SACRAMENTO, Calif. (CN) — A California state bill looking to impose voter ID and other requirements on Golden State elections drew a strong rebuke Wednesday from state Democrats.
Assembly Bill 25 — introduced by Assemblymember Carl DeMaio, a San Diego Republican — led to accusations of flawed elections and “soft bigotry” by GOP members, with claims that Democrats believed minorities weren’t smart enough to get an ID as a reason to not require them at the polls. Democrats countered with arguments that DeMaio relied on a partisan report when making his points and that the state’s elections already are secure.
“This is something Democrats and Republicans should see as a democracy issue, not a partisan issue,” DeMaio said.
DeMaio presented his bill Wednesday before the Assembly Elections Committee, which voted it down.
Pointing to a report about the 2022 election by The Transparency Foundation, DeMaio said California faces issues in conducting elections. His bill would have required a government-issued ID when voting in person and documentation proving citizenship when registering to vote. Voters would have had to put the last four digits of their Social Security number on vote-by-mail ballot envelopes. All ballots would be counted within 72 hours of an election.
Colleen Britton, with the Election Integrity Project, said public trust in the system is low. Part of that distrust stems from a lack of voter ID.
“The people of California deserve these protections,” Britton said.
Assemblymember David Tangipa, a Clovis Republican, called the argument that minorities lack the intelligence to get a voter ID, necessitating no ID requirement at the polls, offensive.
“I believe we are smart enough to meet the standards, the minimum standards asked,” Tangipa said, referring to his Polynesian roots. “I do not believe in the soft bigotry of low expectations.”
Opponents argued the bill was a sweeping attempt at restricting voting access. Dora Rose, deputy director of the League of Women Voters of California, said many voters don’t have access to the costly documents the legislation would require.
“The bottom line here is California’s elections are already secure,” Rose said. “We must not build policy on a bed of lies.”
Citing DeMaio’s claim about the need for transparency, Assemblymember Marc Berman — a Menlo Park Democrat — elicited information that a member of DeMaio’s staff also worked with The Transparency Foundation.
Assemblymember Gail Pellerin, a Santa Cruz Democrat and committee chair, recommended against approval of the bill. A former elections official, Pellerin said lawmakers who question the state’s election integrity should also question their own successful elections. If that’s the case, those lawmakers should resign.
The committee also voted down another Republican bill — Assembly Bill 1214, by Assemblymember Joe Patterson, of Rocklin. However, it did grant Patterson’s request for reconsideration, meaning it could return for another vote at some point.
The bill would have reduced the number of days elections officials have to certify the vote, to 21 from 30. Also, officials would have to count at least 25% of the vote seven days after an election, and 67% of it by 14 days after.
Patterson said the legislation would help with issues of distrust in government.
Berman noted that he had a competing bill, and wouldn’t support Patterson.
Berman’s legislation — Assembly Bill 5 — did pass and now proceeds to the Assembly Appropriations Committee. It would require a tally and public release of election results 10 days after an election, except for ballots that need special processing like a vote-by-mail ballot requiring signature verification. Elections officials could request a deadline extension.
The 30-day deadline to certify the vote would remain unchanged.
The Menlo Park Democrat said he wanted clear metrics for tallying ballots and that his bill would provide transparency. Additionally, he noted that a vast majority of ballots already are counted within 10 days of an election.
While saying that counting ballots is about getting it right and not rushing the process, Pellerin supported the bill.