-law violations has highlighted the fact that Delaware has some of the weakest such laws in the nation.

Federal prosecutors this week said their investigation of Tigani's crimes also led them to evidence of violations of state election laws by others. That evidence has been turned over to the Delaware attorney general, who said he will appoint an independent counsel.

Any investigation, however, will be up against state election laws that are so weak that many longtime observers say no one has ever been prosecuted under them.

National public-interest groups and surveys have repeatedly tagged Delaware's campaign- finance reporting law as anemic.

In 2008, a multiyear national study by a group funded by the Pew Charitable Trusts gave Delaware its lowest failing grade, and pointed out that the state was one of only two that lost ground since 2003.

The report pegged Delaware as having one of the nation's sketchiest campaign-finance disclosure systems, citing omissions of details about contributors, delays in release of last-minute contributions until after elections, and severe limitations on public record review capabilities.

- - - - -

Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation, said Delaware should have little trouble improving.

Failing grade

The foundation, supported by the Pew Center on the States, published a series of reports that found Delaware in the minority of states allowing only voluntary electronic filing of campaign reports. The group gave Delaware a grade of "F," and ranked only Alabama, the Dakotas and Wyoming lower. Wyoming has since adopted major reforms and expanded access to records.

"Voluntary programs are good, but they're not good enough," Alexander said. "Unless there's a requirement, you won't see a lot of data online in a form that's user-friendly."

Peter Quist, a researcher with the National Institute on Money and State Politics, found in a 2010 report that 35 states require donors to list employers or occupations -- provisions that can help track patterns of giving -- and 41 provide systems that allow some degree of searches of contributors.

(full story)

GLBT and business groups want downtown and Midtown to have just one city council member

By Cosmo Garvin, The Sacramento News & Review, May 05, 2011

Excerpt:

In Sacramento we think about “the grid” as a distinct area, geographically and culturally. It’s where Sacramento’s night life is centered, where you find the great neighborhoods of century-old Victorians and equally old trees. It’s the home of an expanding restaurant district, a thriving gay and lesbian community, and where Second Saturday has taken root.

But when it comes to political representation at City Hall, Midtown and downtown are downright balkanized.

Consider Steve Hansen’s neighborhood, Alkali Flat. His address is in city council District 1, represented by Angelique Ashby. “But if I walk one block, I’m in a different district,” he explained—specifically District 3, represented by Councilman Steve Cohn. “But I’m still in the same neighborhood.” A few blocks south and he’s in another council district entirely, Councilman Rob Fong’s District 4.

- - - - - -

That dilutes the political power of central city residents, or so the argument goes.

“If the person living across the street from you has a different council member, you can’t go together and say, ‘Hi, we’re your constituents.’ The political clout of the central city just doesn’t exist,” said Kim Alexander, director of the California Voter Foundation. She used to live in the Poverty Ridge neighborhood (around 21st and T).

While downtown gets lots of attention for its flashy projects and high-profile issues like the rail yards and K Street, it’s harder for neighborhoods to get the care and feeding they need, adds Hansen.

“Everybody wants to be there when there’s a groundbreaking. Nobody wants to be there when there’s a break-in,” he said.

Hansen and the other members of the redistricting commission will meet every Monday evening at City Hall until the end of June. You can go to the city’s website for agendas, and to watch video of past meetings. The city also provides software tools for citizens to experiment with and even submit their own proposed district maps. The deadline for citizen map submissions is May 16.

- - - -- - - -

Cohn said another problem with unifying the central city is that right now it has three council members with a stake in the grid’s success. Change the lines, and the central city’s lone council member may find themselves the lonely vote for the interests of the urban core.

“The other council members might look at the central city as just one other district,” says Cohn.

Still, Cohn is open to the idea. “I’m up in the air right now,” Cohn said, but added, “If we’re going to do it, I think my district would make the most sense,” said Cohn, explaining that District 3, which already contains the biggest chunk of Midtown, may be best suited to take on the other grid neighborhoods.

But maybe Rob Fong in District 4 wants to hold on to his piece of downtown, or would rather have all of it. Or perhaps Sandy Sheedy in District 2 would like to see her north Sacramento district slide across the river and snatch up the downtown rail yards.

Kim Alexander believes the redistricting process ought to be taken out of city council members’ hands.

“Fundamentally, it’s a conflict of interest for politicians to draw their own council districts and then vote on them.”

This year, the citizens redistricting panel—which actually started with Councilman Kevin McCarty and Mayor Kevin Johnson, in a rare moment of agreement—is an attempt to give the public more input. But it remains to be seen whether unification of the central city will fare better than it did 10 years ago.

It ought to, Alexander says. “Midtown is the public face of Sacramento. It’s the social and cultural center of Sacramento. We need to make sure they can effectively represent their community.” (full story)

Editorial: Online voter registration system is long overdue

The Sacramento Bee, May 01, 2011

Excerpt:

Think about 6.4 million people. That's more people than live in 34 of the 50 states. It's also the number of Californians who are eligible to vote but are not registered.

Individuals are most directly responsible for shirking their most basic civic duty. But California's top election official, Secretary of State Debra Bowen, has a role.

Bowen, a Democrat, won a second four-year term in November. Now, she is running in a special election for a congressional seat in Los Angeles County left vacant when Jane Harman stepped down.

While she has her eye on Washington, Bowen has some unfinished business here in Sacramento, most notably bringing California's voter registration system into the computer age.

Bowen, a cautious person, last year canceled a contract with a software company that had agreed to create a voter database that would allow Californians to register to vote online.

But six months after winning re-election, the secretary of state and the Department of General Services have failed to put a new contract out for bid. The delay is unacceptable.

Kim Alexander of the nonpartisan California Voter Foundation gathered some statistics:

• California is one of two states that do not have an online tool for voters to look up their polling places.

• California is one of only nine states without a statewide tool allowing voters to check on their registration status.

• California is the only state that has not fully complied with the federal Help America Vote Act, passed by Congress after the 2000 presidential election debacle in Florida.

The Legislature approved online registration in 2008, to no avail. Clearly frustrated with delays and excuses, some lawmakers are plunging ahead with their own solutions. (full story)

Burn the wagons

The Economist, April 20, 2011

Excerpt:

California in the 21st century faces a question that would fascinate the classical and Enlightenment thinkers who influenced America’s founders. Most of them stipulated that participatory democracies must be small. Their populations should be culturally homogeneous. And they must be virtuous.

California, though, is the most populous and diverse state in America, and no more or less virtuous than any other modern society. The historical achievement of America’s federal constitution was to create a republican structure that would preserve liberty and stability even in a large and diverse society. The price was to make democracy indirect and less participatory. Can California avoid paying that price?

- - - - - - - - - - -

The executive branch, in turn, must become more accountable. It might seem, but is not, paradoxical that this means electing fewer statewide and local officers and giving them more power. “I currently have 22 people I elect to represent me at all levels of government, and I can’t name them—and I’m president of the California Voter Foundation,” laments Kim Alexander, an expert on voter education. Ideally, Californians should elect just one statewide executive, the governor, and let him appoint the other seven. The people can then re-elect or fire the governor for his choices.

The recommendations above are essentially the same as those The Economist made in 2004 when it last examined California in a special report. It is encouraging that some of these steps (such as redistricting and open primaries) have already been taken, others are well under way and yet others are attracting increasing support among the policy elite. (full story)

Brown's Countdown, Day 27: Absentee ballots on Jerry Brown's chopping block?

By Torey Van Oot, Sacramento Bee, February 5, 2011

Excerpt:

Nearly 5 million voters chose to cast their ballots by mail when Gov. Jerry Brown was elected in November, representing almost half of all votes cast in the statewide contest.

Now election officials are warning that a piece of Brown's budget proposal could put the increasingly popular form of balloting, and the integrity of the voting process, in jeopardy.

As part of his plan to close a projected $25.4 billion deficit, Brown wants to stop reimbursing local governments for the costs of complying with various state laws, including the 1978 law that gives all California voters the option of casting their ballots by mail.

Department of Finance officials have scored roughly $32.6 million in savings by not paying the tab for several years' worth of reimbursement claims for specific costs associated with six election mandates. They include establishing a permanent absentee voter system, extending the voter registration window to 15 days before an election and processes for registering voters.

Ending the reimbursements makes the associated laws optional for local governments in the coming fiscal year.

County election officials are still assessing the actual impact Brown's proposal would have on election departments and voters if adopted by the Legislature, but California Association of Clerks and Election Officials President Gail Pellerin called the move "not a wise policy."

"Everyone is going to have to take a cut, everyone is going to have to give a little bit, but I think suspending these vital programs voters have come to rely on is not a good direction," said Pellerin, the Santa Cruz County clerk.

Department of Finance spokesman H.D. Palmer cautioned that suspending the mandates does not necessarily mean counties will suspend the services.

- - - - - - - - -

Kim Alexander, founder and president of the nonpartisan California Voter Foundation, said failing to fund the mandates could compound the existing problem of "uneven access to the voting process at the local level."

"Given how little money counties have already to fund elections, it would be a huge blow," Alexander said.

In Sacramento County, the funding loss would be an estimated $800,000 to $1 million in the next fiscal year, according to Sacramento County Registrar of Voters Jill Lavine.

"It definitely will add to the stress if I have to find another million dollars in my budget just to maintain the level of service I have right now," she said.

Still, it could cost more to communicate the changes to voters and accommodate increased traffic at polling places, Lavine and other election officials said.

Jon Coupal, president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayer Association, said while he thinks the state should reimburse counties for costs it forces on them, there are some cases in which removal of mandates could have a beneficial effect.

"In many instances, the state mandates things that the local governments don't want to do and sometimes the local governments find a cheaper way to do it," he said. "If there's a removal of the mandate and counties can revert to the old way of voting, there might be a better way to (provide those services)."

And some say the more costly policies, including the absentee voting and permanent absentee list laws, still merit review.

"I know the way it's working right now is not in everyone's interest and is wasteful," Alexander said, noting a report that found more than 23 million absentee ballots have been lost or never returned since California created a permanent vote-by-mail system in 2002.

It is not certain whether all – or any – counties would revert to the pre-mandate laws, such as enforcing a 29-day registration deadline or providing absentee ballots only to voters unable to vote in person because of illness, handicap, religious conflict or absence from the precinct on Election Day (full story)

 

Site Map | Privacy Policy | About Calvoter.org

This page was first published on August 6, 1996 | Last updated on May 18, 2013
Copyright California Voter Foundation, All Rights Reserved.