55B - RESO - OPPOSE CA PROP 32 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

PROP POLITICAL CONTRIBUTIONS BY PAYROLL DEDUCTION. 32 CONTRIBUTIONS TO CANDIDATES. INITIATIVE STATUTE. ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST • Otber Political Spending. Some political spending is not considered a political contribution or an independent expenditure. This broad category includes "member communications"-spending by an organization to communicate political endorsements to its members, employees, or shareholders. This spending is not limited by state law and need not be disclosed to election officials. Payroll Deductions. Under limited circumstances, employers may withhold money from an employee's paycheck. The withheld funds are called "payroll deductions." Some common payroll deductions include deductions for Social Security, income taxes, medical plans, and voluntary charitable contributions. Union Dues and Fees. Approximately 2.5 million workers in California are represented by a labor union. Unions represent employees in the collective bargaining process, by which they negotiate terms and conditions of employment with employers. Generally, unions pay for their activities with money raised from (1) dues charged to union members and (2) fair share fees paid by non-union members who the union represents in the collective bargaining process. In many cases, employers automatically deduct these dues and fees from their employees' paychecks and transfer the money to the unions. Payroll Deductions Used to Finance Political Spending. Many unions use some of the funds that they receive from payroll deductions to support activities not directly related to the collective bargaining process. These expenditures may include political contributions and independent expenditures-as well as spending to communicate political views to union members. Non-union members may opt out from having their fair share fees used to pay for this political spending a,id other spending not related to collective bargaining. Other than unions, relatively few organizations currently use payroll deductions to finance political spending in California, PROPOSAL The measure changes state campaign finance laws to restrict state and local campaign spending by: • Public and private sector labor unions. • Corporations. • Government contractors. For text of Proposition 32, see page 93. CONTINUED These restrictions do not affect campaign spending for federal offices such as the President of the United States and members of Congress. Bans Use of Payrol: Deductions to Finance Spending for Political Purposes. The measure prohibits ,nni•??,s, corporations, government contracts .s, and state and local government employers from spending money deducted from an employee's paycheck for "political purposes." Under the measure, this term would include political contributions, independent expenditures, member communications related to campaigns, and other expenditures to influence voters. This measure would not affect unions' existing authority to use payroll deductions to pay for other activities, including collective bargaining and political spending in federal campaigns. Prohibits Political Contributions by Corporations and Unions. The measure prohibits corporations and unions from making political contributions to candidates. That is, they could not make contributions (1) directly to candidates or (2) to committees that then make contributions to candidates. This prohibition, however, does not affect a corporation or union's ability to spend money on independent expenditures. Limits Authority of f Government Contractors to Contribute to Elected Officials. The measure prohibits go -rnmcnt contractors (including public sector lab,)r unions with collective bargaining contracts) from making contributions to elected officials who play a role in awarding their contracts. Specifically, government contractors could not make contributions to these elected officials from the time their contract is being considered until the date their contract expires. FISCAL EFFECTS The state would experience increased costs to investigate alleged violations of the law and to respond to requests for advice. In addition, state and local governments would experience some other increased administrative costs. Combined, these costs could exceed $1 million annually. Analysis I 29 55B-6