California 2009-2010 Regular Session Status: In Committee

AB 1968 — Elections: ballot titles.

Last action — From committee without further action pursuant to Joint Rule 62(a).

  1. ✓
    Introduced
  2. 2
    In Committee
  3. 3
    Passed Assembly
  4. 4
    Passed Senate
  5. 5
    To Executive
  6. 6
    Enacted

This bill died with 2009-2010 Regular Session. It reached “In Committee” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.

This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis. It would have to be reintroduced in the current session to move again.

Summary

Existing law requires the Attorney General, upon receipt of a draft of a petition for a proposed initiative or referendum, to prepare a title and summary of the proposed measure. Under existing law, the Attorney General is required to determine the effect of a proposed initiative measure on revenues and expenditures of the state or local government. If the Attorney General determines that a proposed measure would affect state or local revenues or expenditures, he or she must include in the title either the estimate of the amount of change in state or local revenues or costs or an opinion as to whether a substantial net change in state or local finances would result if the proposed initiative is adopted. Existing law requires the Department of Finance and the Joint Legislative Budget Committee to prepare jointly the fiscal estimate that is included in the title. Existing law imposes specified deadlines on the preparation of a title and summary, and a fiscal estimate. This bill would require the Legislative Analyst, instead of the Attorney General, to prepare the ballot title and summary for all measures submitted to the voters of the state and would require the Legislative Analyst, instead of the Department of Finance and the Joint Legislative Budget Committee, to prepare any fiscal estimate or opinion required by a proposed initiative measure. The bill would also change the deadlines applicable to the preparation of a title and summary and a fiscal estimate or opinion. The bill would make its operation contingent upon the approval by the voters of ACA 20 of the 2009–10 Regular Session.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. From committee without further action pursuant to Joint Rule 62(a).

  2. In committee: Set, second hearing. Failed passage.

  3. In committee: Hearing postponed by committee.

  4. In committee: Set first hearing. Failed passage. Reconsideration granted.

  5. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  6. From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on APPR. Read second time and amended.

  7. From committee: Do pass, and re-refer to Com. on APPR. Re-referred. (Ayes 4. Noes 2.) (April 20).

  8. In committee: Set, first hearing. Hearing canceled at the request of author.

  9. Referred to Com. on E. & R.

  10. From printer. May be heard in committee March 20.

  11. Read first time. To print.

Sponsors

  • Niello · Primary

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on · 1 voted No

Sponsors (1)

  • Niello

Co-sponsors (0)

None.

Not signed on (121)

121 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 121 →

"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.

Whip count is in markup. Polling the chamber and every recorded vote this session. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Calling the roll · Tallying · Engrossing

Votes

Do pass.

Failed 6 Yea · 6 Nay · 7 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 6507
Democratic 0100
Total 6607
% of votes cast 32%32%0%37%
How each member voted (19)
Member Party Vote
Fuentes — Yea
Charles — Nay
Hall — Not Voting
Harkey — Yea
De — Not Voting
Leon — Not Voting
Hill — Nay
Nielsen — Yea
Norby — Yea
Conway — Yea
Coto — Nay
Solorio — Not Voting
Torrico — Nay
Bradford — Not Voting
Miller — Yea
Skinner — Nay
Torlakson — Not Voting
Davis — Not Voting
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Nay

Official roll call →

Do pass.

Failed 6 Yea · 6 Nay · 7 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 6507
Democratic 0100
Total 6607
% of votes cast 32%32%0%37%
How each member voted (19)
Member Party Vote
Hall — Not Voting
Charles — Nay
Fuentes — Yea
De — Not Voting
Leon — Not Voting
Bradford — Nay
Harkey — Yea
Norby — Yea
Solorio — Not Voting
Torlakson — Nay
Ammiano — Nay
Miller — Yea
Nielsen — Yea
Skinner — Nay
Torrico — Not Voting
Conway — Yea
Coto — Not Voting
Davis — Not Voting
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Nay

Official roll call →

Set first hearing. Failed passage. Reconsideration granted.

Passed 19 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 18000
Democratic 1000
Total 19000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (19)
Member Party Vote
Conway — Yea
Charles — Yea
De — Yea
Leon — Yea
Hall — Yea
Miller — Yea
Bradford — Yea
Norby — Yea
Torlakson — Yea
Torrico — Yea
Ammiano — Yea
Harkey — Yea
Nielsen — Yea
Skinner — Yea
Solorio — Yea
Coto — Yea
Davis — Yea
Fuentes — Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea

Official roll call →

Subjects

elections
Cross-referencing the record. Reading this bill against every other bill in the corpus by meaning, not keywords. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Matching · Ranking · Engrossing

Frequently asked questions

What does AB 1968 do?
Existing law requires the Attorney General, upon receipt of a draft of a petition for a proposed initiative or referendum, to prepare a title and summary of the proposed measure. Under existing law, the Attorney General is required to determine the effect of a proposed initiative measure on revenues and expenditures of the state or local government. If the Attorney General determines that a proposed measure would affect state or local revenues or expenditures, he or she must include in the title either the estimate of the amount of change in state or local revenues or costs or an opinion as to whether a substantial net change in state or local finances would result if the proposed initiative is adopted. Existing law requires the Department of Finance and the Joint Legislative Budget Committee to prepare jointly the fiscal estimate that is included in the title. Existing law imposes specified deadlines on the preparation of a title and summary, and a fiscal estimate. This bill would require the Legislative Analyst, instead of the Attorney General, to prepare the ballot title and summary for all measures submitted to the voters of the state and would require the Legislative Analyst, instead of the Department of Finance and the Joint Legislative Budget Committee, to prepare any fiscal estimate or opinion required by a proposed initiative measure. The bill would also change the deadlines applicable to the preparation of a title and summary and a fiscal estimate or opinion. The bill would make its operation contingent upon the approval by the voters of ACA 20 of the 2009–10 Regular Session.
Who sponsors AB 1968?
AB 1968 is sponsored by Niello.
What is the current status of AB 1968?
This bill died with 2009-2010 Regular Session. It reached “In Committee” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
Where can I track AB 1968?
Track AB 1968 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on AB 1968

Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.

Find my representatives → Run a campaign

Stay ahead of AB 1968

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.

Track this bill →