Sign up for our daily briefing
Make your busy days simpler with Axios AM/PM. Catch up on what's new and why it matters in just 5 minutes.
Catch up on coronavirus stories and special reports, curated by Mike Allen everyday
Catch up on coronavirus stories and special reports, curated by Mike Allen everyday
Denver news in your inbox
Catch up on the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Denver
Des Moines news in your inbox
Catch up on the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Des Moines
Minneapolis-St. Paul news in your inbox
Catch up on the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Twin Cities
Tampa Bay news in your inbox
Catch up on the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Tampa Bay
Charlotte news in your inbox
Catch up on the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Charlotte
Photo: View Pictures/UIG via Getty Images.
An unprecedented bill that mandates publicly traded companies headquartered in California to have women on its boards will face another test this week, the SF Chronicle reports, as it heads to the floor of the California Assembly.
Why it matters: California could be the first state to enact a law of this type, in a push to give those who identify as women a seat at the corporate table. According to Board Governance Research, women made up 15.5% of California-based public companies in 2017, while men made up more than 80% of seats.
This law is the first of its kind in the United States, but not the first in the world. In 2003, Norway introduced a gender quota law. Since then, the percentage of women board members in the country has doubled, according to the Economist.
What's next: The bill still needs to get through the California State Assembly, and then return to the Senate for a final vote.
The other side: In a letter opposing the proposal, the California Chamber of Commerce and dozens of other businesses said, "We are concerned that the mandate under SB826 that focuses only on gender potentially elevates it as a priority over other aspects of diversity."
- In a statement to Axios, state Senator Jeff Stone (who voted against the bill) said, "The State of California has no business concerning itself with the composition of the board of directors of privately owned firms that are otherwise following all the applicable laws of the state and nation… Intrusive bills like this provide incentives for firms thinking of leaving California to do so."