SENATE RULES COMMITTEE
Office of Senate Floor Analyses
1020 N Street, Suite 524
(916) 651-1520
Fax: (916) 327-4478
SB 88
THIRD READING
Bill No:
Author:
Amended:
Vote:
SB 88
Yee (D), et al.
3/9/11
21
SENATE ELECTIONS & C. A. COMM.: 5-0, 3/15/11
AYES: Correa, La Malfa, De León, Gaines, Lieu
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: Senate Rule 28.8
SUBJECT:
Elections: names of candidates
SOURCE:
Author
DIGEST: This bill requires that, if a jurisdiction provides a translation of
the candidates’ alphabet-based names into a character-based language, such
as Chinese, Japanese, or Korean, phonetic transliterations of the alphabetbased names of candidates be provided. This bill also permits a specified
jurisdiction that provides translations of candidates’ names to establish a
process by which specified candidates may appeal the translation of his/her
alphabet-based name in addition to procedures available under current law.
ANALYSIS: Existing law requires translation of ballots and ballot
materials into languages other than English when specified. Existing law
also provides that if a candidate changes his/her name within one year of any
election, the new name shall not appear upon the ballot unless the change
was made by either marriage or decree of any court of competent
jurisdiction.
This bill requires that phonetic translations of the English names of
candidates be provided whenever the ballot materials are required to be
CONTINUED
SB 88
Page 2
translated, and applies only to character-based languages, including
Mandarin Chinese, Cantonese, Japanese, and Korean. This bill permits a
jurisdiction that provides translations of candidates’ names on the ballot to
establish a local appeals process to challenge the translation of a candidate’s
name on the ballot for a candidate running for office exclusively within that
jurisdiction and who is not running for the following offices:
 Member of the Assembly, Senate, United States House of
Representatives, or State Board of Equalization
 Justice of the Court of Appeal
 Judge of the superior court
This bill provides that in a jurisdiction in which separate ballots containing
translations of the candidates’ names are printed in different languages,
ballot materials shall include both the alphabet-based names and the
translations of the candidates’ names. This bill further provides that if a
jurisdiction cannot comply with this requirement due to limitations on its
existing voting system, any new voting system purchased by that jurisdiction
after June 1, 2012, shall be able to print both the alphabet-based and
translated names. This bill allows a candidate that has a character-based
name by birth, which can be verified by a birth certificate or other valid
identification, to use that name on the ballot instead of a phonetic
translation. This bill allows a candidate who does not have a characterbased name by birth, but who identifies by a particular character-based name
and can demonstrate that he/she has been known and identified within the
public by that name over the past two years, to use that name instead of a
phonetic translation.
Background
Currently, candidates for public office are allowed to submit any name of
their choosing as the “translation” of their name on ballots without proof that
the name being submitted is a true translation of their “legal” name.
In 2002, the San Francisco Director of lections implemented a change to
their Chinese name policy for ballot translations and the ordinance currently
provides that:
(1) “Translation” shall mean the selection of Chinese characters to
represent the parts of a Chinese name, or a name in any other language
CONTINUED
SB 88
Page 3
that traditionally is written using Chinese characters.
(2) “Transliteration” shall mean the selection of Chinese characters to
represent the phonetic equivalent of the syllables of an English name, or
a name in any other language that is not traditionally written using
Chinese characters.
The Director of Elections shall cause a translation or transliteration of the
names of all candidates to be prepared by a qualified Chinese-language
interpreter according to generally-accepted professional standards. A
candidate may submit documentary evidence demonstrating established
use of a particular translation or transliteration of his or her name to assist
the interpreter, but the Director of Elections’ decision to accept the
translation or transliteration of a candidate’s name submitted by the
Department’s interpreter shall be final. Translated or transliterated names
accepted by the Director shall be available for public review for ten days,
and the Director’s decision may be challenged pursuant to California
Elections Code Section 13313. (Added by Ord. 233-99, File No. 991282,
App. 8/20/99)
Prior legislation. SB 288 (Yee, 2009), which was identical to this bill, was
vetoed by Governor Schwarzenegger. In his veto message, the Governor
stated, in part: “Under current law, local elections officials have the
authority to address this fraudulent behavior and to set policies that are
appropriate for their unique jurisdictions. For example, the director of
elections in San Francisco has established a Chinese name translation policy
to address concerns that improper translations were being used by candidates
in local races. I encourage local elections officials to continue to address the
concerns raised in this bill at the local level.”
FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes Local: Yes
SUPPORT: (Verified 3/15/11) -- per the Senate Elections &
Constitutional Amendments Committee
American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, AFL-CIO
California Communities United Institute
OPPOSITION: (Verified 3/15/11) -- per the Senate Elections &
Constitutional Amendments Committee
CONTINUED
SB 88
Page 4
California Association of Clerks and Election Officials
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: According to the author’s office, the lack
of state law governing this topic has opened the door to abuse. In one
instance, a candidate for Supervisor in California hired a political consulting
firm to pick an Asian-character name for him. This name was allowed on
the ballot even though it had no relationship to his English name and he had
no history of being identified by it. In another instance, a candidate
submitted the “translation” of his name as a common Asian name that the
candidate had just picked for the race, with the intent to win votes from that
community through this false identity and not through his actual name or
accomplishments. Allowing this voter fraud to continue or worse, to
expand, is an affront to civil rights and democracy. On the flip side, this bill
will also protect people who legitimately identify by an Asian name. In a
California Assembly race, a candidate was initially rejected for the use of a
name that he had used and been identified by within the Chinese community
for a number of years. This bill will establish standards to protect people
like this candidate who legitimately have an Asian name that they would like
to be identified by on the ballot. This bill will establish statewide guidelines
for counties and the Secretary of State’s office to follow to ensure the
integrity of the translated names on our ballots in California. It will prevent
the hodgepodge rules and regulations that are currently in place in different
regions that place access to our democratic system at risk for Asian-language
communities.
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION: The California Association of Clerks
and Election Officials writes that they “oppose this bill, unless amended to
remove subsection (a)(3) of Elections Code Section 13217.1, which
specifically allows a jurisdiction to establish a local appeal process to
challenge the translation of a candidate’s name. We are aware that at least
one jurisdiction currently has such a process, and we find nothing in the law
that would prohibit individual jurisdictions from establishing a local process.
However, specifically setting forth this option in the Elections Code would
result in undue pressure being exerted on those jurisdictions that feel the
appropriate venue for challenges is the court system as set forth in Section
13314.”
DLW:mw 4/13/11 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION:
SEE ABOVE
**** END ****