Assembly OKs Bill to Revert to June Primary Except for Presidential Races

SACRAMENTO â€”  A measure to move state primary elections from March to June--but keep the March date for presidential primaries--cleared the Assembly on Monday despite opposition from elections officials and politicians who said it would confuse voters.

Also, in an effort to get around a court ruling that threw out the state’s “Son of Sam� law, the Assembly approved a measure that would allow victims to sue criminals who profit by writing about their crimes. And an Assembly committee killed legislation to raise the smoking age from 18 to 21, possibly dealing the idea a death blow for the time being, as legislators entered the final week of the lawmaking year.

The June primary bill, SB 1975 by Sen. Ross Johnson (R-Irvine), would move the statewide election back to early summer, where it was before being bumped up to spring so Californians would have more say in the selection of presidential candidates. Supporters say the later primary would boost public participation and give challengers a fairer shot against incumbents.

Presidential primaries would still take place in March, however, and in those years a second election for legislators would be held in June--a situation that Republican and Democratic opponents said would waste taxpayer money and possibly lead to even lower turnouts.

“When you talk about depressed turnouts, it might have something to do with us changing elections every two years,� said Assemblyman Rod Pacheco (R-Riverside).

Nonetheless, the measure passed the Assembly on a 41-13 vote, with support from an unusual mix of Republicans and Democrats. It now heads back to the Senate for final approval.

The Son of Sam bill, SB 1887 by Sen. Bruce McPherson (R-Santa Cruz), comes in response to a California Supreme Court ruling invalidating a 1983 state law that prohibited criminals from profiting from their crimes by selling their stories.

The measure seeks to sidestep the ruling by allowing victims to sue for the profits and in essence achieve the same result. It passed 59 to 0 and now goes back to the Senate for final passage.

The smoking-age legislation, SB 1680 by Sen. Richard Polanco (D-Los Angeles), died when Polanco tabled it in the Assembly Governmental Organization Committee.

Polanco’s measure had initially been about law enforcement, not smoking, but Pacheco, the GOP assemblyman, succeeded in inserting amendments on the Assembly floor that turned it into a bill to raise the smoking age from 18 to 21.

In other action:

* Organized labor added another victory to its string of legislative wins when the Senate approved a bill that would require employers to provide severance pay to workers who lose their jobs because of layoffs, closure of the business or relocation to another site.

AB 2989 is sponsored by the California Labor Federation, AFL-CIO, which argued that it would provide some parity to workers who are laid off amid a company’s collapse while superiors walk away with rich severance packages.

The legislation would apply to commercial and industrial employers of 100 or more workers. It cleared the Senate by a thin margin on a 21-14 vote, and now returns to the Assembly for adoption of changes made in the Senate.

* The Senate approved a bill that would require retailers to post a sign to alert the public that certain unpackaged fish and shellfish were the products of genetic alteration.

The creatures, known as transgenic fish and cell fish, are not available in American grocery stores and fish markets. But the Food and Drug Administration is considering approving their sale in the United States. Environmentalists fear the fish may carry harmful new toxins and diseases and argue that consumers should be alerted.

AB 791 by Assemblywoman Virginia Strom-Martin (D-Duncans Mills) passed on a 22-14 vote. It now returns to the Assembly for final consideration.

* The Assembly killed legislation that would have prevented insurance companies from getting into the auto body business, as opponents argued that insurers can’t be any worse than auto body shops at respecting consumers’ interests.

Proponents argued that insurance companies could not be trusted to ensure consumers got the best parts possible if they also owned auto body shops. But opponents said auto body shops were already notorious for not acting in good faith, and should not be shielded from competition.

The measure, SB 1648 by Sen. Jackie Speier (D-Hillsborough) failed badly, garnering only 24 of the 41 votes needed for passage.

“This group that has built this abysmal record is acting for special protection,� Assemblyman Dario Frommer (D-Los Feliz) said of the auto shops. “That is wrong.�

*

Times staff writer Carl Ingram contributed to this report.