TA
D California Assembly · District 17 · Former member

Asm. Tom Ammiano

Compare
Total votes
16,445
all sessions
Attendance
96%
468 missed
Near the chamber average
With party
98%
of cast votes
Near the chamber average
Bipartisan score
1%
crosses aisle rarely
Near the chamber average
Sponsored
831
bills & resolutions
Higher than 98% of chamber peers
Committees
0
assignments
831 bills and resolutions

Sponsored bills

Total
831
Primary
129
Co-sponsor
702
This page
831
matching current filters
Co-sponsor ACR 103
Passed · California Assembly · Co-sponsor
Relative to Campus Safety Month.

This measure would declare March 2012 to be Campus Safety Month, and would encourage citizens to visit the Internet Web site of the national nonprofit organization Security On Campus, Inc., to view public safety information about public and private colleges and universities.

Passed Mar 20, 2012 1 co-sponsor
Co-sponsor SCR 61
Signed into law · California Senate · Co-sponsor
Relative to Cervical Cancer Awareness Month.

This measure would recognize January 2012 as Cervical Cancer Awareness Month, and would encourage prompt access to preventive services and medical care in order to overcome barriers to care and treatment for cervical cancer.

Signed into law Mar 13, 2012 1 co-sponsor
Co-sponsor AB 1200
Signed into law · California Assembly · Co-sponsor
Elections: central committees.

Existing law requires that each member of a county central committee for the Democratic, Republican, and American Independent Parties take and subscribe to an oath or affirmation, as specified. Existing law provides that the oath or affirmation may be taken before any officer authorized to administer oaths. This bill would, instead, provide that the oath or affirmation may be taken before the chairperson of the county central committee, the immediate predecessor of the chairperson, or a designee of the chairperson or his or her immediate predecessor. Existing law entitles a member elected to central committees for the Democratic, Republican, American Independent, and Peace and Freedom Parties to receive a certificate of election. This bill would eliminate the above-described entitlement to receive a certificate of election and make other conforming changes. Existing law provides how members are elected to county central committees. The method by which members are elected varies from county to county depending upon certain factors, such as the number of Assembly districts that exist within the county. This bill would provide that, for the Democratic Party, in the County of Sacramento, the elected members of the county central committee shall be elected by supervisor districts with 6 members elected from each supervisor district, as specified. This bill would provide that, for the Democratic Party, in the County of Alameda, the elected members of the county central committee shall be elected by Assembly districts and that the committee shall contain at least a certain number of members from each district, as specified. This bill would provide that, for the Democratic and Republican Parties, in the City and County of San Francisco, the elected members of the county central committee shall be elected by Assembly districts, as specified. This bill would provide that, for the June 5, 2012, statewide primary election for the Democratic Party, in the County of Sacramento, and for the Democratic and Republican Parties, in the City and County of San Francisco, signers of nomination papers for candidates for county central committees shall be limited to voters who disclosed a preference for the respective parties and who are residents of the respective counties. Under existing law, for the Democratic Party, in each county containing less than 5 Assembly districts, the county central committee is required to reapportion itself at least every 10 years, prior to the June primary election of that year, as specified. This bill would eliminate the above-described reapportionment requirement. Existing law requires that each county central committee of the American Independent Party meet in the courthouse at its county seat, upon call, which shall be given by the elections official of the county and in quarters to be arranged or provided for by the elections official of the county, as specified. This bill would, instead, require the committee to meet at its county seat, upon call, which shall be given by the chairperson of the county central committee or the immediate predecessor of the chairperson. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.

Signed into law Mar 8, 2012 1 co-sponsor
Co-sponsor SB 88
Vetoed · California Senate · Co-sponsor
Elections: names of candidates.

Existing law requires the translation of ballots and ballot materials into languages other than English when specified circumstances exist. This bill would require that, if a jurisdiction provides a translation of the candidates' alphabet-based names into a character-based language, such as Chinese, Japanese, or Korean, phonetic transliterations of the alphabet-based names of candidates be provided. The bill would also require that if a candidate's name is to appear on the ballot in more than one jurisdiction in an election then all of those jurisdictions must use the same phonetic transliteration or character-based translation of the name. This bill would provide an exception for a candidate who has a character-based name by birth or has verifiably been known by a character-based name for at least 2 years to permit him or her to use that name on the ballot instead of a phonetic transliteration. This bill would require that, if a jurisdiction provides separate ballots containing translations of the candidates' names in different languages, both the alphabet-based names and the translations of the candidates' names appear on the translated ballot. This bill would also require a county to purchase voting equipment that permits compliance with this section as a part of any new purchase of voting equipment. Because the bill would impose additional duties on local elections officials, it would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to these statutory provisions.

Vetoed Feb 29, 2012 1 co-sponsor
Showing 461 to 470 of 831 bills
Previous 1 … 46 47 48 … 84 Next