California verifies votes so slowly it breeds distrust – CalMatters

This article is also available in English. Read it here.

Political persecution, threats of violence and seizure of confidential documents may sound like the plot of a thief or a thriller.

For California election officials charged with making participatory democracy possible, these are now daily realities: from Riverside County, where Sheriff Chad Bianco confiscated more than 650,000 ballots from their own county registrar of voters to Shasta County where there are threats of violence They forced the longtime incumbent into early retirement.

The integrity of the state’s election systems will come under intense scrutiny this year, as control of the U.S. House of Representatives hangs in the balance and Californians could play a decisive role in which party wins the majority. While timely and conclusive results are more important than ever, California is notorious for its slow vote count.

That long wait has sown growing distrust in the accuracy of results in California, especially among Republicans, and especially in races where a candidate leading on Election Day falls behind as more votes are processed in the days that follow.

“Every day counts,” said Kim Alexander, president of the nonpartisan California Voters Foundation. “Election security is about security in reality and also security in perception, both of which are equally important.”

During a panel on election integrity last Thursday hosted by CalMatters and the UC Student and Policy Center, Alexander argued that election administrators face a “false choice” if they sacrifice timeliness for accuracy. When winners remain undecided for days, sometimes weeks, the resulting uncertainty breeds doubt, speculation and misinformation.

In 2024, it took eight days for the Associated Press to announce that Republicans had won control of the U.S. House of Representatives, in part because of a tie vote in the California election, Alexander explained. Two years earlier, it took nine days. In 2020, it took the AP seven days to determine that Democrats would keep the House, he added. Each time, the results in California’s key congressional districts played a decisive role.

“We’re creating an opportunity for people to make these claims,” ​​Alexander said, referring to largely unfounded allegations of systemic voter fraud and election manipulation. “We have to recognize it.”

The other panelists defended California’s thoroughness as crucial to the integrity of its elections. Gayle Pellerin MP The Democrat, chairman of the Assembly Elections Committee and former Santa Cruz County Clerk of Voters, said county officials need time to verify voter signatures on mail-in ballot envelopes “so people aren’t disenfranchised because of bad handwriting or a missing signature.”

“There is no law that says, ‘I have to meet your deadline,'” Pellerin said, referring to the media and journalists eager to announce the results on election night. “The law says I have to count the votes accurately and safely. I have to review them, review them again, audit them, and then certify them.”

Matt Barreto, director of the UCLA Voting Rights Center, noted that counties have 30 days after the election to certify their results and submit them to the secretary of state. As he pointed out, this process must be completed as soon as possible, but “without preventing the county election registrars from doing their job effectively to ensure that every vote is counted.”

Katharine Baker, director of the UC Center, stressed — speaking directly to Pellerin — that counties need more money to ensure they have enough staff and equipment to effectively conduct the census.

They all agreed there was one thing voters could do to speed up the count: Mail in their ballots early so precincts could process them before Election Day.

Wide partisan divide over election integrity

California voters are highly polarized in their opinions about the state of democracy in their state and the country, largely along partisan lines.

A new survey by UC Berkeley’s Institute for Governmental Studies found that a third of Democrats say they are “extremely satisfied” or “very satisfied” with how democracy is working in California, while only 4% of Republicans share that view. By contrast, more than two-thirds of Republicans are not at all satisfied, compared to 10% of Democrats.

These results are largely unchanged from voter responses in 2024, despite several major political events, including a presidential election won by President Donald Trump, a new presidential administration and special election in California in which voters approved disputed constituencies rigged for partisan purposes.

“It shows that in many ways our democracy is at a standstill,” said Eric Schickler, a professor of political science at UC Berkeley and co-director of the institute. “Republicans have one view of what’s wrong: They decry election fraud and slow vote counting,” he explained, “and Democrats have another that focuses on voter suppression.”

The survey also revealed the partisan divide over a proposed ballot initiative from Republican Rep. Carl De Maio, of San Diego, which will require Californians to present a photo ID to vote. When asked if they would support the measure, but without any context about who is for it and who is against it, 56% of respondents said they support it with strong or moderate opposition, while 39% are strongly or moderately opposed.

But those opinions have changed as more information has been made available to voters. When informed that DeMaio is the leading advocate of fraud prevention and that Democrats say the measure is part of Trump’s agenda to prevent people of color from voting, support flipped, with only 39% in favor of the measure and 52% opposed.