California: Proposition 39 Voter ID to Mandate Photo ID, Mail-In Checks

• California's Proposition 39 proposes requiring photo ID for in-person voting and the last four digits of a government ID for mail-in ballots.
• Supporters, including State Senator Tony Strickland, argue the measure enhances public trust and election integrity, citing concerns over expanded mail-in voting.
• Opponents, like Assemblymember Gail Pellerin, contend the measure aims to make voting more difficult, would disenfranchise voters, and slow ballot counting.
• A recent poll shows 52% opposition to Proposition 39, a decline attributed by proponents to a controversial rephrasing of the ballot summary by Attorney General Rob Bonta.
• California is currently one of 14 states without a statewide voter ID requirement, relying instead on signature verification for ballot authentication.

Assemblymember Gail Pellerin, a Santa Cruz Democrat and former elections official, has voiced strong opposition, asserting that the primary objective of Proposition 39 is to complicate the voting process.

California voters are set to consider Proposition 39, a significant ballot measure that seeks to introduce new voter identification requirements across the state. If enacted, this measure would mandate that individuals voting in person present a photo ID. For those casting their ballots by mail, the proposal stipulates that they must provide the final four digits of a government-issued identification number. To ensure accessibility, the state would be obligated to furnish a voter ID to any individual who requests one, free of charge.

Supporters of Proposition 39, including State Senator Tony Strickland, a Republican from Huntington Beach and a co-author of the measure, contend that these new California voter ID requirements are essential for bolstering public trust in the electoral process. They argue that the recent expansion of mail-in voting and the implementation of automatic voter registration have compromised the integrity of elections. Senator Strickland emphasized that robust democracies rely on election integrity, drawing parallels to existing identification requirements for activities such as air travel and alcohol purchases.

California currently stands as one of only 14 states without a statewide voter ID mandate, relying instead on signature verification as part of its authentication process. However, proponents of Proposition 39, such as Senator Strickland, suggest that signatures can change over time, rendering this method less reliable. The initiative garnered support from every county in California, successfully meeting the deadline for ballot placement weeks ahead of schedule, indicating broad initial backing for the California Proposition 39 voter ID initiative.

Despite initial widespread support, the California Proposition 39 voter ID measure has encountered significant political headwinds. A recent poll conducted by the Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies indicated that 52% of respondents opposed the measure, while only 39% expressed support. This represents a notable decline from six weeks prior, when the opposition led by a narrower margin of nine points. Senator Strickland attributed this shift in public opinion to changes made by Attorney General Rob Bonta's office to the ballot measure's official title and summary.

Strickland accused Attorney General Bonta of employing favorable language for ballot measures he supports and negative phrasing for those he opposes. Initially, the title and summary for Proposition 39 stated that it “establishes additional voter identification and citizenship verification requirements.” However, Bonta’s office revised this to “prohibits citizens from voting unless they present government-issued identification.” A judge subsequently ruled in August that this new language was “sufficient,” despite the controversy surrounding the Rob Bonta ballot measure summary.

Assemblymember Gail Pellerin, a Santa Cruz Democrat and former elections official, has voiced strong opposition, asserting that the primary objective of Proposition 39 is to complicate the voting process. Pellerin highlighted that voters are already verified during registration, and their signatures are cross-referenced with those on file when they cast a ballot, with officials reaching out if discrepancies arise. She also noted her past practice of recruiting individuals skeptical of election security to serve as poll workers, allowing them to observe the checks and balances firsthand and gain trust in the system. Pellerin warned that if Proposition 39 becomes law, it would prolong ballot counting and disproportionately disenfranchise vulnerable populations, particularly those with disabilities.

Proposition 39 is one of 14 ballot measures slated for the November 3 election, sharing the ballot with other significant proposals, including a one-time tax on billionaires and adjustments to how the state conducts recall elections. This California voter identification ballot measure has emerged as a central issue within a midterm election cycle that also features a gubernatorial race and the introduction of new congressional districts across the Golden State. The broader electoral landscape saw canvassers actively engaging voters in Oceanside prior to the June 5 primary, reflecting the ongoing efforts to encourage civic participation.

While the debate around Proposition 39 election integrity continues, some experts have noted a lack of evidence for certain claims, such as widespread voting by non-citizens or the notion that a proposed billionaire tax would prompt wealthy individuals to leave California. The core of the Proposition 39 debate, however, centers on balancing the perceived need for enhanced election security with concerns about potential barriers to voter access. Assemblymember Pellerin views the measure as part of a broader national trend aimed at undermining elections, despite arguments from opponents that showing identification is a simple task. The outcome of this measure could significantly reshape California election law changes and impact voter participation for years to come.

Lawyers specializing in election law or public policy in California should monitor the outcome of Proposition 39, as its passage would introduce new voter identification requirements, potentially impacting voter access and leading to litigation regarding its implementation or challenges based on disenfranchisement concerns.

Source: Original reporting via Courthouse News Service