It’s Not Just the Spot Bill Deadline

It’s Not Just the Spot Bill Deadline By Chris Micheli

            In another one of my “legislative geek” moments, I would like to suggest that we change our terminology to “placeholder bill.” For example, everyone is aware of the upcoming “spot bill deadlines” in the Assembly (amendments in Legislative Counsel form due March 13 by 5pm) and Senate (amendments in Legislative Counsel form due March 22 by 3pm).

            However, these deadlines apply to more than just spot bills. They also apply to bills that contain only legislative intent statements, and even a bill introduced that only contains legislative findings and declarations. All three of these types of introduced bills are meant to be placeholder bills, awaiting substantive language to be added so that the respective Rules Committees will refer those bills to a policy committee for their first hearing.

            I realize that many individuals working in and around the California Legislature simply refer to all of these placeholder measures as “spot bills,” but placeholder bill would be more appropriate because there are three separate and distinct types of placeholder bills. They are:

 

·         Spot bills make a technical or nonsubstantive change to an existing statute in one of the 29 Codes.

 

·         Intent bills contain, in most instances, a single statement of legislative intent to do something generally (e.g., the Legislature intends to enact a bill related to transportation) or specifically (e.g., the Legislature intends to enact a bill to create a youth hiring tax credit).

 

·         Legislative findings and declarations bills that contain only one or more of these statements (and not any statutory language).

So, rather than lumping all three of these different types of introduced bills that lack substantive statutory language under the same “spot bill” term, let’s instead try and lump them all under the “placeholder bill” term.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Another Reason to Limit Bill Introductions?

Another Reason to Limit Bill Introductions?  By Chris Micheli             As I did my final review of Governor Newsom’s actions on the 1,046 bills sent to him after the 2023 Legislative Session, I noticed that some of the Governor’s veto messages provide additional rationales for limiting bill introductions.             Out of 156 vetoes from the 2023 Session, the number one reason for the Governor’s veto was budget concerns or cost pressures. In fact, 41% of the vetoes used that basis. That by itself is not a reason to limit bill introductions, but another statistic may provide such a reason…             By my count, just over 1/3 of the bills vetoed by Governor Newsom likely should not have been sent to his Desk and, arguably, should not have made it through the process at all. In fact, perhaps they should not h...
Read more

Frequently Asked Questions about California’s Budget Process

Frequently Asked Questions about California’s Budget Process  By Chris Micheli             What are the main parts of the California state budget? They are the Budget Bill, Budget Bill Junior, Trailer Bills, and Supplemental Reports.             What is the Budget Bill? This bill contains the appropriations and “Budget Bill Language”. Note that only a Budget Bill (or BBJ) can contain multiple appropriations. It requires a majority vote for passage and the bill takes effect immediately. There is just one Budget Bill. What is the “Budget Bill Jr.”? This is the bill that amends the main Budget Bill by making changes to multiple appropriations. There are often multiple BBJs. What is a Trailer Bill? This bill makes the statutory changes needed to implement the budget. It is the same as any other bill, but it takes effect immediately with a majority vote if it contain...
Read more

Can Any Bill Call an Election?

Can Any Bill Call an Election?  By Chris Micheli             In June 2024, we saw two bills that contain a provision to call an election.             Both bills contain a “plus” section at the end of the bill, which is an uncodified statute, stating the following: “this act calls an election within the meaning of Article IV of the California Constitution and shall go into immediate effect.” Such a measure only requires a majority vote, unless some other constitutional provision requires a higher vote threshold (e.g., a tax increase). What is the basis for this statement? Section 8(c)(3) of Article IV of the state Constitution provides: “ Statutes calling elections, statutes providing for tax levies or appropriations for the usual current expenses of the State, and urgency statutes shall go into effect immediately upon their enactment.” However, there is no further gui...
Read more