Can You Trust California’s Elections?
Well folks, things have shifted.
When the first wave of results came in after California's primary election, the trends looked incredibly promising for conservatives. And to be clear, I still think many of the trends we discussed last week are real and worth paying attention to. But as more ballots have been counted, the picture has changed…significantly.
Several strong Republican candidates who initially appeared to be safely advancing are now in serious danger of being locked out of the November election altogether. That dramatic shift has reignited a debate Californians seem to have after every election: What exactly is happening with our vote-counting process? Why does California take so long to count ballots? Why do Republicans often start election night with large leads, only to see those margins shrink, or disappear entirely, as more votes come in? Are there legitimate concerns about election integrity in our state? And perhaps most importantly: can Californians trust the results of our elections?
I’m breaking it all down for you to day – explaining how California's election system actually works, examining the real vulnerabilities that exist, and looking at what has changed in the results since last week.
Election Updates
Let’s start with some election updates. Man, I am so sad to be bringing this news to you!
Now, the shifts in the Governor’s race are fairly expected. Hilton and Becerra were under 2% apart from each other last week, so there was a good chance that could flip – and it looks like it has. With 83% of the votes counted, Becerra has taken the lead with 27.7%. Hilton was pushed into second place at 25.1%, but he still leads Steyer in third with 22.4%.[1] As of now, it is still looking likely that the top two will be Becerra and Hilton, but it doesn’t bode well for the November election that Hilton only garnered a quarter of the votes when Democrats were so split up.
The other races we talked about, like Lieutenant Governor and Attorney General have also seen slight decreases for the Republican candidates, but not enough to change the top two candidates. For Insurance Commissioner, unfortunately the radical Democrat, Jane Kim, has advanced even further forward – remember that she is the one who wants single-payer insurance programs (i.e. abolish private insurance for your home and car!!!) – while the best candidate, Stacy Korsgaden, has sunk even further into third place. The only really good news is that the Republican in the lead for Superintendent of Public Instruction, Sonja Shaw, is still solidly in the lead![2]
All of that is discouraging, but it has not yet locked out Republicans or changed the final outcomes. BUT there is one race that has seen a HUGE shift for the worst – and that is the LA Mayoral Race. With 83% of the votes in, Spencer Pratt has been knocked into third place, overtaken by radical socialist Nithya Raman. Last week, Pratt was in a solid second place, only 6% behind Karen Bass, with 30% of the vote. Raman was well behind him, with 22%.[3] She even cried giving her speech on election night because she clearly was doing so poorly, she did not believe at the time she would recover.[4] But now? Now Spencer Pratt has dropped to 25.8% and Raman has skyrocketed to 28.5%. So, Los Angeles voters have apparently chosen as their two options 1) an incompetent incumbent mayor who has already failed them severely, and 2) a literal Democratic Socialist who couldn’t answer a single question during the debate. How in the world?
Concerns About Election Integrity
Now, all of this has raised a lot of questions about election integrity and the ballot-counting process in California. People are asking, rightly so: Why does it take so long to count votes in our state when other states (and even countries) seem to do it much faster? And when candidates who appeared to be comfortably ahead on election night suddenly find themselves in danger days later, it's natural for voters to then ask whether they can trust the process.
I want to address those concerns because they matter. Every Californian deserves confidence that their vote is counted fairly and accurately. I think there are two extremes that are easy to fall into, and both are wrong. One extreme dismisses all election integrity concerns as conspiratorial or fringe. I don't think that's right. We shouldn't be afraid to examine potential problems in our elections. Our elections are the literal foundation of our representative government – they matter. If there are weaknesses in the system, voters deserve answers. The other extreme assumes every unexpected shift in the vote count is proof that an election was rigged. I don't think that's right either. Serious claims require serious evidence. We should absolutely ask questions and scrutinize the process, but we shouldn't jump to conclusions that aren't supported by facts.
The challenge is finding the middle ground. We need to be willing to identify real problems where they exist, ask tough questions about the way California conducts elections, and push for greater transparency. At the same time, we need to stay grounded in evidence and focus on what we can actually prove. So that's what I want to do today. Let's talk about how California's vote-counting process works, why it takes so long, what legitimate concerns voters have, and what reforms could help restore confidence in our elections.
How California’s Vote-Counting Works
To answer those questions, we first need to understand how California's vote-counting process actually works. Because while many voters see races shifting days or even weeks after Election Day, most people have no idea what is happening behind the scenes during that time. So let's break it down step by step and talk about why California's elections seem to take forever to finish.
California law gives county election officials up to 30 days after Election Day to complete what's called the canvass process and certify the results.[5] The Secretary of State then certifies the statewide results weeks later. So, if you've ever wondered why California seems to be counting votes long after every other state has moved on, part of the answer is that our election system is legally designed to take weeks, not days.
What are officials doing during all that time? First, they're verifying signatures. Every mail ballot has to be signed, and election officials compare that signature to the voter's signature on file. With millions of ballots, that's a massive undertaking. If a signature is missing or doesn't appear to match, California gives the voter time to fix the problem. Counties can spend up to two weeks notifying voters, and those voters can have up to 22 days after the election to submit a correction.[6] That means a ballot cast on Election Day could potentially be counted more than three weeks later.
Officials are also processing provisional ballots. These are ballots cast when a voter's registration status can't immediately be confirmed.[7] Counties have to investigate each one individually before deciding whether it can be counted. The same is true for Californians who register and vote on Election Day – their registration has to be verified before their ballot can be added to the totals.
Then there's vote-by-mail. California accepts ballots that are postmarked by Election Day and arrive up to seven days later.[8] So even after the polls close, counties are still receiving valid ballots throughout the following week. Finally, counties conduct post-election audits and other verification procedures required by law, including the requirement that officials must hand-count every ballot at one percent of precincts.[9]
Put all of that together, and you can see why California's count takes so long. We have 58 counties, each running its own election operation with different staffing levels, resources, and workloads. This is a direct result of the policies and regulations that layer on top of each other to then create a system where votes are counted over weeks rather than be finalized and communicated to voters on Election Night.
Voter Registration Madness
But the way these vote-counting processes are designed are just the tip of the iceberg. The real problem isn’t just the vote counting. The most consequential gaps in California’s election processes boil down to two main issues: voter registration and ballot harvesting. This is where there is extreme vulnerability for fraud.
First, voter registration in California is laughable. Let’s go through the process.
When you register to vote in California, the state asks for your driver's license number or the last four digits of your Social Security number. If you provide one, California's DMV or SSA database is supposed to match it against your record. This is required by the federal Help America Vote Act. The purpose of this is to verify your eligibility to vote – because you should, and must be by law, a citizen to vote.
However, on the Secretary of State's registration website, both the driver's license and SSN fields give applicants the option to check a box indicating they lack that form of identification. If you check both boxes, then you enter the alternate verification track. What "alternate verification" means is that individuals can provide alternate proof of identity by showing items such as a credit card, a utility bill, or their gym membership. These documents verify that you live somewhere in California, but the problem is that they say nothing about whether you are legally eligible to vote.[10]
The full list is truly shocking. The Secretary of State's list includes a drug prescription label, a criminal pardon document, a public housing ID card, a sample ballot received in the mail, and a lease agreement all as options for you to be able to register to vote.[11] That is insane.
Hans von Spakovsky, a Senior Legal Fellow at Advancing American Freedom, says it perfectly:
"Allowing a gym membership is ridiculous. I can create a gym membership card on my laptop using Microsoft Word. In fact, that's the whole reason states require a government-issued photo ID for all kinds of things, including getting a marriage license in most places or cashing a check or to buy alcohol. The idea that you would use a gym membership to prove ID is just absurd. That does absolutely nothing."[12]
California's constitution limits voting to U.S. citizens, but PROOF of citizenship is clearly not required. So, if a noncitizen wants to vote, all they have to do is:
1. Go to the Secretary of State website,
2. Check both opt-out boxes for driver's license and SSN,
3. Attest, under penalty of perjury, that you are a U.S. citizen,
4. Provide a utility bill or gym card to verify you live in California,
5. And you're registered to vote!
The literal only mechanism to enforce that only citizens are registering to vote, and voting, is the perjury attestation – which is never investigated and enforced, and is the minimum safeguard possible, not a sufficient safeguard to protect our elections. There is no independent verification that the person checking that citizenship box is actually a citizen, and of course California does not require showing ID when you vote.
This should be absolutely unacceptable to any functioning state. It completely corrodes and undermines any trust that voters would have in elections – because literally any person can vote. And because our state prioritizes illegal immigrants over its own citizens, there is no basis or evidence at all for voters here to believe that noncitizens AREN’T casting ballots in our elections and getting away with it.
Ballot Harvesting Insanity
Now, if you think THAT is bad, just wait until you hear about ballot harvesting. This is the single most significant structural vulnerability in California's election system.
In 2016, California passed AB 1921, legalizing what's called “ballot harvesting” – the practice of allowing third parties to collect and submit mail ballots on a voter's behalf.[13] And California didn't just legalize it, but they made it essentially unlimited.
Here's what that means in practice: A campaign operative, someone who has a financial and political stake in the outcome of the election, can show up at your door, ask for your ballot, take it, and deliver it. And they can do that for an unlimited number of voters. There are no requirements to document the chain of custody, and the ballot envelope is not sealed by any process that prevents the harvester from knowing how you voted or replacing your ballot.[14]
So, while letting someone take your ballot and drop it off for you could benefit those who are elderly or disabled or can’t make it out to vote, the problem is it also introduces a whole host of ethically questionable situations as well. Ballot harvesters can hypothetically go to the many homeless shelters in California’s big cities, help them register to vote, get their ballots, and take them en masse to a ballot box. This poses an ethical question: who is really voting in our elections, and are they really competent to vote? Should homeless drug addicts who can’t get a job or get themselves off the streets, many of whom are not mentally competent, have their ballots filled out and cast for them? Are voters really making informed decisions to be fairly represented, or is your vote being overruled by a machine that is collecting votes for their candidate from people who wouldn’t otherwise turn out to vote? This is wildly problematic.
A House Administration Committee Republican report on this practice was stark, saying, "The lack of safeguards invites fraud and coercion, and invites political operatives to legally game the system for their own benefit."[15]
These questions and concerns are not at all unfounded. If you think the idea of ballot harvesters going to homeless shelters is crazy and conspiratorial, then let me tell you – similar practices have already been uncovered in our state. Brenda Lee Armstrong, a 64-year-old woman in Marina Del Rey, was convicted of a felony just this year for going down to Skid Row, paying people to sign petitions to get initiatives on the ballot, and registering people to vote using her own former home address. She literally worked for 20 years doing this before she was investigated and convicted.[16] She is surely not the only one doing this, and we should be deeply troubled and disturbed at the thought of what other fraud and crimes are going on unnoticed and without conviction.
Specific Questions Around LA Mayoral Race
Considering all of this, it makes complete and total sense that voters are concerned – and that people believe the LA Mayoral Race is being stolen right in front of our eyes.
The numbers tell a story worth examining closely. AS I mentioned before, on election night, with 46% of votes counted, Pratt led Raman by between 8 to 10 points depending on which source you looked at. Then the ballot dumps started over the next several days.
By the time 63% was counted, the gap was down to 7 points. By Thursday at 71%, it was 4 points. And on Saturday night, VoteHub's head of data science Zachary Donnini wrote: "Raman needed to beat Pratt by 8.7 points in the remaining vote today. Instead, she won this drop by 22.5 points, and it was a large batch."[17] Friday night’s drop had nearly 60,000 ballots, the largest batch outside of election night, and it split 39% for Raman, 34% for Bass, and only 18% for Pratt. It was the first batch in which Raman received the largest share of any candidate.[18]
So, the incumbent mayor Karen Bass, the best-known candidate in the race, was getting less of the late mail-in ballots than the candidate who had been in third place six days earlier. Now, there is an explanation that California's defenders will offer, which is that mail-in voters skew left, and Raman's base in progressive neighborhoods may have returned mail ballots later. That is possible, but it doesn't quite explain why the pattern is so consistent – why every single batch is moving in one direction, by margins that data analysts flagged as abnormal in real time. It also doesn't explain why, in a city with an incumbent Democratic mayor on the ballot, the late ballots weren't breaking toward her, but toward a lesser-known city councilwoman.
To be clear: we don't yet have hard evidence that this race was manipulated, and we should be careful about saying otherwise. But we've established that California has an election system that is structurally wide open to abuse, and there is no question that a Democratic establishment that controls this city's institutions had enormous incentive to keep Spencer Pratt off that November ballot. People aren't crazy for asking questions! The pattern is real, the anomalies are documented, and the only way to restore confidence is though transparency and investigation – which, not coincidentally, is exactly what California has been fighting to prevent.
Federal Investigation
Which brings us to the current federal investigation that has been opened into California’s election integrity.
In August 2025, Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon sent California Secretary of State Shirley Weber a letter demanding a complete electronic copy of the statewide voter registration list, including voter names, dates of birth, addresses, driver's license information, and the last four digits of Social Security numbers.[19] The purpose of this request is to verify that only eligible U.S. citizens are registered to vote. At the time, California refused.
In response, in September 2025, the Department of Justice sued California Secretary of State Shirley Weber, along with Michigan, Minnesota, New York, New Hampshire, and Pennsylvania, for failing to hand over their voter rolls. Attorney General Pam Bondi put it plainly, saying, quote:
"Clean voter rolls are the foundation of free and fair elections. Every state has a responsibility to ensure that voter registration records are accurate, accessible, and secure – states that don't fulfill that obligation will see this Department of Justice in court."[20]
California's response was to fight the request in court, which resulted in a federal judge dismissing the lawsuit in January 2026, finding that the DOJ had not satisfied the legal requirements to access the data and that California's privacy laws were not preempted by federal law.[21] But this didn’t end the fight, because the DOJ appealed, and the case is now before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
In light of the primary results, First Assistant U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli announced the next move. His office is now working with Dhillon to conduct what he called a "comprehensive audit" of California's voter rolls, saying, "The state has stonewalled every effort to verify that only eligible U.S. citizens are registered to vote. My office will not look the other way. We will investigate and prosecute. Every legal vote deserves to be counted. Every illegal vote cancels one out."[22]
California has 23 million registered voters, a voter registration system that accepts gym cards as proof of identity, no voter ID requirement at the ballot box, and it has spent over a year in federal court fighting to make sure no one can independently verify who is on those rolls. These are real concerns, and voters deserve a full investigation with answers.
Make California…Florida?
So, what can be done about all of this? Could a good leader, like Steve Hilton, actually reform the process to restore public trust, if given the chance? This is where we look to another state that also used to have issues with election integrity, but that passed good policies to address that and has since become one of our best examples for conducting elections: Florida.
For most of the last quarter century, Florida was not quite seen as the standard for counting votes. I’m sure everyone remembers Bush v. Gore in 2000 with the “hanging chads” on the ballots. That recount had to go all the way to the Supreme Court! For years, Florida was the punchline every time anyone talked about broken election systems. BUT – after enough instances of losing public trust, Florida finally fixed it.
Following the 2020 election cycle, Florida enacted sweeping reforms to enhance election security, including requiring annual voter roll maintenance, strengthening identification requirements for vote-by-mail ballots, restricting third-party ballot harvesting, banning unsolicited mass mail ballot applications, and prohibiting private funding in election administration. The state also secured ballot drop boxes, implemented strict deadlines for ballot returns, and ensured voting systems remain disconnected from the internet.
Let's take those one by one – because each one is a direct mirror image of the vulnerabilities we've been talking about in California. On voter ID: Florida now requires voters to provide either a driver's license number, a state ID number, or the last four digits of their Social Security number to request a mail ballot, with no alternative if a voter has neither.[23] On ballot harvesting: Florida explicitly banned ballot harvesting in 2021, and in 2022 enhanced the criminal penalties, making it a third-degree felony.[24] On the voter rolls: Florida requires annual voter roll maintenance, actively purging ineligible voters every single year.[25] On counting speed (and this is the key mechanism that most people don't know about), one of Florida's biggest advantages in recent elections that allowed it to report results early on election night was that the legislature allowed election officials to canvass vote-by-mail ballots and tally them well in advance of Election Day. Florida doesn't wait until after the polls close to start counting mail ballots, they process them as they come in, so by the time Election Night arrives, the overwhelming majority of the count is already done. That is a critical difference between their state and ours![26]
What has been the result of all of these changes? In the 2022 midterms, every race was called on Election Night. Unlike us, they didn’t have weeks of ballot dumps moving the results in one direction. Florida called its governor's race, keep in mind this is a state with over 9 million voters, before most people had finished dinner.[27] The James Madison Institute, in a comprehensive review of Florida's election administration, called the state "the gold standard" – a phrase that is the exact opposite of anything anyone has ever said about California.
This is the model that works. The only question is whether California has the political will to adopt it – and right now, under our current leadership, the answer is and will continue to be no. Because the people running California's elections have no incentive to change a system that consistently produces outcomes they like, week after week, ballot dump after ballot dump. But we must reform our system so that voters can have restored trust in our election results, just as voters gained in the state of Florida.
Reminder to Be Faithful
I want to end on a note of encouragement. Because it feels incredibly disheartening to think the only path to change is by electing new leaders, but the elections themselves are the problem, so how are we supposed to GET the new leaders?!
The path forward is not one thing and one thing only. It's not just about electing Hilton, though that matters. It's not just the ballot initiative to enact Voter ID, though that matters too. It's the accumulation of pressure applied consistently over time against a machine that has never had to defend itself the way it's being forced to right now. Think about what has happened just in the last week! A federal prosecutor walked into Los Angeles County's counting center, the DOJ launched multiple fraud investigations, the voter roll case advanced to the Ninth Circuit, a Republican led the LA mayor's race on election night for the first time in a generation, and millions of Californians who were told the system works perfectly are watching ballot dumps move a race in real time and asking out loud – for the first time, loudly – whether that's actually true. The President himself is calling out the fraud! All of that is not nothing, that is progress that leads to change!
The honest truth about how to make change happen here, in a state that seems entirely stacked against you as a conservative, is to make the margin so undeniable that even a broken system can't absorb it. You beat it by showing up in numbers they didn't plan for, you beat it by voting – even when it's hard, even when you're skeptical, and even when you wonder if it counts – because the one thing that is absolutely guaranteed to change nothing is not showing up at all.
Keep asking questions. Keep demanding answers. Keep showing up – to vote, to organize, to talk to your neighbors, to share this episode with someone who thinks it's all fine. Because the Democrat machine wins when good people conclude that engaging in the process is hopeless. Hopelessness is what they need from you! Don't give it to them.
References:
[1] NBC News. “California Governor Primary Results 2026,” June 7, 2026. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2026-primary-elections/california-governor-results.
[2] California Secretary of State, “California Primary Election Results,” Election Results, June 7, 2026, https://dp.electionresults.sos.ca.gov/contests/statewide.
[3] NBC News. “Los Angeles Mayor Primary Results 2026,” June 4, 2026. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2026-primary-elections/los-angeles-mayor-results.
[4] O’Keefe, Ross. “Far-left LA Mayoral Candidate Nithya Raman Breaks Down in Tears as She Falters Behind Spencer Pratt and Karen Bass.” Yahoo News, June 4, 2026. https://www.yahoo.com/news/politics/articles/far-left-la-mayoral-candidate-nithya-raman-breaks-down-in-tears-as-she-falters-behind-spencer-pratt-and-karen-bass-143154637.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAABFKYIFWf9HaNoDxQaYHwKNbjWkrIxyFMv7dfo320Ik8h77m8vLQOzKAt4eYw_5JScxYWOqMEnMfINm3ym_DYH7EHCxmaSnnx6VI8ul97SO6zcez453LSDC-ZwiRm6JyDpE6DnUDAO3LuSfs2ojoIZbnSFTGF-eixMCZkqEN-Ydq.
[5] City News Service. “Secretary of State Urges Patience on Vote Count.” NBC Los Angeles, June 4, 2026. https://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/secretary-of-state-urges-patience-on-vote-count/3900072/.
[6] Ballotpedia. “Cure Period for Absentee and Mail-in Ballots,” n.d. https://ballotpedia.org/Cure_period_for_absentee_and_mail-in_ballots.
[7] California Secretary of State, “Provisional Voting,” n.d., https://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/voting-resources/provisional-voting.
[8] California Secretary of State, “Vote by Mail,” n.d., https://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/voter-registration/vote-mail.
[9] California Secretary of State. “1% Manual Tally,” n.d. https://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/post-election-audits/1percent-manual-tally.
[10] Lyman, Brianna. “Californians With No Driver’S License or SSN Can Use a Credit Card or Gym Membership to Vote.” The Federalist, June 25, 2024. https://thefederalist.com/2024/06/25/californians-with-no-drivers-license-or-ssn-can-use-a-credit-card-or-gym-membership-to-vote/.
[11] California Secretary of State, “Help America Vote Act (HAVA) Identification Standards :: California Secretary of State,” n.d., https://www.sos.ca.gov/administration/regulations/current-regulations/elections/help-america-vote-act-identification-standards.
[12] Kokai, Mitch. “California Voters Can Use Credit Card, Gym Membership in Place of ID.” John Locke Foundation, June 26, 2024. https://www.johnlocke.org/california-voters-can-use-credit-card-gym-membership-in-place-of-id/.
[13] Korte, Lara. “What Is ‘Ballot Harvesting’ and Why Is California Fighting About It?” The Sacramento Bee, October 13, 2020. https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article246424595.html.
[14] Huey-Burns, Caitlin, and Musadiq Bidar. “What Is Ballot Harvesting, Where Is It Allowed and Should You Hand Your Ballot to a Stranger?” CBS News, September 3, 2020. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ballot-harvesting-collection-absentee-voting-explained-rules/.
[15] United States House of Representatives, Committee on House Administration, and Rodney Davis. “Political Weaponization of Ballot Harvesting in California,” n.d. https://republicans-cha.house.gov/_cache/files/9/3/933b5275-f713-4036-98ca-73fd32c06b28/1EBC61DEE1E8CD754D4E76E1CB0F49B4D9A63D57B675192831F0E5215BA9E33B.ca-ballot-harvesting-report-final.pdf.
[16] Ellis, Rebecca. “Homeless People on Skid Row Were Paid to Register to Vote, Feds Charge - Los Angeles Times.” Los Angeles Times, May 18, 2026. https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2026-05-18/skid-row-voter-charges.
[17] Rivas, Yunior. “Sweeping GOP-backed Anti-voting Measure Qualifies for California Ballot - Democracy Docket.” Democracy Docket, April 24, 2026. https://www.democracydocket.com/news-alerts/sweeping-gop-backed-anti-voting-measure-qualifies-for-california-ballot/.
[18] Ibid.
[19] Dallow, Lily. “U.S. Attorney Accuses California of Blocking Voter Roll Audit Amid Legal Battle.” KTLA 5 News, June 7, 2026. https://ktla.com/news/california/u-s-attorney-accuses-california-of-blocking-voter-roll-audit-amid-legal-battle/.
[20] Rector, Kevin. “Justice Department Sues California, Other States That Have Declined to Share Voter Rolls.” AOL.Com, September 25, 2025. https://www.aol.com/news/justice-department-sues-california-other-230914556.html.
[21] American Civil Liberties Union. “Federal Court Dismisses DOJ Lawsuit Seeking California Voter Data | American Civil Liberties Union.” American Civil Liberties Union, January 16, 2026. https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/federal-court-dismisses-doj-lawsuit-seeking-california-voter-data.
[22] Brams, Sophie. “DOJ Prosecutor in California Opens ‘Multiple Election Fraud’ Probes.” The Hill, June 5, 2026. https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/5912737-california-election-fraud-probes/.
[23] Brewster, Adam, and Grace Segers. “Florida Gov. DeSantis Signs Sweeping Elections Bill Revising State’s Rules for Mail Voting and Drop Boxes.” CBS News, May 6, 2021. https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/desantis-florida-elections-voting-bill/.
[24] Wheeler, Doug. “Florida: The Gold Standard in Elections Administration From Bush V. Gore to Present 2000-2025.” James Madison Institute, August 21, 2025. https://jamesmadison.org/florida-the-gold-standard-in-elections-administration-from-bush-v-gore-to-present-2000-2025/.
[25] “Chapter 98 Section 065 - 2024 Florida Statutes - the Florida Senate,” n.d. https://www.flsenate.gov/laws/statutes/2024/98.065.
[26] Wheeler, “Florida: The Gold Standard in Elections Administration From Bush V. Gore to Present 2000-2025.”
[27] Elder, Elise. “DeSantis Wins 2022 Florida Governor’s Race by Largest Margin in 40 Years.” WUFT | News and Public Media for North Central Florida, March 28, 2024. https://www.wuft.org/2022-11-09/desantis-wins-2022-florida-governors-race-by-largest-margin-in-40-years.
