Senate Standing Committee on Elections and Constitutional Amendments

The Senate Committee on Constitutional Amendments and Elections will come to order. Good afternoon, everybody, and welcome. We have one measure on our agenda today. We do not have a quorum, so we will start as a subcommittee. And the bill is SB 299 from Senator Limón. Senator Limón, you may present your measure.

Thank you, Madam Chair. SB 299 is an opportunity to upgrade our current voter registration system and help welcome eligible voters. California is home to 4.6 million eligible but unregistered voters, a disproportionate number of whom are youth, people with disabilities, black, Latino, Asian American, native, indigenous, and other people of color, including people with limited English proficiency and low income citizens. The current system is leaving out millions of eligible voters.

Each year, 1 million eligible voters conduct a license transaction at the DMV but do not register to vote. SB 299 has taken substantial amendments in the Assembly. The bill does three things. A, it requires the DMV to implement a noncitizen filtering system.

So if a person provides proof of non-citizenship, such as a green card, the applicant will automatically be filtered out of our voter registration system. Second, the bill requires the DMV to automatically check voter registration status during a driver's license or ID transaction and tailor the motor voter process to whether the person is unregistered or already registered to vote in California.

Lastly, the bill grants the Secretary of State authority to adopt regulations to generate a list of people for a pre-approval pre-approved for registration list based on confirmed citizenship status through the DMV license or identification card application process. This pre-approved list will be contingent upon appropriation by the Legislature.

In response to concerns raised on the bill, SB 299 has delayed implementation date to 2030. SB 299 has broad and diverse coalition of supporters, many of which have been doing the work to register the population groups this bill aims to support. We have been working on this bill for two years. It is substantially different from where we started. And while we continue to have opposition, we do have great support, which is evident, I think, from the folks you'll hear.

But additionally, it is with the hope that we can find a way to register eligible but that we can ensure that the 4.6 million eligible but unregistered voters have the opportunity to vote. With me today, we have Sydney Fang from Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders for Civic Empowerment here, as well as Neal Ubriani from the Institute for Responsive Government to answer any questions.

Okay, thank you. Are those your lead witnesses in support? Okay, would you like to come forward? And you each have two minutes.

Okay. Hello, Chair Members. My name is Sydney Fang, and I'm the Policy Director for Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders for Civic Empowerment. I'm also proudly representing the California Grassroots Democracy Coalition, which comprises over 140 organizations that engage hundreds of thousands of young, working class, and voters of color year round.

Senator Limón and our coalition have been dedicated to addressing concerns from all parties, and the current version of SB 299 reflects that commitment. This measure removes barriers to voting while protecting non-citizens and improving the integrity of our voting system. Historically, voter registration was designed and implemented to keep minorities and poor communities from voting.

The impacts of this racist legacy persist today as California's 4.6 million unregistered eligible citizens are disproportionately black, Latinx, and Asian American. By streamlining registration for eligible but unregistered people, California can remove significant barriers to registration for millions of working class people, people of color, and young people.

SB 299 allows the Secretary of State to launch a pre-approved registration list when the state is equipped with the funding and technology. This update will be significant for organizers like myself, who will be pounding the pavement day in and day out, mobilizing voters to get folks to the polls rather than convincing them to register. SB 299 would provide vital protections for non-citizens. From our work across the state, we have encountered noncitizen residents who have been mistakenly registered to vote through the current AVR system.

With SB 299, licensed applicants will be automatically filtered out of motor voter if they provide a green card or other documents clearly indicating noncitizenship as a part of their transaction. This straightforward change prevents noncitizens from making an honest mistake due to inattention, confusion, or limited English proficiency. Your support is crucial to ensuring that all eligible citizens can exercise their right to vote, regardless of their background. For these reasons, I strongly and respectfully urge your aye vote for SB 299. Thank you.

Thank you very much. And before we go to the second witness, let's establish a quorum. So we'll ask the Assistant to call the roll.

[Roll Call]

Okay, thank you. We've established a quorum, so now we'll move on to our second lead witness. Thank you for coming.

Chair Blakespear and Members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify. My name is Neal Ubriani. I'm the Policy and Research Director at the Institute for Responsive Government Action, a nonpartisan organization that works to improve government accessibility and efficiency.

I'm here in strong support of SB 299, which is a modified version of SB 846, which passed this Committee last year. SB 299, like SB 846, makes California's voter registration process more secure, efficient, and accessible. According to Secretary of State data, California is home to 4.7 million eligible unregistered people.

One in six eligible California does not register to vote, a population that is disproportionately young people and people of color. Most of those people are being left out by the current Motor Voter system, which requires customers to opt in to voter registration.

Secretary of State data indicates that each year, 1 million eligible unregistered people conduct a license transaction at the DMV but do not register to vote. SB 299 gives the Secretary of State a powerful tool to address this problem, if, and only if there is adequate technology and funding in place.

The Secretary has discretion to create a list of people pre-approved for voter registration. As a supplement to the current Motor Voter process, the DMV would transmit information to the Secretary of State for an additional group of people, DMV customers who do not affirmatively register to vote, but who've provided a US passport or another document conclusively showing US citizenship as part of their license transaction.

These confirmed US citizens will not be registered to vote, but they will be pre-approved for registration, and the secretary can offer them streamlined ways to activate their pre-approved registration. This process would save people substantial time and effort of resupplying all of the information already provided during a DMV transaction, making registration and voting significantly easier.

This same process, where the DMV transmits information to election officials for people who provide specified documents during their license transaction, has been adopted by 10 other states and Washington, DC. This bill gives the Secretary discretion to use the same process. SB 299 also contains two other important upgrades to the current Motor Voter process.

First, people who provide a green card or other document conclusively establishing non-citizenship during their DMV transaction will be automatically filtered out of the current motor voter process. This significantly reduces the risk of a mistaken registration by a noncitizen and removes a trap for the unwary in the current process.

Second, SB 299 requires the DMV to work with the Secretary of State to automatically check voter registration status during a license transaction. This allows the Motor Voter questions to be tailored depending on whether the customer is unregistered or already registered to vote.

I've personally worked on development and implementation of automatic voter registration in 19 states and Washington, DC, and I've seen firsthand the features that make registration systems maximally accessible, efficient, and protective of non-citizens. This bill incorporates important features to make California's Motor Voter system more secure, efficient, and accessible. I urge you to vote yes, and I'm happy to answer any questions.

Thank you very much to both of the lead witnesses in support. Do we have anyone who is a lead witness in opposition? Sorry, first we're going to go to other support. Do we have anyone else in the room who would like to express support? Please come forward. Yes. Right there is perfect.

Thank you, Chair and Members. My name is Sadalia King. I'm with Catalyst California in strong support. And also we're part of a coalition called the Alliance for Reparations, Reconciliation, and Truth, also in strong support.

Sarah Brennan with the Weideman Group on behalf of NextGen California in support.

Thank you. Okay, anybody in opposition? Anybody wishing to express opinions otherwise at the microphone? Do we have the Secretary of State's office here? Welcome.

Madam Chair, Members, Tim Cromartie on behalf of the Secretary of State's Office. With all due respect to the author with whom we are collaborating on a number of other issues, we do not, after weeks of negotiations, we do not believe this bill can be implemented as written.

There are a number of operational implementation concerns that have yet to be addressed with any specificity. For example, determinations of citizenship status, screening out noncitizens, and protecting their data from misuse to the degree they need to be excluded from folks who will be slated to register to vote.

We also are aware in the course of our negotiations that a number of technology solutions that have yet to be precisely defined have been identified. They are going to be expensive. We don't know what platforms they will be specifically. We don't know precisely what form they will take.

There's a lot that has yet to be determined, and for that reason, the bill has hidden costs, and we have serious reservations about the ability of DMV and SOS to jointly implement it. Notwithstanding the fact that we have been allowed in the bill broad discretion to craft implementing regulations. Some of the issues are deeper than that.

It's not that we can simply fix it by crafting the regulation. For example, if you have an individual, the National Voter Registration Act, for example, requires folks, when activating their registration, to self attest to their citizenship status. Everyone who walks into DMV is not going to have proper documentation. Very often, people may be intimidated to bring that kind of a thing to DMV. They're not in a formal government office. And so the self attestation requirement, which is required by the National Voter Registration Act, it's not required in the bill currently.

And if there's going to be an alternate mechanism, it's going to be a technological solution, most likely. And there's going to have to be an analysis as to whether that solution, an alternate solution, violates the federal act. So there are a number of complicated to complex issues that remain to be resolved. We have serious reservations.

Thank you. Do we have anyone else in the room wishing to express support or opposition or other comments? Not seeing any. We will come back to the Members. Senator Newman, would you like to make a comment, question?

I guess comment, but thank you. So I actually carried a bill that was substantially similar to this bill, I think, three years ago. And I give both the author and the supporters credit for working through very deliberately, very rigorously through the issues that presented themselves during that cycle.

And I think, as noted, one in six eligible Californians still not voting is a substantial number, and especially when you consider who those voters are. And so I am in support of efforts to thoughtfully, deliberately, and without jeopardizing their immigration status or causing other problems is bringing them into the system. And I think I give the author immense credit for working on this bill over a very, fairly long period.

There are a still concerns, but I do think that they have addressed many of them. One, deliberately filtering out those who might not be eligible, and then, you know, the provision for a proactive check, and that has to then reach a standard that is equivalent to the self attestation requirement. But I do think it's headed in the right direction. And this is a worthy effort. And so for those reasons, I will support the bill today.

Thank you. Senator Nguyen.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Just a couple of comments. I think it's known that we're all very supportive, wanting everybody to register, wanting everybody to, I mean, voter turnout. But I don't think the DMV is where the voter turnout goes into play. I don't think putting registering to vote through the DMV is not going to turn out folks to vote. But my actual concern is that I think the DMV needs to stick to just their driver's license and voter, I mean, and vehicle registration. That's in itself itself is its own big animal and lots of concerns.

A lot of our casework comes to our office as DMV problems. I don't think, you know, registration should be a priority of the DMV. It should stay with the Secretary of State. It should stay with the ROV. And so I just think, you know, as we keep on piling into the DMV, I think it makes it more and more difficult, and that's where you get more errors. Thank you.

Thank you, Senator. Senator Allen.

You know, I'm going to support the bill because I understand the theory of the case. I have tremendous respect for the author. I think that we all know there are significant implementation challenges here. And quite frankly, I anticipate this bill having problems, you know, for some of the reasons that were expressed at the microphone just now.

And I think even if you look at the opposition to this bill, it's not a good list to be going into the final week with opposition from on a bill that's purporting to help address access issues. So let's see where this goes. I'm sure we'll be back next year working on some of these issues. But as a courtesy to my friend, I'll support the bill.

Thank you. Any other comments, questions? Not seeing any. I would like to ask the author if she'd like to close.

Sure. Thank you. And so I do want to comment on a few things that I think are really important. One, this bill allows for a process. So some of the concerns that are expressed both in the letter and in the comments would be worked out through a regulation, you know, a regulation process that we are not dictating.

So that is a process that will be there. And these exact issues need to be worked out. We're the first to say they need to be worked out. We also think that they need to be done through the regulatory process, and the Secretary of State would have discretion. This bill allows for the Secretary of State to say, hey, after going through this process, looking at some of these issues, yay, we're going to move forward, or, no, we're not going to move forward.

So I think that that's really important to recognize that the reason that we feel strongly about this bill is because it sets the goals up and it makes it clear who has the authority to say whether or not this bill moves forward. This bill also isn't going to move forward in a short timeline.

It has until 2030 to be implemented. I think the issues with the DMV, we all have many issues with the DMV. And I will say that this bill is neither going to, you know, it's not going to solve those. The DMV already is part of registering folks to vote, independent of this bill.

And lastly, this is also, right, based upon appropriation in the future between now and 2030. So what this does, and I think that this piece is... This is one of the pieces that's most motivated me to really work on this issue. Is it creates a framework and it gives time for us to meet it.

In this Legislature, I have heard time and time again, well, this isn't the right year for us to do it. We can't do it this way. We haven't solved for this problem. If we now tell a state agency, and we work with the person who heads up our registration and voting system process, which is our Secretary of State, and say, the Legislature would like for this to be accomplished, it gives these bodies ample time to be able to figure it out.

Absent this, I can guarantee you we're going to be here year after year asking for the same outcome, but saying, well, it's still not the year. We still don't have money. We still haven't figured out the technology. And so that is one of the pieces that has motivated me to continue working on this bill, despite the fact that for two years, it has had challenges.

And I am concerned that not moving this bill forward, what it will do is we will be back, potentially again next year with the same concerns, the same opposition that for two years hasn't wanted to give, you know, more to help us make this bill better. And so I think that this is the only way we get folks at the table, and it is really the voice of the Legislature to move this forward. So with that, I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Okay, thank you. Do we have a motion? Okay, thank you. We have a motion, which is that the Assembly amendments be concurred in. So. Assistant, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

Thank you. We will leave this on call. We will go into a recess now until more Members come.

Senate Elections and Constitutional Amendments is back from recess, and we are lifting the call.

Lifting call on file item one, SB 299. Motion is that the Assembly amendments be concurred in. Current vote is 4-1. Chair voted aye. Vice Chair voted no. [Roll Call]

It is 5-1, and we are closing the roll. Thank you to all the individuals who participated today. If you are not able to testify, please submit your comments or suggestions in writing to the Senate Committee on Elections and Constitutional Amendments. The Senate Committee on Elections and Constitutional Amendments is now adjourned.