logo Standing Up To Powerful Interests

Legislative Scorecard

How Did Your Representative Vote?

CALPIRG compiles an annual legislative scorecard for all members of the California legislature, to educate the public about their representatives' voting records and hold elected officials accountable. 

Our 2009 scorecard focuses on key consumer votes in the legislature.

Find out how your State Assemblymember voted here.

Find out how your State Senator voted here.  

Thirteen state Senators and twenty-five state Assemblymembers received 100 percent scores for their strong record of voting to protect consumers, rather than special interests.

The average score in the Assembly is 66 percent. The average score in the Senate is 65 percent. 

Most of the bills scored here faced tough opposition from insurance companies, banks and/or mortgage brokers, the chemical industry or other powerful interests. Several of the bills succeeded and were signed into law. Unfortunately, many good consumer laws did not make it through the legislature, or were vetoed by the governor. 

Successful new laws that we scored include: 

AB 260: A new law protecting consumers from many of the deceptive lending practices that caused the foreclosure crisis. The law requires brokers to act in their clients' best interest, and removes the incentive to cheat borrowers. 

SB 94: A new law prohibiting up front charges to consumers for loan modifications, which became a common scam this year. 

SB 340: A new law requiring products with free trial offers and monthly subscriptions to notify customers before charges start and give them the opportunity to opt out of the charges.  

Unsuccessful laws that we scored include:

SB 550: If passed, this measure would have required grocery stores to program their checkout scanners to notify a cashier if a customer is purchasing a product subject to a recall.

SB 316: If passed, this measure would have required health insurers to spend at least 85 cents out of every premium dollar on patient care.

AB 943: If signed, this measure would have made it illegal for employers to base a hiring decision on an applicant’s credit history.  

 

 

SEARCH THIS SITE