|
Kevin de Leon on Government Reform
|
|
Prohibit district-based election if protected class impaired
ACLU argument in favor of AB 182: The 2002 CA Voting Rights Act empowers challenges to race-based vote dilution in local at-large elections. AB 182 extends these protections to single-member district systems and designs remedies to avoid
diluting the voices and votes of protected communities.SFGate.com veto analysis: Gov. Brown said in his veto message that existing laws "already ensure that the voting strength of minority communities is not diluted." The law signed by
Gov. Gray Davis in 2002 allows minority groups to challenge at-large (city-wide) elections, increasing the likelihood of control by a white majority. [Since 2002] over 100 local governments switched to district elections.˙The [new] law could challenge
district lines if intended to dilute minority votes.
Legislative Outcome: Passed Senate 26-14-0 on 9/3/15; State Sen. Kevin de Leon voted YES; Passed Assembly 53-24-3 on 9/8/15; Vetoed by Gov. Brown on 10/10/15.
Source: ACLU on California voting record AB 182
, Sep 3, 2015
Pilot program for all-mail-in ballots
Excerpts from Legislative Counsel's Digest:- This bill would, until 2020, authorize San Diego County to conduct, as a pilot program, an all-mailed ballot special election to fill a congressional or legislative vacancy.
-
The bill would also authorize the county to process vote-by-mail ballots beginning 10 days before the election.
Status:Concurrence vote passed House, 47-29-3; passed Senate 24-8-8; approved by Governor 9/26/14
OnTheIssues Explanation: The states of Washington, Colorado and Oregon require all of their elections to be run entirely by mail. California is experimenting with the same idea in this bill, recognizing that a growing number of Californians
prefer to vote-by-mail anyway. The "10 day" provision allows counting to begin before election day, to address the problem that several races were decided a week after election day, due to counting starting on election day. (Kevin de Leon voted YEA).
Source: California legislative voting records: AB 1873
, Aug 28, 2014
Voted YES to amend Constitution to overturn Citizens United
Excerpts from Legislative Counsel's Digest:- WHEREAS, Corporations' rights should be more narrowly defined than rights afforded to natural persons; and
- WHEREAS, Corporations should not be categorized as persons for purposes related
to elections; and
- WHEREAS, The U.S. Supreme Court, in Citizens United v. FEC (2010), held that the government may not, under the First Amendment, suppress political speech on the basis of the speaker's corporate identity;
- This measure calls for a
constitutional convention to propose an amendment that would limit corporate personhood for purposes of campaign finance and political speech.
Status:Passed House, 51-20-9; passed Senate 23-11-6 (de Leon voted YES)
OnTheIssues Explanation: The Citizens United ruling gave rise to "Super-PACs" which can spend unlimited money on political advertising by unknown donors. This resolution seeks to overturn the Supreme Court by a Constitutional Amendment.
Source: California legislative voting records: AJR-1
, Jun 23, 2014
CC:Oppose strict Constitutionalist judges.
de_Leon opposes the CC survey question on judicial constitutionalism
The Christian Coalition Voter Guide inferred whether candidates agree or disagree with the statement, 'Appointing Judges Who Will Adhere to a Strict Interpretation of the Constitution'
Christian Coalition's self-description: "Christian Voter Guide is a clearing-house for traditional, pro-family voter guides. We do not create voter guides, nor do we interview or endorse candidates."
Source: Christian Coalition Surve 18CC-1a on Jul 1, 2018
Page last updated: Jul 14, 2021