CALIFORNIA’S VOTER-ROLL PROBLEM IS BIGGER THAN NONCITIZENS
Reuters focused on one category. California’s 2026 records raise a larger question: who is on the voter rolls, and what is actually being verified?
By Christine Bish
Reuters just exposed one part of the problem: government errors have put self-identified noncitizens on voter rolls, including in California. When Reuters asked California officials to confirm the state’s previously reported figures, they did not respond. [1]
Two days later, Secretary of State Shirley Weber said California has no intention of using the expanded federal SAVE database for the November 3 election. [2]
So here is the obvious question: If California will not use SAVE, what independent system is it using to verify citizenship?
That question is bigger than noncitizens.
California’s voter-roll integrity depends on identifying deceased voters, people who have moved, duplicate or inaccurate records, bad addresses and registrations that should never have existed in the first place.
California says VoteCal cross-checks voter records with death data, national change-of-address information, correctional records and DMV information. [3] Those checks matter. But checking one government database against another only works if the underlying records — and the system connecting them — are accurate.
The warning signs started with the system itself. Then-Secretary of State Alex Padilla certified VoteCal as California’s official statewide voter-registration system in September 2016. [4] But an official VoteCal technical specification records that “voter activity” was removed from the synchronization-check process pursuant to Change Request #14. The public specification identifies the change, but does not include the underlying change request or a full explanation of its effect. [5]
That matters because VoteCal is not a side database. It is California’s official statewide voter-registration list.
The price tag was never small. A state HAVA report projected the VoteCal project at about $98 million, including a $38.75 million system-integrator contract, plus remediation, testing and other support. [6] Years later, California is still maintaining, upgrading and correcting the system.
And the fixes are still happening in 2026
From January through August 2026, DMV transmitted about 5.66 million Motor Voter records to the Secretary of State. During that period, the state reported 10 system irregularities and 3,831 records delivered more than 10 days after acceptance. [7]
At the April Motor Voter Task Force meeting, officials also disclosed a quality-assurance error that had produced 1,500 duplicate records during an earlier period. The same meeting revealed that DMV’s third-party address-standardization tool had been shut off in March because it did not meet updated state cloud-encryption requirements. Failed address validations jumped from roughly 1% to 14%, with the number of failed records at one point exceeding 10,000 before the Secretary of State implemented a workaround. [8]
None of that proves illegal votes were cast. It proves something simpler: the databases California relies upon are not magically error-free.
And then there is the dog
In Orange County, Laura Lee Yourex registered her dog, Maya Jean, to vote. A ballot cast in the dog’s name in the 2021 gubernatorial recall was counted. A 2022 primary ballot was rejected, and prosecutors said another ballot was mailed in Maya’s name in 2024 after the dog had died. Yourex pleaded guilty in April 2026 to knowingly registering a nonexistent person. [9]
A dog is obviously not a noncitizen. It is also obviously not an eligible voter.
That is why the Reuters investigation should not end with a debate about citizenship. It should trigger a much broader examination of the integrity of California’s voter rolls.
November is close. Transparency should be closer.
California can track registration status, ballot issuance and voter participation. So the public deserves direct answers: How many ineligible or invalid records have been identified? How many received ballots? How many ballots were returned or accepted? What independent process verifies citizenship? And what happened to unresolved system changes and audit questions dating back to VoteCal’s rollout?
Audit it. Document it. Release it.
If California’s voter rolls are accurate, the records should prove it.
SOURCES
[1] Reuters, “How US states mistakenly added 30,000 non-citizens to voter rolls,” Sept. 23, 2026. Source link
[2] California Secretary of State, “Supreme Court Ruling on DHS Voter Database Will Have No Impact on California’s 2026 General Election,” Sept. 25, 2026. Source link
[3] California Secretary of State, VoteCal overview and voter-roll maintenance data sources. Source link
[4] California Secretary of State, “Secretary of State Padilla Certifies VoteCal Statewide Voter Registration Database,” Sept. 26, 2016. Source link
[5] California Secretary of State, VoteCal System EMS Integration and Data Exchange Specifications, Final v6.0, June 2016 (revision history referencing Change Request #14). Source link
[6] California Secretary of State, HAVA Annual Status Report / VoteCal project cost and contractor reporting. Source link
[7] California Secretary of State, Department of Motor Vehicles Monthly Report, updated Sept. 4, 2026. Source link
[8] California Secretary of State, Motor Voter Task Force Meeting Minutes, Apr. 28, 2026. Source link
[9] Orange County District Attorney, “Costa Mesa Woman Charged with Five Felonies for Illegally Registering Her Dog to Vote…”; subsequent 2026 plea reported by Los Angeles Times/LAist. Source link
RELATED BISH REPORT INVESTIGATIONS