NOTE:  As provided in LFC policy, this report is intended only for use by the standing finance committees of the legislature.  The Legislative Finance Committee does not assume responsibility for the accuracy of the information in this report when used for other purposes.

 

The most recent FIR version (in HTML & Adobe PDF formats) is available on the Legislative Website.  The Adobe PDF version includes all attachments, whereas the HTML version does not.  Previously issued FIRs and attachments may be obtained from the LFC in Suite 101 of the State Capitol Building North.

 

 

F I S C A L   I M P A C T   R E P O R T

 

 

 

SPONSOR:

Coll

 

DATE TYPED:

1/30/03

 

HB

135

 

SHORT TITLE:

Candidate Party Affiliation

 

SB

 

 

 

ANALYST:

Chavez

 

APPROPRIATION

 

Appropriation Contained

Estimated Additional Impact

Recurring

or Non-Rec

Fund

Affected

FY03

FY04

FY03

FY04

 

 

 

 

$10,000.0

 

Non-Recurring

OSF/County

 

 

 

 

 

 

(Parenthesis ( ) Indicate Expenditure Decreases)

 

SOURCES OF INFORMATION

 

Secretary of State (SOS)

LFC Files

 

SUMMARY

 

     Synopsis of Bill

 

House Bill 135 provides for candidates to run in primary and general elections under one or multiple party designations, known as “fusion” in election parlance.

 

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS

 

No appropriation is contained in this bill.  However, according to the Secretary of State (SOS), only counties have voting systems capable of being programmed to count “fusion” votes.  The replacement of voting systems in the remainder of counties would cost approximately $10 million.  The cost would be paid by the counties but would have a current impact on state funds since the counties would purchase voting systems by asking the Board of Finance for funding to make these purchases.  A no interest loan would be issued to the counties and the state would get repayment in ten to twenty years.  The money available from the loans would come from the Voting Machine Revolving Fund which is currently at $4 million.

 

ADMINISTRATIVE IMPLICATIONS

 

The SOS estimates that the administrative implications would be moderate to severe for the State Bureau of Elections.  If many candidates choose this option, the SOS indicates that election night reporting and canvassing would take longer and involve a more complex process.

 

TECHNICAL ISSUES

 

On page three, the language on lines 10-13 are deleted (pertaining to the petition containing a statement that the voters signing the petition are residents of the state etc. to be represented by the office for which the person being nominated is a candidate) which applies to “Nomination by Minor Political Party Convention-Designated Nominees”.  However, on page 9, lines 20-24 indicate a signature shall not be counted if the person signing failed to provide information to determine that the person is a qualified voter of the state etc. to be represented by the office for which the person seeking the nomination is a candidate.  On page 10, lines 8-10 indicate the above procedure applies to candidates of minor political parties (since the language suggesting it does not apply to minor political parties is deleted lines 10-13).  It appears that either on Page 3, the language on lines 10-13 should not have been deleted, or the language on page 10, lines 10-13 should not have been deleted.

 

POSSIBLE QUESTIONS

 

  1. How will the ballots look?

 

  1. Will a candidate appear multiple times under each designation, or only once under multiple designations?

 

  1. How will ballots be counted? Will they be counted under the first designation or for each vote cast under a party designation?

 

FC/prr ;yr