Voter registration: incomplete affidavits: rebuttable presumptions.
Summary
Under existing law, when a county elections official receives an affidavit of voter registration that does not include all required information, but the telephone number of the affiant is legibly included, that official is required to telephone the affiant to collect the missing information. This bill would alternatively permit the county elections official to contact the affiant by e-mail, if the e-mail address is legibly provided on the affidavit. Additionally, under existing law, when a county elections official receives an affidavit of voter registration that does not include portions of information for which space is provided, the county elections official is required to apply several rebuttable presumptions. Those presumptions include a presumption that if the affiant fails to list a middle name or initial then no middle name exists, and if the affiant fails to list a state of birth within the United States then it is presumed that the place of birth is in the United States if the affiant lists his or her birthplace as the United States, U.S.A., or other recognizable term designating the United States. This bill would provide that if an affiant fails to identify his or her place of birth, the county elections official shall apply a rebuttable presumption that the affiant is eligible to register to vote if the affiant marked the box on the affidavit of registration, executed under penalty of perjury, that the affiant is a citizen of the United States.
Bill status
vetoed
4 of 5 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2010
Committee Review
Jun 2010
Senate Passage
May 2010
Assembly Passage
Jul 2010
Vetoed
Aug 2010
Introduced Feb 19, 2010
Vetoed Aug 23, 2010
Floor votes · Senate Aug 9, 2010 · Assembly Jul 1, 2010
How they voted
20–11
Passed · 3 other
Total votes 34
Aug 9, 2010
D
Democratic23
86% Yea
R
Republican11
90% Nay
Vote distribution
All Yea
All Nay
Mixed
No data
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
22
Key actions
5
Committee
2
Amendments
2
Aug 23, 2010
Vetoed
In Senate. To unfinished business. (Veto)
upper
Aug 23, 2010
Vetoed
Vetoed by Governor.
upper
Aug 9, 2010
Senate · Passed
Senate Vote: pass (20-11-3)
senate
Aug 9, 2010
Introduced
Senate concurs in Assembly amendments. (Ayes 21. Noes 13. Page 4404.) To enrollment.
upper
Jul 1, 2010
Assembly · Passed
Assembly Vote: pass (35-23-3)
assembly
Jun 23, 2010
Lower · Passed
(Heard in committee on June 22.)
lower
Jun 23, 2010
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 5. Noes 2.)
lower
Apr 21, 2010
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 3. Noes 2. Page 3297.)
upper
Feb 19, 2010
Introduced
Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.
upper
1 primary · 0 co-sponsors
Sponsors
Role
Legislator
Party
State
District
P
CD
Curren D Price
DDemocratic
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about SB 1434
Scope: CA
Hi! I can help you understand SB 1434. What would you like to know?
Try one of these
i
Maddy answers using official bill text and legislative records. Always verify before sharing.
Sources cited inline