Make Secretary of State nonpartisan

Summary#

ACA 23 would amend the California Constitution to make the Secretary of State’s office nonpartisan. Its stated legal effect is to apply existing rules for nonpartisan offices to the Secretary of State; the bill does not change the office’s term or election date. It is introduced and is not law: it would need approval by two-thirds of each house of the Legislature and approval by voters.

  • A political party or party central committee could not nominate a candidate for Secretary of State.
  • A candidate’s party preference could not appear on the ballot for that office.
  • The Secretary of State would join the offices already listed as nonpartisan, including the Superintendent of Public Instruction and judicial, school, county, and city offices.

What it means for you#

  • Voters: The ballot would not show candidates’ party preferences for Secretary of State. The bill does not change when or for what term the office is elected.
  • Candidates and political parties: Parties and party central committees could not formally nominate Secretary of State candidates. The bill does not say candidates could not belong to a party.
  • General public: The bill changes the office’s election rules, not the Secretary of State’s duties or services.

Money#

No cost information is in the available material.

  • The bill does not appropriate money. The materials do not estimate any administrative or election costs.

What is unclear#

  • The bill does not state when the change would take effect.
  • It does not explain how candidates would be selected or what other role, if any, parties could have in elections for this office.
  • The materials do not estimate any costs of implementing the change.

Case for#

  • The bill would make the Secretary of State’s office nonpartisan, like the other offices named in the Constitution.
  • A possible argument for the bill is that voters would choose among candidates without party preferences printed on the ballot.

Case against#

  • Voters would lose party preference as information on the ballot when choosing a Secretary of State.
  • A possible trade-off is that parties and party central committees could not formally nominate candidates, while the bill does not explain what candidate-selection process would apply instead.