California Attorney General Rob Bonta has been accused of manipulating the language of a voter identification initiative, Proposition 39, to politically disadvantage its supporters. Critics contend that Bonta, after the measure qualified for the November ballot, significantly altered its official title and summary to create prejudice against it.
When supporters of Proposition 39 began collecting signatures last year, the initiative was given a straightforward title by Bonta's office: "ESTABLISHES ADDITIONAL VOTER IDENTIFICATION AND CITIZENSHIP VERIFICATION REQUIREMENTS." Over 1.3 million Californians signed petitions under this description. However, the revised title that appeared in the state's draft voter guide on Tuesday reads: "PROHIBITS CITIZENS FROM VOTING UNLESS THEY PRESENT GOVERNMENT-ISSUED IDENTIFICATION."
The revised summary also emphasizes that mail ballots could be "invalidated" without required identifying information and that in-person voting would be "prohibited" without government-issued identification. According to critics, the substance of the initiative did not change, only Bonta's description of it.
Assemblyman Carl DeMaio, a proponent of Proposition 39, raised concerns about the language change, stating that Bonta provided a "relatively fair ballot title" initially. DeMaio charged that after the measure qualified for the ballot, Bonta "changed it to a biased and dishonest one."
In contrast, Bonta's description of Proposition 50, a measure related to congressional district maps supported by legislative Democrats, included justifications cited by the measure's proponents. Its title was "AUTHORIZES TEMPORARY CHANGES TO CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT MAPS IN RESPONSE TO TEXAS’ PARTISAN REDISTRICTING," and its summary began with "In response to Texas’ mid-decade partisan congressional redistricting…"
Veteran California election-law attorney Tom Hiltachk called the extensive revision of a previously issued title and summary "highly unusual." Hiltachk suggested that the extent of the changes indicated that the attorney general might have been influenced by opponents of voter ID to gain political advantage, possibly based on public opinion research. Hiltachk also confirmed that California law permits the attorney general to issue a different title and summary after an initiative qualifies, but stipulated that the law requires a "true and impartial statement" that does not argue for or against a measure or create prejudice.
Proposition 39 would require government-issued identification for in-person voting and identifying information for mail voting. It would also provide voter ID cards upon request and require election officials to report on the verification of citizenship on voter rolls.
Critics argue that with Democrats holding all statewide constitutional offices and commanding majorities in the Legislature, a Democratic attorney general has significant discretion over the wording voters see on ballot measures. This discretion, they contend, is being used to campaign for or against measures rather than to impartially describe them.