Inland Assemblyman wants to make sure every bill gets a vote in Sacramento

A recent vote on the way legislation can be tabled in Sacramento has some lawmakers crying foul.

In December, the Assembly clarified its rules, allowing committee chairs to use individual discretion when deciding which bills will get hearings and which bills don’t. Previously, all bills were given at least a committee hearing date, which, in theory, gave the public a chance to comment or urge their Assembly representative to weigh in.  

Since Dec. 3, just after the vote, nearly 2,000 bills have been introduced in the Assembly. Though it’s unclear how many of those were held up as a result of the new rules, Assemblyman Jay Obernolte, R-Big Bear Lake says numerous bills have gone down without a committee vote or even public testimony.

That lack of debate, Obernolte said, is “very corrosive to the entire legislative process.”

That’s why, on May 6, Obernolte introduced House Resolution 35, which would require that all bills get a hearing.

But some lawmakers argue that the current rules aren’t new.

Committee chairs have always had the right to decide whether to set bills for committee vote or debate, said Kevin Liao, press secretary for Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon, D-Lakewood. Liao said the December move was simply to clarify existing practice and put the Assembly’s rules in line with those followed in the state Senate.

“Speaker Rendon believes that the concentration of power in politics — even within his own office — is not a good thing,” Liao said. “That’s why he strives to empower his colleagues to run committees in ways they best see fit.”

The rules, under House Resolution 1, passed along party lines 49 to 20, with one member not voting.

Under the old rules, which required every bill get a hearing date in committee, Obernolte said the bill’s author, and the public, had a chance to be heard.

Some of the bills that did not make it to a vote since December include reforms to the Department of Motor Vehicles, school spending and gun control.

Assemblyman Steven Choi, R-Irvine, said half of the 16 bills he’s introduced were shelved without a committee vote. Those included a proposal to require lawmakers accused of sexual misconduct to pay for their own attorneys, tax credits for new teachers who pay for classroom supplies out of pocket, and tax credits for property owners who rent out units at below-market rates to people at risk of becoming homeless.

“I would like to have at least a chance to present to committee members, so that they will have to vote ‘no’ and then need to defend (that vote) to their constituents when they go back to their districts,” Choi said.

Choi said being in the minority party in Sacramento makes it more challenging to get bills heard, but Obernolte noted the issue is bipartisan.

“Bills have been held without comment from both Republican and Democrat authors,” he said. “Some of the really, I think, good bills that have been withheld from hearings have been Democrat bills.”

Obernolte points to a bill from Assemblywoman Shirley Weber, D-San Diego, that would alter the funding formula for public schools to allow more money for students with the lowest test scores. Weber told CALMatters in April that this was the first time in her six years in office that a committee chair refused to hear one of her bills.

“Generally, even if the chair opposes a bill they will set the bill for a hearing. And then people can vote it up or down,” Weber told CALmatters.

Just because a bill was not heard this session, does not mean it’s dead, said Assemblyman Reginald Jones-Sawyer, Sr., D-Los Angeles, chair of the Public Safety Committee, which has heard 181 bills this session, more than any other committee except appropriations.

“Until next year, at the end of the two-year cycle, we should have that conversation about bills that are not heard,” he said. “Technically, they can be and probably most of them will be heard next year, in 2020.”

One of the bills held in Public Safety, introduced by Assemblywoman Laura Friedman, D-Glendale, would require gun owners to securely store their firearms in Department of Justice-approved devices.

Jones-Sawyer said he expects the committee will have a full discussion on that proposal next year.

“As a chair, if you believe that even if a bill has merit you can hold it and try to work with the author, with the advocates, and sometimes with the opposition, to try to get to a solution point,” Jones-Sawyer said.

“If a bill is heard and it doesn’t get enough votes, that bill is dead. For me, that’s worse.”

While Obernolte said he believes bills get held for a variety of reasons, he also believes political cover — protecting members from voting on controversial proposals — is part of the calculation.

“It’s clear that this rule change is affecting legislators from both parties,” he said. “I don’t see any reason why this practice shouldn’t end, and we shouldn’t go back to the rules that state that every bill will get a hearing.”