Print 🖨

The Senate Committee on State Affairs met on February 27 to take up several bills. This report covers SB 578 (Zaffirini) and SB 2 (Hughes). The full agenda can be found here. A video of the hearing can be found here.

 

This report is intended to give you an overview and highlight the various topics taken up. It is not a verbatim transcript of the discussions but is based upon what was audible or understandable to the observer and the desire to get details out as quickly as possible with few errors or omissions.

 

Vote Outs

SB 578 (Zaffirini) (8 ayes, 0 nays)

SB 2 (Hughes) (7 ayes, 3 nays)

 

SB 578 (Zaffirini) Relating to the confidentiality of certain personal information of an applicant for or a person protected by a protective order

  • Zaffirini – Relates to confidentiality of certain personal information for a person protected by protective order
  • Makes a minor but important change, authorizes applicants to allow their counties to remain confidential

 

Bronwyn Blake, Texas Advocacy Project – For

  • This is a cleanup bill
  • The legislative intent was to keep people safe quickly and efficiently
  • Protective orders work, about 80% effective in preventing future violence
  • Frequently survivors chose to apply where their abusers are to keep their county confidential
  • In 2017 legislature allowed individuals to keep whole address confidential
  • This bill is the last step to enact what was supposed to happened in 2017

 

SB 578 voted favorably to the senate (8 ayes, 0 nays) and sent to local and uncontested calendars

 

SB 2 (Hughes) Relating to conduct constituting the criminal offense of illegal voting; increasing a criminal penalty

  • Hughes – Purpose of the bill is to clarify Mens Rea
  • Last year court of criminal appeals, it was illegal for felons to vote
  • Law was not written to be interpreted this way; intent is to clean it up
  • It returns the penalty to misdemeanor to second degree felony; what it was prior to 2021
    • During 87(1) the House amended SB 1 and made this change
  • Bill changes penalty to felony from class A misdemeanor
  • Zaffirini – Would you consider an amendment to add signs about violating the law to voting places?
    • Hughes – Yes, we can talk about it

 

Jonathan White, AGs Office

Geoff Barr, AGs Office

  • Here as resource witness for the members
  • Hughes – Can you walk us through the Mens Rea requirement?
    • Prior to Court of Criminal Appeals, if an individual votes knowing they were a felon, or a non-citizen they were committing the crime of illegal voting. The court of criminal appeals changed that, to show proof that a person had prior knowledge and knew they were voting illegally.
  • Hughes – How would you be able to prove that?
    • It would be a confession
  • Hughes – Short of a confession how would you go about proving that?
    • After this opinion it would be very hard to prove with circumstantial evidence.
  • Hughes – Before 2021, the offense for illegal voting was what?
    • It was a second-degree felony; it had been a third-degree felony back in 2012.
  • Hughes – what’s the current penalty stats for SB 1 as amended?
    • Class A Misdemeanor
  • Hughes – This bill would restore it to what it was before 2021 is that correct?
    • That is correct

 

Alex Mead, Election Judge – Oppose

  • Concerned about the change to the understanding of Mens Rea
  • Gave an example of a gentlemen that had an issue dealing with voting
  • Believes the law should be inherently just, it shouldn’t be left up to the prosecutors on who they wish to prosecute

 

Andrew Eller, Republican Executive Committee – For

  • The bill is restoring the penalty to where it used to be

 

Bob Green, Travis County Election Integrity – For

  • In support; notes DAs are refusing to prosecute misdemeanor offenses
  • Zaffirini – Do you think a person that made an honest mistake should have such a severe punishment?
    • There would be judicial discretion with honest mistakes
  • Zaffirini – Do you have suggestions to prevent someone that makes an honest mistake?
    • Posting large signs at voting areas

 

CJ Grisham, Self – For

  • Both parties engage in voter fraud; change to felony offense will sway people to follow the law

 

Emily French, Self – Oppose

  • Under current law prosecutors must show that there was intent to cast an illegal vote
  • Could be hundreds if not thousands of people who end up getting tried
  • Hughes- In the case of Krystal Mason, she pled guilty in federal court to tax fraud; encourage people to look at that case

 

Veronic Warms, Self – Oppose

  • Oppose bill; since the change last session to SB 1, there has been no increase in voter fraud

 

Bill King, Retired Judge – Oppose

  • The existing law is clear, the change in the law makes it complicated

 

Karla Fleming Jones, Delta Sigma Theta – Oppose

  • Bill removes the standard of intent; this is a waste of taxpayer resources

 

Adona Griffith, Self – Oppose

  • Oppose the bill; are those whose vote would now be illegal under this bill
  • Bettencourt- There is no intent of this bill to commit people that were at once felons

 

Carl Jones, Self – Oppose

  • Bill is reversal of SB 1; people targeted here are felons and minorities

 

Holly Pendergast, Self – Oppose

  • Concerned about the wording of the bill; this is not a good use of money or time

 

Susana Caraza, Self – Oppose

  • Second degree felonies are very harsh, illegal voting should not be in the same category

 

John Turner, Self – Oppose

  • HR 123 did a good job of explaining the Mens Rea, this bill removes Mens Rea
  • Zaffirini – How do you respond the criticism to the question, ignorance of the law is no excuse?
    • Doesn’t apply to this case; should have to know that you aren’t able to vote in this circumstance; like how you should have to know if property is stolen to be convicted under theft statute

 

Elden Pearson, Self – Oppose

  • Should account for good faith mistakes, bill passage would mean those making mistakes would face felony

 

Francesca Lakey, Self – Oppose

  • Law as it exists is fine, provides sufficient consequence for illegal voting; punishes people for mistakes
  • Proposed punishment is disproportionate to the offense

 

Charles DeVore, Texas Public Policy Foundation – For

  • Felony disenfranchisement has long history; felons who had voted before their time was up, is a little less than 10%
  • In many states felons are disqualified from voting perpetually
  • Many cases are prosecuted by the AG, local jurisdictions often don’t have
  • Bettencourt – How many states have termination of voting rights permanently?
    • Haven’t checked, Florida recently changed

 

Bradley Hodges, Self – For

  • 2-25 felony is fair for this offense, standards promote accountability and transparency
  • Need to adopt similar standards to those handling or mishandling ballots

 

Sydney Davison Self – For

  • Concerned more about huge cases of illegal voting not being prosecuted
  • At risk when working in Travis County because of Poll Chief software, CEO was arrested for PII
  • Bettencourt – Software tracks pay for people, CEO was arrested or charged for theft of personal info?
    • Info was on a server in China
  • Bettencourt – Software is identifying people for payment and concerned data could be misused?
    • Yes, also tracked data on children, social security numbers, etc.
  • Bettencourt – Do you know this is happening, or you think this is happening?
    • CEO was arrested because data was on a server in China

 

Sharon Edwards, Self – For

  • The fact that we have a problem isn’t a secret; despite laws passed, still have a problem; need a severe penalty to get people’s attention
  • DAs have not shown much interest

 

David Stein, Self – For

  • Correcting something changed last session and restoring felony convictions; nothing new
  • Need to consider voter whose vote was stolen and wasn’t counted
  • Hughes – Crime was a felony for 50 years and lowered to misdemeanor in 2021 is that correct?
    • Correct
  • Hughes – Is this something folks at home care about?
    • Yes

 

Claudia Torres-Yanez, Self – Oppose

  • Not a crisis level situation comparable to real crisis in state like mental health & gun violence
  • Heavy handed policy that could impact a person’s ability to support themselves; need to improve voting education, ridiculous we don’t have online voter registration
  • Menendez – You help students register to vote, correct? You can register at 17 and then vote at 18 on election day?
    • Can register within 2 months of 18 and vote on election day
  • Menendez – If a student gets the date off by a month, and then a 17-year-old votes, would the student commit a felony if they vote?
    • Sounds like the type of mistake that could be punished by a felony
  • Menendez – Agrees, can saddle young people with felonies for these types of mistakes; can also impact employment with felony charges

 

Karen Marshall, Self – For

  • Appreciate criminal intent aspect of the bill, requires people to be aware of ineligibility to vote, DAs and judges would not charge and convict

 

Gary Bledsoe, NAACP – Oppose

  • Shouldn’t be discussed as good or bad public policy, should be discussed as clear manifestation of racial bias; highlights importance of Mens Rea, criminalizes conduct when people thought they had a right to vote
  • Bettencourt – There is absolutely no racial intent of this bill whatsoever, felons should have voting rights restored, many other states do not; bill is to restore prior penalties
  • Menendez – In addition to changing penalty, also removes Mens Rea requirement, effectively imposes negligence or strict liability standard, thus would affect populations of color much more so?
    • Absolutely; on SB 1, an election integrity group produced a document of people being investigated, vast majority being people of color, one of the reasons we are concerned
    • Looking at previous cases to see what the effects will be
  • Menendez – Saying with this bill that this crime is worse than other severe felonies?
    • Punishment doesn’t fit the crime; main reason for law is to deter conduct, but many wouldn’t be aware they are in violation so there is no deterrent effect
  • Menendez – Potentially effects people who are afraid they’ll make a mistake and not show up
    • Will have chilling effect on people of color, have laws that allow people to be prosecuted in any jurisdiction

 

Don Garner, Texas Faith & Freedom Coalition – For

  • Support the bill; brings enforceability back to these kinds of issues

 

Jocelyn Sanchez, Deeds Not Words – Oppose

  • Doesn’t allow for guilt to be determined in a way that can be prosecuted; will discourage young people from voting while turnout is already embarrassingly low
  • Tax dollars would be better spent clarifying voting process

 

SB 2 voted favorably to the senate (7 ayes, 3 nays)