The certification of California’s 2024 election results by Secretary of State Shirley Weber has raised significant concerns regarding the integrity of the election process. With over 16 million Californians reported to have voted, the statistics reveal a striking imbalance, with more than 13 million mail-in ballots cast compared to slightly over 3 million ballots cast at voting locations. While these numbers reflect high voter engagement, they also highlight potential vulnerabilities in the election system. Given the pronounced discrepancies present in California’s voting infrastructure, many experts argue that the election results are far from certifiable, citing the state’s problematic voter rolls and processes as key areas of concern.
A major issue pertains to California’s voter rolls, which appear to be severely inflated with non-citizens. Studies suggest that about 3.8 million records may belong to non-citizens, representing roughly 17% of the state’s registered voters. This figure arises from examining foreign-born individuals on voter rolls and comparing it with legitimate citizenship data. One of the contributing factors to this problem is California’s Motor Voter law, which automatically registers individuals who apply for driver’s licenses, allowing many non-citizens to slip through the cracks without thorough verification. The existence of millions of non-citizens on voter rolls undermines the legitimacy of the election outcomes and raises serious questions about their certifiability.
In addition to problematic voter rolls, the practice of ballot harvesting has also been scrutinized. This method allows third parties to collect absentee ballots from voters and submit them on their behalf. The phenomenon gained notoriety during the 2018 North Carolina election when results were overturned due to illegal harvesting practices. Critics argue that the introduction of this practice in California has adversely impacted the Republican Party’s fortunes, contributing to contentious and often disputed election outcomes. As a result, the integrity of the vote becomes increasingly questionable, underscoring the need for stringent controls in ballot collection and submission.
Another factor contributing to doubts about the integrity of California’s elections is the prolonged ballot counting process. Unlike states such as Florida and Texas, where results are typically confirmed on election night, California often engages in weeks of post-election counting. This practice leaves ample room for speculation and doubt, especially considering that several GOP candidates appeared to lead early on, only to lose to Democrats as counting continued. For instance, Congresswoman Michelle Steele was ahead for ten days after the election, only to have her position reversed in a seemingly improbable turn of events. Such trends prompt skepticism, particularly as they favor one party disproportionately in the delayed count.
Compounding these concerns, the recent occurrence of bomb threats at election counting sites in Orange County led to abrupt halts in the counting process shortly after the election. These incidents, along with similar threats reported across various counties, create an unsettling backdrop for the legitimacy of the results, as abnormal externalities can influence outcomes. Reports on such events have not received adequate attention from mainstream media, further obscuring the atmosphere of uncertainty surrounding the election integrity in California.
In light of these notable shortcomings and the myriad anomalies present in California’s election systems and processes, many assert that the 2024 election results are fundamentally untrustworthy. A properly conducted audit in any corporate context would yield similar conclusions regarding material deficiencies and unverifiable results. Currently, there is no reliable way to ascertain the authenticity of voter registrations, the identities of those who voted, or the origins of the votes themselves. Given this chaotic landscape, the certification of the election results by the Secretary of State can only be deemed unwarranted, raising alarm bells for the broader electoral integrity in California moving forward.
