Politics > Vote Fraud

How California Mandated Election Corruption

The right to vote is among our most cherished liberties, but equally important is the public’s confidence that every lawful vote -- and only lawful votes -- determines the outcome

Jim Cardoza | June 24, 2026

The right to vote is among our most cherished liberties, but equally important is the public’s confidence that every lawful vote -- and only lawful votes -- determines the outcome. Election integrity is not simply about preventing fraud; it is about preserving trust. An election that half the country believes was unfairly manipulated is an election that erodes trust in the republic and confidence in the system, regardless of who wins.

Such elections have become standard practice in California -- not by accident, but by intent. The state has embraced a philosophy that treats virtually every security measure as an obstacle to the apparent goal of maintaining one-party control. Each voter integrity safeguard, once considered common sense, has been systematically dismantled. Practices critics have long warned create opportunities for abuse have not merely been tolerated -- they have been written into state law.

Supporters insist these reforms are aimed innocently at expanding voter participation. But their effect has been to unnecessarily increase the opportunities for misconduct and make it more difficult for the public to verify that the elections were conducted honestly.

Perhaps no change illustrates this philosophy better than universal vote-by-mail. Every active registered voter automatically receives a ballot through the mail whether requested or not. Mailing millions of ballots inevitably means some are sent to outdated addresses, former residences, or individuals who have moved. The larger the distribution, the greater the opportunity for ballots to fall outside the intended recipient’s control. Election officials argue they accurately maintain voter rolls, but if that is so, why do they........

© American Thinker