Bills with Different Vote Requirements in the California Legislature

Bills with Different Vote Requirements in the California Legislature By Chris Micheli

            In the California Legislature, there are six possible vote thresholds required for passage of bills in order to enact a statute. Those six different vote thresholds and accompanying statistics are set forth below:

55% Vote Required

In the 2023 Session, there is one bill that require a 55% vote for passage. Since 1999, there have been 6 bills that require a 55% vote for passage. This higher vote threshold is required for bills amending Prop. 63 from 2016, the Safety For All Act of 2016, which makes it a crime for a person to possess a large-capacity magazine.

An example is AB 732 (Mike Fong) from the 2023-24 Session

Proposition 63 allows its provisions to be amended by a vote of 55% of the Legislature so long as the amendments are consistent with, and further the intent of, the act. This bill would amend Proposition 63 by requiring a defendant not in custody to relinquish their firearms within 48 hours.

DIGEST KEY

Vote: 55%   Appropriation: no   Fiscal Committee: yes   Local Program: yes  

70% Vote Required

In the 2023 Session, there are no bills that require a 70% vote for passage. Since 1999, there have been 6 bills that require a 70% vote for passage. This higher vote threshold is required for bills amending Prop. 71 from 2004, the California Stem Cell Research and Cures Act.

An example is AB 617 (Mullin) from the 2019-20 Session

Legislative Counsel’s Digest: Existing law prohibits amendment of Proposition 71 by the Legislature unless the amendment is approved by the voters, or the amendment is accomplished by a bill introduced after the first 2 full calendar years and approved by a vote of 70% of both houses, and only if the amendment enhances the ability of the institute to further the purposes of the grant and loan programs.

DIGEST KEY

Vote: seventy_percent   Appropriation: no   Fiscal Committee: yes   Local Program: no  

Two-thirds Vote Required

In the 2023 Session, there are 158 bills that require a 2/3 vote for passage. Since 1999, there have been 6,173 bills that require a 2/3 vote for passage.

Three-fourths Vote Required

In the 2023 Session, there are no bills that require a ¾ vote for passage. Since 1999, there have been 2 bills that require a ¾ vote for passage. This higher vote threshold is required for bills amending Prop. 9 from 2008.

An example is SB 852 (Harman) in the 2011-12 Session

Legislative Counsel’s Digest: Existing law, as amended by Proposition 9, the Victim’s Bill of Rights Act of 2008: Marsy’s Law, of the November 4, 2008, statewide general election, establishes procedures at all hearings for the purpose of reviewing a prisoner’s parole suitability, or the setting, postponing, or rescinding of parole dates, and provides prisoners and victims specified rights at these hearings. Prop. 9 permits the Legislature, by a statute enacted by a vote of 3/4 of the membership of each house and in accordance with specified procedures, to amend the provisions of the act. Because this bill would eliminate these en banc hearings and exempt en banc reviews from the application of this act’s statutory provisions, it would require a 3/4 vote of the Legislature.

DIGEST KEY

Vote: three_fourths   Appropriation: no   Fiscal Committee: yes   Local Program: no  

Four-fifths Vote Required

In the 2023 Session, there are no bills that require a 4/5 vote for passage. Since 1999, there have been 9 bills that require a 4/5 vote for passage. This higher vote threshold is required for bills amending Prop. 117 from 1990, Prop. 99 from 1988, or Prop. 11 in 2018.

An example is AB 24 (Maze) in the 2005-06 Session

Legislative Counsel’s Digest: Proposition 117, an initiative measure approved by the electors at the June 5, 1990, primary election, enacted the California Wildlife Protection Act of 1990. The act prohibits the Legislature from changing the special protection of the mountain lion except by a 4/5 vote of the membership of both houses of the Legislature and then only if consistent with, and in furtherance of, the purposes of the act.

DIGEST KEY

Vote: four_fifths   Appropriation: no   Fiscal Committee: yes   Local Program: yes  

Another example is AB 689 (Calderon) from the 2009-10 Session

Legislative Counsel’s Digest: Proposition 99 prohibits the Legislature from amending provisions of the Tobacco Tax and Health Protection Act of 1988 except by a 4/5 vote of the membership of both houses of the Legislature and then only if consistent with the act. 

DIGEST KEY

Vote: four_fifths   Appropriation: no   Fiscal Committee: yes   Local Program: yes  

Another example is AB 27 (Rodriguez) from the 2019-20 Session

Legislative Counsel’s Digest: The Emergency Ambulance Employee Safety and Preparedness Act, an initiative measure enacted by the voters by Proposition 11 at the November 6, 2018, statewide general election, requires every emergency ambulance employee to annually receive employer-paid training relating to, among other things, responding to active shooter and mass casualty incidents and preventing violence against emergency ambulance employees and patients. The act permits amendment by the Legislature by a 4/5 vote of each house if the amendment is consistent with, and furthers the purposes of, the act.

DIGEST KEY

Vote: four_fifths   Appropriation: no   Fiscal Committee: yes   Local Program: no  

Majority Vote Required

In the 2023 Session, there are 2,520 bills that require a majority vote for passage. Since 1999, there have been 47,284 bills that require a majority vote for passage.

 

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