Padilla, Alex SoS Sen

---

prev node state assembly

prop 59

Late yesterday the California Legislature filed for the Court to rehear HJTA vPadilla and Restore 49 to the November 2016 ballot as the Court should have done in its January 4th ruling. The filing became official earlier today.

--> , Becerra previously served as the 33rd attorney general of California from 2017 to 2021 and as a U.S. representative from California from 1993 to 2017

MIT engr degree but anti-immigr prop 187 --> LA city cncl, youngest prez

---

AI Overview

The Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association (HJTA) has been involved in multiple notable legal actions naming California's Secretary of State. The most prominent cases involving HJTA and former Secretary of State Alex Padilla include a 2016 constitutional dispute over an advisory ballot measure and a 2020 taxpayer lawsuit over a $35 million state contract. [1, 2]

HJTA v. Padilla (2016)

The Issue: The HJTA challenged the California Legislature's authority to place Proposition 49, an advisory (nonbinding) ballot measure, on the 2014 ballot. The measure asked voters if Congress should overturn the U.S. Supreme Court's Citizens United ruling. [1]

The Ruling: In a 6-1 decision, the California Supreme Court ruled in favor of Padilla and the State, holding that the Legislature is constitutionally authorized to use the ballot to consult with the public on important matters. [1, 2]

Further Details: Read the full written opinion in Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Assn. v. Padilla via Stanford's Supreme Court of California Clinic.

HJTA v. Padilla (2020-2021)

The Issue: The HJTA filed a lawsuit against Padilla to prevent the expenditure of state funds on a $35 million advertising/voter outreach contract. The HJTA argued the contract lacked budget authority and violated state procurement and public contract codes. [1, 2]
Resolution: Before the lawsuit could fully resolve, the California Legislature passed Assembly Bill 85 in early 2021 as a trailer bill, which retroactively authorized the funding and effectively closed the controversy over the invoice. [1]
Further Details: Read the initial Complaint Document hosted by the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association.

---

beware

Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association v. Padilla

HowardJarvis Taxpayers Association v. Padillawas whether the California Legislature exceeded its authority by enacting Senate Bill 1272, which placed an advisory question (known as Proposition 49) on the November 2014 ballot soliciting the views of California voters on whether to amend the U.S. Constitution to overturn the U.S Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United v. FEC.

Case Summary

On July 3, 2014, the California Legislature enacted Senate Bill 1272, placing an advisory question (known as Proposition 49) on the November 2014 ballot soliciting the views of California voters on whether to amend the U.S. Constitution to overturn the U.S Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United v. FEC. Shortly thereafter, the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association (“HJTA”) sought to remove Proposition 49 from the ballot, arguing that the Legislature had exceeded its authority in placing it there.

On August 11, 2014, the California Supreme Court issued a writ of mandamus ordering the Secretary of State to remove the measure from the ballot, pending full briefing and argument. Although HJTA’s challenges to the validity of Proposition 49 arose under the state Constitution, Justice Goodwin Liu filed a concurring opinion that relied, in part, on federal constitutional principles to support removing Proposition 49 from the 2014 ballot, arguing that advisory measures like Proposition 49 are incompatible with the system of representative democracy chosen by our nation’s Founders.

On January 28, 2015, Constitutional Accountability Center filed an friend-of-the-court-brief brief in the California Supreme Court in support of the California Legislature, countering Justice Liu’s arguments and demonstrating that there is no federal aversion to a state legislature’s seeking the input of the people in choosing whether to invoke the amendment process set out in Article V of the U.S. Constitution. Not only did the Framers write Article V against a backdrop of popular control of state legislatures, but advisory measures like Proposition 49 are consistent with the principle of popular sovereignty at the core of the U.S. Constitution. Accordingly, ballot measures have been used throughout our nation’s history – including in California – to promote constitutional change, ranging from the use of advisory measures in the efforts leading to the ratification of the Seventeenth Amendment, the use of such measures in the push to end Prohibition, and their current role in modern day efforts to address the consequences of Citizens United. With our brief, we urged the California Supreme Court to uphold the California Legislature’s authority to solicit the views of California voters on an important topic of public concern – whether to overturn Citizens Unitedby constitutional amendment.

The California Supreme Court heard oral argument on October 6, 2015. On January 4, 2016, the court – in a 6-1decision, with a concurrence by Justice Liu – reversed course and upheld the constitutionality of Proposition 49, recognizing, as CAC had argued, that advisory ballot measures like Proposition 49 are consistent with the U.S. Constitution’s text and history, the principle of popular sovereignty at the Constitution’s core, and the use of similar measures as part of other constitutional reform movements throughout American history.

Case Timeline

January 28, 2015

CAC files amicus brief in Supreme Court of California

Supreme Court of California Amicus Brief

Brief Authors

not a sponsor 2019-20 116th

https://legiscan.com/US/bill/HJR48/2019

---

alyson Sincavage

Senate Judiciary Committee Immigration, Citizenship and Border Safety Subcommittee (April 2021-), Chief Counsel, Democratic/Staff Director

nova Southeastern University Shepard Broad Law Center - JD (2007-2010)
Florida Institute of Technology - MS, clinical psychology (2005-2007)
University of Florida (Gainesville) - BS, psychology (2001-2005)

senate Judiciary Committee Immigration, Citizenship and Border Safety Subcommittee (April 2021-)

Sen. Alex Padilla (**D**-CA)

Chief Counsel, Democratic/Staff Director

Sen. Tim Kaine (**D**-VA) (Aug. 2020-April 2021)

Chief Counsel/Senior Policy Adviser

Sen. Tom Udall (**D**-NM) (2020)

General Counsel/Senior Policy Adviser

Sen. Tom Udall (**D**-NM) (Aug. 2018-2020)

Counsel

American Immigration Lawyers Association (2018)

Senior Legislative Counsel

American Immigration Lawyers Association (2015-Jan. 2018)

Legislative Associate

ctr am progress ?

https://www.americanprogress.org/person_tax/alyson-sincavage/

Sincavage, Alyson (2009) "The War Comes Home: How Congress' Failure to Address Veterans' Mental Health Has Led to Violence in America," Nova Law Review: Vol. 33: Iss. 2, Article 7.

Available at: https://nsuworks.nova.edu/nlr/vol33/iss2/7

From: Brian Carr [mailto:bc899899@comcast.net]

Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2022 2:18 PM

To: 'Senator Alex Padilla'

Subject: RE: Confirmation of receipt of letter dated July 24, 2021 from Move to Amend (HJR 48)

Dear Senator Padilla,

Thank you for the response. I appreciate your support for the Disclose Act and S.J. Res 25., both excellent measures.

In regard to HJR 48, I do understand that it is pending in the House of Representatives. My request is that you introduce or commit to support a Senate version of that measure. Doing so would bring this crucial issue to the public’s attention and move it forward. As you know, the majority of the California Congressional delegation, as well as the California Democratic Party, support HJR 48. Of course passing a constitutional amendment is a long term project and requires extensive political and public support. Progress in the senate is the next logical step. I would ask that you would respond to this specific request.

As a member of the national group Move to Amend, I know that supporters of HJR 48 have made many attempts to contact and meet with. It would provide an opportunity for you to ask any questions, or voice concerns, if you have them, about the proposed amendment. We, therefore respectfully request that you indicate a time that would be convenient for you to meet.

Respectfully,

Brian Carr

San Jose, California

12 6 22

Thank you for writing to share your thoughts regarding campaign finance reform. I appreciate hearing from you.

Ever since the Supreme Court ruled against limiting campaign spending by corporations and nonprofit organizations in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission in 2010, dark money and super PACs have polluted our political system. America desperately needs to empower citizens by building a 21st-century campaign finance system that increases the power of small donors and reaffirms Congress’ authority to regulate money in politics.

As your Senator, I have worked to push pack against Citizens United. That is why I am a proud original cosponsor of the “Democracy Is Strengthened by Casting Light On Spending in Elections (DISCLOSE) Act of 2021” (S.443), introduced by Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), which would enhance transparency and accountability in our political system and help curb the influence of dark money in our politics. Among its many provisions, this bill would require organizations spending money in elections to disclose donors who contribute more than $10,000 in an election cycle and strengthen disclosure rules for political advertisements. I am also a cosponsor of the “Democracy for All Amendment” (S.J.Res.25), introduced by Senator Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), which would empower Congress and states to set reasonable campaign finance rules and limit corporate spending. S.443 is currently awaiting consideration by the full Senate, and S.J.Res.25 is currently awaiting consideration by the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, of which I am a member.

I understand that you support H.J.Res.48, also known as the “We the People Amendment,” which addresses the issues of corporate personhood and dark money in politics through an amendment to the United States Constitution. This resolution is currently awaiting consideration by the House of Representatives, of which I am not a member.

Please know that I appreciate hearing your perspective on this issue, and I will keep your thoughts in mind as I continue working to reform our campaign finance system.

Once again, thank you for writing. Should you have any other questions or comments, please call my Washington, D.C. office at (202) 224-3553 or visit my website at padilla.senate.gov. You can also follow me on Facebook, and Twitter, and you can sign up for my email newsletter at padilla.senate.gov/newsletter.

we are asked to contact Senator Padilla now and request that he introduce a companion bill to HJR 48 in the Senate....Good luck and thanks for all you do,

Thanks, Judith

https://www.padilla.senate.gov/contact/contact-form/

david montez legal

josh esquivel

Monday Feb 8, 2021, Invisible SF members joined over forty Indivisible members from groups across CA to meet with Josh Esquivel, policy director for Senator Padilla in Washington DC. The meeting was organized by our friends at Indivisible East Bay. ... He is also supportive of S1, which is the Senate version of the “For the People Act” (HR1).

Senator Padilla is also supportive of the John Lewis Voting Rights Act,

joshua_esquivel@padilla.senate.gov

112 Hart Senate Office Building Washington, DC 20510	112 Hart Senate Office Building Washington, DC 20510
Phone:	202-224-3553
Fax:	202-224-2200

112 Hart Senate Office Building

Washington, DC 20510

112 Hart Senate Office Building

Washington, DC 20510

Phone:

202-224-3553

Fax:

202-224-2200

Joshua Peter Esquivel

Yale University - Bachelor's (2011)
Westlake High School (Thousands Oaks, Calif.) - Diploma (2009)

Employment History

Sen. Alex Padilla (**D**-CA) (Jan. 2021-)

Legislative Director

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (**D**-CA) (Feb. 2019-Jan. 2021)

Legislative Director

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (**D**-CA) (2017-Feb. 2019)

Deputy Legislative Director

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (**D**-CA) (April 2014-2017)

Legislative Assistant

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (**D**-CA) (Oct. 2011-April 2014)

Legislative Correspondent

Rep. Brad Sherman (**D**-CA) (2009)

Intern

Chief of Staff: David Montes
Legis. Dir.: Joshua Esquivel
Comm. Dir.: Vanessa Valdivia
Email, work:

vanessa_valdivia@padilla.senate.gov

UFW cedar pt nursery amicus?

BRIEF OF SENATORS SHELDON WHITEHOUSE,

JEFF MERKLEY, RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, CORY

BOOKER, AND ALEX PADILLA, IN SUPPORT

OF RESPONDENTS

https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/20/20-107/169590/20210222160032394_20-107bsacSenatorsSheldonWhitehouseJeffMerkleyRichardBlumenthalCoryBookerAndAlexPadilla%20Corrected%20Brief.pdf

https://calmatters.org/politics/2020/12/california-senator-padilla-harris-replacement/

After Joe Biden picked Sen. Kamala Harris as his vice presidential running mate in August, the parlor game of choice for California’s most politically plugged-in was: Who will Gov. Gavin Newsom pick to fill her vacant Senate seat?

Alex Padilla — California’s secretary of state, a Democrat from Pacoima, loyal Newsom ally and a Latino in a state that has never had a member of that largest ethnic group serve as senator — was a top pick among the predictions of insiders. The governor announced his choice in late December and made the appointment official today.

But for many Californians — perhaps the majority — Padilla’s appointment is likely to elicit more curiosity than self-congratulation, less “I knew it” and more “who knew?”

If you’re acquainting yourself with Padilla for the first time, here are a few takeaways from his California CV.

California’s #1 turnout booster

Like surfing, Silicon Valley and unaffordable housing, California has madeeasy access to the ballot box its calling card. While many GOP-run states have embraced voter ID requirements and have balked at the prospect of sending ballots by mail, we’ve gone in the opposite direction.

Padilla can take credit for a lot of that.

Consider these recent changes to the state’s voting rules:

Eligible adults are automatically registered to vote when they apply for a driver’s license — though California’s new motor voter program hit a few speed bumps along the way

16- and 17-year-olds can pre-register to vote, ensuring that they are automatically added to the voter rolls when they turn 18

If a registered voter’s official signature doesn’t match the one they put on their mail-in ballot envelope, counties are now required to give them the opportunity to try again

Before the pandemic made it a statewide practice, over a dozen counties sent ballots to every active, registered voter — whether they signed up to vote by mail or not

California’s 2020 primary was bumped up from June to March, giving the state’s voters an earlier say in this year’s presidential contest

All of that is the result of legislation sponsored by Padilla. And as head of the national coalition of Democratic state election administrators, he has also been one of the most prominent evangelists for California’s election model on the national stage.

Leaving behind an ethically dicey $35 million bill

With mammoth turnout expected in an election like no other, staff inside the Secretary of State’s office spent the summer of 2020 scrambling to inform voters about the what, when, where and how of voting.

That’s why they inked a contract in September with the political consulting firm, SKDKnickerbocker, to run a statewide PR campaign called Vote Safe California. The total tab: $35 million.

That contract got Padilla into hot water with Republicans. SKDKnickerbocker has longstanding ties to the Democratic Party and was a client of president-elect Joe Biden, then a candidate in the election the firm had been hired to promote. GOP members of Congress launched an investigation and the conservative Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association took Padilla to court.

As CalMatters reported, the contract also didn’t go over well with the state’s Democratic controller, Betty Yee, who is responsible for approving all state government payments. According to Yee’s staff, Padilla’s office planned to draw the necessary $35 million from a pot of cash that was supposed to fund county government voter outreach operations. In a letter Padlla wrote to Yee, he argued that the SKDKnickerbocker campaign was being conducted “on behalf of counties.”

It’s unclear who will ultimately be left holding the bag.

Patron saint of tote bags

Padilla hasn’t just changed the way Californians vote. As a state Senator, he’s changed the way we shop too.

In 2014, Gov. Jerry Brown signed what was arguably the most controversial bill of Padilla’s eight-year legislative tenure, outlawing single-use plastic bags at grocery stores.

The statewide ban wasn’t enacted without a fight. Padilla drew flack from fellow Los Angeles Democrats who worried the bill would harm a major plastic bag manufacturer south of downtown.

Conservative critics piled on, both in California and nationally, highlighting Padilla’s effort as a measure par excellence of California nanny statism. The Pacoima senator made an easy target for the libertarian critique. Prior legislative efforts of his included a successful bill to force chain restaurants to list calorie counts on their menus and an unsuccessful one to ban the sale of tobacco products near schools.

Padilla brushed off the concerns about the bag ban during a speech on the Senate floor in 2014.

When local governments have introduced plastic bag bans, he said, “the sky does not fall and consumers adapt and life goes on.”

Even after the bill was signed — two years after it was first introduced — it didn’t become law immediately. In 2016, plastic bag manufacturers took to the ballot to override Padilla’s ban. But that campaign failed. The cloth bags you might store in your closet or in the trunk of your car are testament to that and to Padilla’s work.

The first senator of Generation 187

Like an entire generation of young Latinos, including former Senate leader Kevin De León, Padilla insists he had no intention of getting involved in politics until 1994.

That year, Proposition 187 was on the ballot, a measure to exclude undocumented immigrants from all non-emergency public services, including public education.

Padilla said it was the naked nativism of that campaign — and of Gov. Pete Wilson’s, who was running for re-election as a supporter of 187 — that drew him to Demoratic party activism. The son of Mexican immigrants who grew up in the San Fernando Valley, Padilla told CalMatters in 2018 that he felt that he “had to get involved so that families like mine, communities like mine, would not continue to be scapegoated or targeted.”

Padilla was in early 20’s at the time. Fresh out of college with a big ticket bachelor’s degree, his parents were not immediately on board with his turn to politics. As he recalled it: “Wait a minute, four years of MIT engineering school…for what?”

He started behind the scenes. He worked the campaigns and made friends with up-and-coming members of the Legislature, including Tony Cárdenas, now a congressman. He served as an aide to Sen. Dianne Feinstein. In 1998, he finally ran for a seat of his own and a year later, at 26, he was elected to the Los Angeles City Council. At 28, he became the council’s youngest president — a feat not just for Padilla, but for the growing coalition of Latino Democrats in the valley’s northeast.

On the Los Angeles City Council, Padilla had a knack for bringing “consensus and calm and peace,” said Harvey Englander, a longtime lobbyist and public affairs consultant in Los Angeles. “It’s not that he didn’t make waves but he didn’t make enemies.”

Now, a quarter century after California voters passed Prop. 187, Padilla is becoming the state’s first Latino U.S. senator.

A friend of Newsom’s

Padilla’s alliance with Newsom began as a marriage of convenience.

When Newsom announced his bid to run for governor in 2010, challenging the elder statesman and front runner Jerry Brown, the San Francisco mayor knew he needed to make inroads in southern California — particularly with Latino voters.

And so the gubernatorial hopeful picked Padilla, a newly elected state senator and a rising star in the party, to help him do just that.

Newsom’s bid was a long shot that predictably failed. He dropped his campaign before Brown even officially announced his own run, opting instead to campaign for lieutenant governor. But Newsom was a rising star in his own right and Padilla’s early support gave the young senator a prominent role in a statewide campaign. It also earned him an ally on the rise.

In 2017, when Newsom decided to run for governor again, Padilla once again offered his endorsement, supporting the lieutenant governor over Antonio Villaraigosa, who had served as Los Angeles mayor when Padilla was on the council.

That loyalty seems to have paid off.

https://www.alternet.org/2020/12/oan-doubles-down-on-election-conspiracy-theories-while-facing-possible-defamation-lawsuit-report/

One American News, like Newsmax TV, has gone out of its way to promote the baseless conspiracy theory that President Donald Trump, not President-elect Joe Biden, really won the 2020 presidential election. Two companies that have been targeted by far-right election conspiracy theorists include Dominion Voting Systems and Smartmatic, both of which specialize in election technology. And journalist Kelsey Vlamis, in an article published by Business Insider on Christmas Day 2020, reports that OAN has been doubling down on election conspiracy theories while being threatened with a defamation lawsuit by Dominion.

According to Vlamis, "In response to threats of a defamation lawsuit, the One America News Network is leaning further into some election conspiracy theories that the network has featured on its shows. Dominion Voting Systems previously sent OAN letters threatening to sue, accusing the network of spreading the unsubstantiated conspiracy theory that the election technology company manipulated votes in favor of President-elect Joe Biden in the November general election."

Dominion, Vlamis notes, "asked the network to save any documents or correspondence related to Dominion." And OAN, according to Vlamis, "responded by requesting Dominion keep records of certain documents so the network can 'preserve its own claims and defenses in the event of litigation.' The conservative news network sent similar letters to Smartmatic, another election technology company."

Dominion has been a target of far-right attorney, conspiracy theorist and Trump supporter Sidney Powell, who made the baseless claim that Dominion's voting technology was used to help Biden steal the election just as it gave the late President Hugo Chávez an unfair advantage in Venezuela — and Dominion has responded that its technology has never even been used in that South American country. Dominion has filed a lawsuit against Trump's campaign and Powell.

In a late November press release, Dominion explained, "Dominion has no ties to the Venezuelan government, nor any other foreign government, including China and Iran. Dominion has never participated in any elections in Venezuela and has no connection or relationship with the now deceased former Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chávez. Other companies have serviced elections in Venezuela, but Dominion is not one of them."

On Christmas Eve Day, Vlamis reports, OAN asked Smartmatic to "save any correspondence between Smartmatic CEO Antonio Mugica and a number of individuals, including former president of Venezuela, Hugo Chávez, and California Secretary of State Alex Padilla.The president's allies have also claimed, without evidence, that Smartmatic was working with the socialist Venezuelan government and Chávez, who died in 2013, to disrupt the U.S. presidential election."

Vlamis notes, "In addition to OAN, Dominion has sent letters to Fox News and Newsmax with threats to sue for defamation, as well as conservative media figures like Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh, among others."

FROM YOUR SITE ARTICLES

Biography

Email editor@ballotpedia.org to notify us of updates to this biography.

Padilla earned his B.S. in mechanical engineering from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 1994. He is a 1995 graduate of the Coro Fellowship Program in Leadership and Public Affairs.

Padilla's professional experience includes working as a staffer, political director or campaign manager for a variety of Democratic politicians in California, including Dianne Feinstein, Richard Alarcon, Gilbert Cedillo and Tony Cardenas. In 2005 he was elected and served as the president of the League of California Cities, and is a member of the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials.[4]

In August 2012, he was included in a list of 20 Latino political rising stars compiled by the San Francisco Chronicle.[5]

Political career

2021 - Present: U.S. Senator from California
2015 - 2021: California Secretary of State
2006 - 2014: State Senator from California State Senate District 20
1999 - 2006: Los Angeles City Councilmember
- 2001-2006: President
...
||

[show]Alex Padilla Campaign Contributions

2012

Padilla was not up for election to the California State Senate in 2012. During that election cycle, Padilla raised a total of $8,680.

[show]California State Senate 2012 election - campaign contributions

2010

In 2010, Padilla raised $1,193,644 in contributions.[20]

His four largest contributors were:

Donor	Amount
AT&T	$13,700
Electrical Workers Local 18	$12,000
Southwest Regional Council Of Carpenters	$11,600
Operating Engineers Local 3	$8,900

2006

In 2006 Padilla raised $1,947,933 in campaign donations. His top five donors are listed below.[21]

Donor	Amount
AT&T	$14,300
California Medical Association	$13,400
AFSCME California	$11,700
Southwest Regional Council of Carpenters	$9,200
Plumbers Local 78	$8,500

Noteworthy events

Response to June 2017 request for voter rolls

See also: State government responses to the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity On June 29, 2017, the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, which had been created by President Donald Trump on May 11, requested information on registered voters from all 50 states dating back to 2006. The states were given until July 14 to respond. On June 29, Secretary Padilla announced that the state would refuse to provide the requested information to the commission.

“	I will not provide sensitive voter information to a commission that has already inaccurately passed judgment that millions of Californians voted illegally...California's participation would only serve to legitimize the false and already debunked claims of massive voter fraud made by the President, the Vice President, and Mr. Kobach.[22]	”
—Secretary Alex Padilla[23]	—Secretary Alex Padilla[23]	—Secretary Alex Padilla[23]

State legislative career

- ##### :{

- ##### :{

- Information about Padilla's committee assigments and legislative scorecards (click to expand)

Committee assignments

2013-2014

At the beginning of the 2013 legislative session, Padilla served on the following committees:

[hide]California committee assignments, 2013
• Appropriations
• Business, Professions, and Economic Development
• Elections and Constitutional Amendments
• Energy, Utilities and Communications, Chair
• Governmental Organization
• Labor and Industrial Relations
• Fairs, Allocation, and Classification
• Legislative Budget
• Joint Rules

[

In the 2011-2012 legislative session, Padilla served on these committees:

[show]California committee assignments, 2011

2009-2010

In the 2009-2010 legislative session, Padilla served on these committees:

[show]California committee assignments, 2009

Scorecards

A scorecard evaluates a legislator’s voting record. Its purpose is to inform voters about the legislator’s political positions. Because scorecards have varying purposes and methodologies, each report should be considered on its own merits. For example, an advocacy group’s scorecard may assess a legislator’s voting record on one issue while a state newspaper’s scorecard may evaluate the voting record in its entirety.

Ballotpedia is in the process of developing an encyclopedic list of published scorecards. Some states have a limited number of available scorecards or scorecards produced only by select groups. It is Ballotpedia’s goal to incorporate all available scorecards regardless of ideology or number.

Click here for an overview of legislative scorecards in all 50 states. To contribute to the list of California scorecards, email suggestions to editor@ballotpedia.org.

2014

In 2014, the California State Legislature was in session from January 6 to August 30.

- - California Chamber of Commerce

Legislators are scored on their votes on bills supported or opposed by the chamber.

- - California Civil Liberties Council

Legislators are scored by the California Civil Liberties Council on their votes on "bills related to due process, privacy rights, equal protection, and criminal justice."

- - California Clean Money Action Scorecard

Legislators are scored by California Clean Money Action on their votes on bills "to limit the undue influence of Big Money in politics in California."

- - California Environmental Justice Alliance

Legislators are scored on their votes on bills related to environmental issues.

- - California Labor Federation

Legislators are scored on their votes on issues related to labor.

- - California League of Conservation Voters

Legislators are scored on their votes on environmental issues.

- - Clean Water Action

Legislators are scored on their votes on bills related to water policy.

- - California State Student Association

Legislators are scored by the California State Student Association "on their votes on bills addressing issues like improving the Cal Grant program, use of pre-loaded debit cards to issue financial aid, and increasing civic engagement and voter registration among college students."