Assembly Standing Committee on Elections

Good evening. I'd like to call the September 12, 2025 hearing of the Assembly Elections Committee to order. Before we proceed, let's call the roll and establish a quorum. Pellerin. Here.

[Roll Call]

Wonderful. So I'd like to welcome everyone who's here in the hearing room today and who's watching the hearing online. For purpose of this hearing, we are accepting witness testimony in person and we are also accepting written testimony through the Legislature's position letter portal.

That portal can be accessed through the Committee's website at aelc assembly.ca.gov the Committee has two measures on its agenda. Nothing on consent. And when we hear the bills on the agenda, we'll hear from a maximum of two primary witnesses in support. Two primary witnesses in opposition of the Bill, and limit the presentations of two minutes per witness.

As a reminder, primary witnesses in support are those designated by the author. Other witnesses are limited to providing their name, the organization they represent, if any, and their position on the Bill. Additional comments will be ruled out of order.

We seek to protect the rights of all who participate in the legislative process so that we can have effective deliberation and decisions on critical issues facing California. In order to facilitate the Committee's business and public participation in today's hearing, we will not permit conduct that disrupts, disturbs, or otherwise impedes the orderly conduct of legislative proceedings.

Violations of these rules may subject you to removal or other enforcement actions. But those announcements out of the way, we will now move on to the Committee's agenda. And we have an author in the room. So, Assembly Member Sharp Collins, come on down. You are presenting AB 1392. You may begin when you're ready.

Okay. Good afternoon, Chair and Members. I am here to present Assembly Bill 1392. It is a measure aimed at protecting the personal safety of our candidates for office and also elected officials.

Unfortunately, in this current climate, political violence is. It's on the rise, including an increase in threats and actual violence. Just this week, we were reminded of how dangerous the political environment is with the brutal assassination of political. I had to pause because. Yeah, with the assassination of Charlie Kirk.

In response to the growing threats of violence, I worked with our Secretary of State to ensure that addresses and other confidential information from candidates is being kept private. In California voters role information is publicly accessible. So. So a change in estate law, as we can all see even more so now, it is necessary.

It is necessary for us to protect our candidates and to protect their families. Assembly Bill 1392 simply requires county election officials to make private their residence address, telephone numbers and email address of a candidate for state, local or federal offices.

Here in California, those protections will last through the duration of the elected time in office or through the end of the election cycle for the unsuccessful candidate amendments, they were taken to remove the opposition, allowing a process for journalists and governmental offices to access the information if needed.

This common sense Bill will protect public servants and their families. A commitment to elected officials should not be accompanied with undue threats, especially against families. The other reason why I paused when I said the brutal assassination of Charlie Kirk is my son called and my son called and said, mommy, I want to know that you are okay.

My son is 15. And he said, well, are you okay in the area where you're taking your call? And I said, well, in this space. I said, but just know that this building is safe and it's secure. My son, he's afraid for me to do my job.

So by me sharing my story and us already currently seeing what's happening, I truly 100% respectfully ask for your aye vote. This is not just about me. This is about all of us.

Very inspirational. Thank you. Assembly Member, do you have any witnesses in support today?

I do, I do.I have Tim Cromartie from the Secretary of State's office as well.

Madam Chair, Members, thank you. In the wake of escalating threats to elected officials and those close to them in recent years on a nationwide scale, Secretary Weber chose to sponsor this legislation to place California on a heightened State of vigilance in regard to the personal information of its elected officials, as the Assemblymember has said.

Unfortunately, we have fresh and tragic evidence of the urgent need for this legislation in the form of the sudden and violent death of activist Charlie Kirk. Although not an elected official, he was a public figure who shaped political debate just two days ago.

Against the troubling backdrop of increasing political violence, this measure will add a layer of protection for elected officials at all levels of government. Undue exposure to harassment and violence should never be the price paid for the choice to enter public service.

We have worked diligently with the author and stakeholders to remove opposition and address legitimate concerns about the need for continued access to elected officials by the news media while restricting the exposure of their voter registration information for that on behalf of the Secretary of State, I respectfully asked for your aye vote.

Thank you very much. Is there anybody in the room in opposition to this Bill? Anybody who wants to add on as a MeToo and support or opposition seeing none. I'll bring it back to the dais. Any questions? Comments from Members Assemblymember Macedo.

This has been an extraordinarily heavy week and this has been a difficult week, being the end of session for a lot of us new Members experiencing this for the first time. And this is a highlight. I got the call from my mom worried about me going home, worried about me. Here we all are somebody, somebody.

We all are people that we have a job to do. But when we leave this building, we are human beings and political violence has no place in our society. And one thing I think we can come together as Republicans and Democrats and independents alike is to denounce political violence.

And I know that this Bill came shortly after the legislators in Minnesota were gunned down. And I condemn that violence and all violence. So let's come together. We can fix this place. Thank you so much for bringing this Bill forward and thank you to my fellow legislators. We can fix this place together. Thank you.

Assemblymember Tangipa.

I just want to echo the exact same sentiment that my colleague from Tulare shares as well. I also want to make sure that I'm thanking the author, probably with how expedient we have to go on this. There's probably no time for accepting co authors on it. But.

What we do know is our families, ourselves, we all deserve a place of dialogue and to be able to say what's on our mind without the threat of violence. And that should especially be our home and confidential areas.

You know, I think again, this is just an amazing Bill, especially at a time where, you know, we care about our families. We're here because we care about our families.

We're here because we want to carry the voices of our community and we should do so without the threat of political violence from anybody on any side of the aisle. And so I just want to say thank you for bringing this forward and I look forward to supporting this.

Thank you, Assemblymember Berman.

Well, I also want to thank the author for bringing this important Bill forward last year. About a year ago. Exactly. Because last year ended earlier. I'd had a Bill, an elections Bill, ironically, that was tweeted about by a very active social media user, slash owner. And then I was traveling back from the East Coast.

I was about to board a flight in Philadelphia. And I got a phone call from, from a no caller ID number which is used in my congressperson. And I was like boarding the flight. So I was like, I'll ignore it and call them back and call her back and call again. And called again. I finally answered.

Is this Mark Berman? I said, yep. I said, I'm coming to your house at Blank Blank Blank Blank. I mean, knew my read me my address and I'm going to come and, you know, let you know how angry I am about this Bill.

And I first let them know that they were welcome anytime and I looked forward to seeing them and I'd be waiting.

And then I realized that wasn't the right answer, especially as I was 3,000 miles away from my house and my wife was there by herself and I, you know, we got great sergeants and they called the Police Department and there were two Menlo Park cars waiting for me at the house when I got back from the flight.

And but that's the reality that we live in, is our personal information is way too easily accessible and there are some unstable people out there who get too on all sides who get too, you know, unhinged about, about how to react to political discourse.

And we should never react to political discourse with threats and we should never react to political discourse with violence that erodes the foundation of this country and of our democracy. And unfortunately, that's become too prevalent across the spectrum.

And so I appreciate, you know, this being a really good, important way to minimize that threat to us that a lot of us wouldn't care. But it's about our families and especially when we're gone so much from home, they're the ones that we worry about the most.

And I think about it in terrible, terrible ways all the time. So I appreciate bringing this Bill forward. I love that it's got bipartisan support and excited to support it. Thank you. Thank you.

Any other comments or questions from Committee Members? Okay. So you may go ahead and close. I respectfully ask for your aye vote. Thank you. So I definitely share your concern about the rise in political threats and violence. And I think the Members here today expressed their concern so eloquently.

And, you know, we are in extraordinary and difficult times and anything we can do to protect people and make sure that there is no place for political violence in this country is absolutely necessary. And I want to commend you for working with the Secretary of State and our Assembly minority floor leader on this Bill.

I also want to thank you for your work to address the concerns by stakeholders and I'm glad that this Bill made it back to us with no opposition. So I'm recommending a support. So thank you. Madam Secretary, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

And still no opposition. Out 60. Thank you so much for being here. Thank you. We'll keep the roll open for we have an absent Member. Yes. And we'll now go ahead and move on to our second and last Bill. So we have a second Senator Cervantes presenting SB851.

Good afternoon. Thank you, Madam Chair and Committee Members, for the opportunity to present Senate Bill 851 today. I also just want to thank your committee staff for all their assistance in making this bill possible. Our election systems, as we know, are currently under attack in California.

Just this morning on Fox News, President Trump declared his intentions to target our state. This is unsurprising. A key pillar of President Trump's descent into authoritarianism is his plan to undermine the cornerstone of our democracy, that is the right to vote. He has been clear about his desire to attack vote by mail ballots and voting machines.

In addition, his followers at the Department of Justice are already suing at least one county in California because they refuse to bend the knee to his whims. We cannot stand idle while Donald Trump dismantles our democracy piece by piece. This bill is the first step that we can take to protect the integrity of our election systems.

This bill does four things. First, it requires state agencies and local governments to notify the Secretary of State and the Attorney General if they are served with any court actions related to elections that arise under federal law.

It also requires that the SOS and AG be notified at least 14 days before entering into a settlement or consent decree due to an elections related claim arising under federal law. This will allow both the SOS and AG with the opportunity to aid in defending against federal tax on our elections that come to in the form of lawsuits.

Second, SB 851 would ensure that federal agents are treated the same way as state and local law enforcement, such as the hiring or arranging for any law enforcement officer to be posted at or near a voting location or a county registrar's office without authorization is a crime.

The existing crime was originally put in place by this legislated body in 1980 after the Republican Party of Orange County hired security guards to post themselves at polling places in Santa Ana to intimidate Latino voters. As we have already seen, President Trump is willing to use ICE and CBP as secret police to harass his political rivals, most recently when he sent them to the press conference in LA when Governor Newsom held the redistricting press conference. Many of us that attended.

By extending this provision to federal agents, this bill will enhance the essential sanctity of the places where Californians cast their vote in person and where their votes are counted. We must protect California voters and election workers from facing intimidation from law enforcement for simply playing their part in making our democracy work.

This bill will protect our voting system standards from attacks by the federal government. Just last month, President Trump made false statements declaring that many of the legitimate voting machines used in our country are inaccurate. SB 851 will ensure that voting machines in California continue to meet the highest industry standards, not the warped demands of President Trump.

Finally, this bill makes the role of county registrars in certifying the election results administerial and non-discretionary, which will protect registrars from being pressured by President Trump to refuse to certify an election because he does not like the results. This is a bill that is important that we pass today.

It has an urgency clause so that all these protections are in place for the November 4th statewide special election. If we lose our democracy, we will lose not only a piece of what makes us fundamentally American, but also our best defense to safeguard the freedoms that we hold so dear. And we cannot let that happen. I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you so much. Your witnesses each have two minutes. Oh, your witness has two minutes.

Thank you, Madam Chair and Members. Tim Cromartie on behalf of Secretary of State Shirley N. Weber. SB 51, among other things, contains prudent updates to the Elections Code regarding notice provisions pertaining to both voting systems and elections related federal claims. It also deletes from law provisions that are literally outdated, inapplicable to California, or both.

For example, sections 8 and 9 of the bill delete language to the effect that the Secretary of State shall adopt standards that meet or exceed federal voluntary voting system guidelines set forth by the US Elections Assistance Commission. This language is outdated and does not apply to California.

Since 2015, California has set its own standards for voting systems guidelines as is allowed under federal law and continues to do so. The California voting system standards are considered the gold standard of voting systems testing in the United States.

We have arguably the most strenuous voting system certification program in the country, ensuring the security, accessibility, accuracy, and functionality of voting systems used in California elections. California is not unique in this regard. Other states including Colorado, Florida, and Indiana have developed their own voting system standards independent of federal guidance. With that, we ask for your aye vote.

Thank you so much. We have a motion, we have a second. Is there anybody in the room who's opposed to the bill as a primary witness? Seeing none. Anyone in the room that wants to add on to as a me too in support or opposition? Seeing none. I'll bring it back to the dais. Any comments or questions from Members? Assembly Member Tangipa.

You know, after listening to what you were saying and actually was constantly reminded this entire year that we have the gold standard and we have that safeguards in our elections here. But the Dhillon Law Group actually had to sue Orange County to gain information because a registrar wouldn't allow them in.

And then after pushing for that, we were able to find out, as reported by KTLA, as reported by USA Today, as reported by so many other groups that a dog had voted in two elections. Is that the gold standard? I was reminded in this, in this committee that it was more likely to be struck by lightning than to find voter fraud in the State of California. And as of three days ago we found out that a dog voted twice.

So I think that this bill is actually just built on more fear mongering to fight the federal administration. I think this creates a larger mess. I think that we're forcing something through with urgency for a standard that actually isn't there because it's not the gold standard when you can find a dog voted twice and then registered on our ballots.

So I think we need to do better and at cleaning our voter rolls, I think we need to do better at following the National Voter Act. I think we need to do better. And this just again puts California in a position against the federal administration when we should find ways to make sure that dogs don't vote. Thank you.

Anybody on the dais has any other questions or comments? Assembly Member Berman.

The the odds of being struck by lightning are 1 in 1,222,000 and we found one instance of voter fraud amongst 23 million voters. So it still maintains that you are more likely to be struck by lightning than find voter fraud in California. And I'm glad that we found it. I mean that's the key. That's the key is that was found.

And I know I said this a lot in prior years before my colleagues from across the aisle and some colleagues from this side of the aisle who are on this committee, but President Trump, the first time he got elected President set up a voter fraud commission that had the full weight and authority of the federal government.

Vice President Pence, they were good friends at the time. Vice President Pence was one of the co-chairs of this voter fraud commission that was set up by President Trump to go find voter fraud across the country. This was a top initiative of the President of the United States.

And that voter fraud commission disbanded without a whimper. Because the reality is that voter fraud doesn't happen at the prevalence that the President says it does. The reality is that our voting systems in California are true and secure and accurate.

And when the President says that he actually would have won the State of California but not for the voter fraud. And I haven't looked it up yet, but I'm pretty sure he lost by millions of votes, that's just a wildly inaccurate and laughable statement. That also, by the way, erodes voters confidence in our democracy.

So it's very damaging, it's very damaging to our democracy when anybody, let alone the President, makes those statements. Does voter fraud happen? Yes, it does. Do we have laws? Is just like, just like murder happens, but it's against the law. Voter fraud in California, I believe, is a felony. It is against the law.

And this person who registered their dog, I'm glad they got caught and I hope they get prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. And that's how the system is supposed to work. So once again, it still stands that you are about 20 times more likely to get struck by lightning than catch voter fraud in California. I appreciate you bringing the bill forward. Appreciate the support of the Secretary of State. Happy to support the bill. Thank you.

Assembly Member Berman.

Bennett.

Bennett.

I think it's important to just point out that the demand for the perfect is being used by people who then take that and go completely to the other side. We had a President back in 20, back in 2020, who said that there were 3 million fraudulent votes. I'm sorry, back in 2016. 3 million fraudulent votes.

And as my colleague pointed out, set up a whole commission, all the resources, the federal government, et cetera, and they disbanded without a whimper. But then we have, because it's a great headlines to say a dog voted, then we have that.

And because the system, a system like we have in the United States, you can always find somebody that can manipulate it. Right? And that is what is there is no perfect system. But we're going to find some one or two examples and then say somehow that justifies the claim that 3 million fraudulent votes were made, and that's okay.

And that we ought to be emphasizing the fact that there is this slight imperfection that no one claims anybody will be able to run a completely 100% perfect election. The question is, is there substantial fraud that is actually changing the outcomes of these national elections? And it's very clear nobody's been able to find that.

So instead, what we have to do is play up a hyped up incident. And it was an intentionally hyped up incident where a voter intentionally registered their dog to try to make this point for political gain and not to really demonstrate what are the things that we should be focused on, which is, is there widespread fraud?

Are foreign governments spending millions, hundreds of millions of dollars in trying to distort our elections? The things that are important to us for election integrity, some people don't want to focus on. They want to focus on this. And so I really support the bill and I really appreciate it. Thank you very much.

Madam Chair, may I just add one point?

Yes, you may.

We do have a system, and it does work. It's true that a woman was found out to have registered her dog to vote, but she was eventually discovered. That is proof that our system works. Because to Mr. Berman's point, she is now being prosecuted for five separate felony counts.

Well done. Thank you. Any other questions or comments from Committee Members? Seeing none. Senator, you may close.

Just want to thank you, Madam Chair, for being my joint co-author in this and what we're doing to protect the integrity of our elections. Respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you. In light of these unprecedented attempts by the federal government to interfere with the administration of our nation's elections, California must remain vigilant and proactive. And we must be prepared for the possibility that federal agencies could be used to interfere in California's election operations.

So SB 851 is a vital safeguard that empowers elections officials with the clarity, protections, and tools they need to defend against any federal overreach. And I also want to thank the author for incorporating provisions into the bill that remove the ambiguity related to election certification that could be potentially exploited by bad actors. So with that, I'm recommending a support. We have a motion and a second. Madam Secretary, please call the roll.

The motion is do pass. [Roll Call]

That bill is out, five to two. Thank you. I think we need to just call the roll on some bills so our Members can add on.

On AB 1392 by Sharp-Collins. [Roll Call]

That's it. Okay, this meeting is adjourned. Or hearing. Whatever it is.