California really cares about counting its ballots
Every few years, California reminds the nation that democracy's most essential act — counting votes — is not a performance to be completed by midnight, but a process designed to honor every voice that arrives within the law's reach. This election cycle, with millions of mail-in ballots still arriving days after polls closed, the state's gubernatorial and Los Angeles mayoral races remain unresolved — not because the system has failed, but because it was built to succeed at something harder than speed. The delay is the price of access, and California has decided, deliberately, that it is worth paying.
- Millions of mail-in ballots are still being processed days after Election Day, leaving major races — including the governorship and the LA mayoral contest — without declared winners.
- The uncertainty is feeding public anxiety and political conspiracy theories, prompting Governor Newsom to personally urge county officials to accelerate their timelines.
- Beneath the frustration lies a layered security architecture: every ballot envelope is signature-matched by machine, reviewed by hand when flagged, and voters are given a chance to 'cure' errors — each step adding days to the count.
- A crowded nine-candidate gubernatorial field pushed Democratic voters toward last-minute decisions, meaning late-arriving ballots may yet shift the tallies toward left-leaning candidates.
- Election officials report they are actually ahead of pace compared to prior cycles, suggesting the delay reflects the scale of participation, not a failure of administration.
California's election results no longer arrive on election night. Days pass, then weeks, and major races remain unresolved while county officials continue their work. This is not dysfunction — it is the deliberate cost of a system built to count as many votes as possible.
In the 2024 presidential cycle, roughly 13 million of California's 16 million votes came by mail. Ballots postmarked by Election Day can legally arrive at county offices up to a week later and must be counted. This year, both the gubernatorial primary and the Los Angeles mayoral race remained undecided long after polls closed. USC political scientist Christian Grose frames the delay not as failure but as philosophy: 'California really cares about counting its ballots. And so as a result, we have a lot of different ways to vote.'
Security measures add further time. Every mail-in ballot undergoes signature matching — machine first, then human review if flagged. When both reject a signature, voters are offered a chance to 'cure' the problem and preserve their vote. The process is slow by design. As Grose put it, the frustration of not knowing results quickly is the tradeoff for knowing that votes are counted securely.
The competitiveness of this year's races deepens the uncertainty. With as many as nine viable candidates in the gubernatorial primary, Democratic voters faced harder choices and were more likely to mail ballots at the last minute. That pattern suggests left-leaning candidates may gain ground as late ballots continue to be tallied.
Governor Newsom urged county officials to speed up the count, hoping to stay ahead of conspiracy theories. But LA County's registrar noted that counters are actually running ahead of previous cycles. What looks like disorder is, in fact, a system working as intended — one that chose access over speed, and is now living with the honest consequences of that choice.
California's election results don't arrive on election night anymore. Days pass, then weeks, and the outcome of major races remains uncertain while county officials continue their work. This isn't a sign of dysfunction or incompetence. It's the deliberate cost of a system designed to count as many votes as possible.
In the 2024 presidential election, roughly 13 million of California's 16 million votes came by mail. That's the overwhelming preference of the state's electorate—convenience, flexibility, and the ability to vote from home. But that volume creates a mathematical reality: ballots postmarked on or before Election Day can arrive at county offices up to a week later, and they must be counted. The law is clear. The process is slow.
This year's gubernatorial race and the Los Angeles mayoral contest have both remained undecided days after voting ended, with mail-in ballots still arriving and being processed. Christian Grose, a political science professor at USC and director of the Schwarzenegger Institute, explains the delay not as a failure but as a choice. "California really cares about counting its ballots," he said. "And so as a result, we have a lot of different ways to vote." The state's commitment to access—sending ballots to all 23 million registered voters, allowing mail-in voting, permitting last-minute decisions—necessarily extends the timeline for knowing results.
Beyond the sheer volume, California has layered security measures that take time. Every mail-in ballot goes through a signature-matching process. Machines compare the signature on the ballot envelope to the one on file from voter registration. When machines flag a mismatch, election workers examine the signatures by hand. If both the machine and the human review reject it, California offers voters a chance to "cure" their ballot—to correct the problem and ensure their vote counts. This process, Grose noted, adds days to the count. "It is frustrating because we don't know who the winner is all the time quickly, but then it gives voters the opportunity to make sure that their votes are accounted for and that their votes are counted securely."
The competitive nature of this year's races compounds the delay. In the gubernatorial primary, as many as nine candidates polled well enough to be viable, forcing voters into genuinely difficult choices. That crowded field appears to have affected voting patterns. Democrats, facing a longer decision-making process, were more likely to mail in their ballots at the last minute—Monday or Tuesday before the deadline. Republicans, with only two major candidates in the race, likely made their choices earlier. The result: as mail-in ballots continue to arrive and be counted, left-leaning candidates may see late gains in the tallies.
Governor Gavin Newsom sent a letter to county election officials last month urging them to speed up the count, hoping to outpace conspiracy theories about election security. But Grose resists the framing that speed and security are in tension. "It's normal to have weeks until we have the final count," he said. "It's a little more unusual here that we have so many close elections, we don't know the outcome yet." Dean Logan, the LA County Registrar-Recorder, noted that ballot counters are actually ahead of pace compared to previous cycles.
What's happening in California is not a breakdown. It's the machinery of a system that has chosen accessibility over speed, that counts every ballot that arrives within the legal window, that double-checks signatures and offers voters a chance to fix errors. The frustration is real. The uncertainty is uncomfortable. But the alternative—faster results achieved by counting fewer votes or skipping security steps—would serve a different value. Grose put it plainly: "I think it's personally unfortunate when democracy, literally counting ballots, turns into a partisan battle. It really should be how can we do it the best and as fast as possible and not a partisan issue."
Citas Notables
California really cares about counting its ballots, and so as a result, we have a lot of different ways to vote.— Christian Grose, USC political science professor
It is frustrating because we don't know who the winner is all the time quickly, but then it gives voters the opportunity to make sure that their votes are accounted for and that their votes are counted securely.— Christian Grose
La Conversación del Hearth Otra perspectiva de la historia
Why does California take so long to count votes when other states seem to finish faster?
Because California decided that getting every vote counted matters more than getting a quick answer. About 13 million of their 16 million votes come by mail, and the law says any ballot postmarked by Election Day counts, even if it arrives a week later. That's a choice—a deliberate one.
But doesn't that create opportunities for fraud or manipulation?
That's the fear people voice, but California built in security specifically because of the volume. Every mail-in ballot gets signature-matched by machine, then by hand if the machine flags it. If there's still a problem, voters get to fix it. It takes time, but it's designed to catch real issues.
So why are the governor's race and the LA mayor's race still so close?
Both races have unusually competitive fields. The governor's race had nine viable candidates. That made voters sit with their ballots longer, thinking through the choice. Democrats especially waited until the last minute to mail theirs in.
Does that mean Democrats will end up winning because their votes arrive later?
Possibly. If Democrats mailed ballots in on Monday or Tuesday, those are still being counted now. Republicans with fewer choices likely voted earlier. So yes, as the count continues, you might see left-leaning candidates gain ground.
Is the governor asking them to speed up because something's wrong?
He's asking them to speed up to get ahead of conspiracy theories—to show people the process is legitimate and trustworthy. But the election officials say they're actually ahead of pace compared to past years. The slowness isn't a failure. It's the cost of the system they built.
What would happen if California tried to count faster?
They'd have to either count fewer ballots or skip security steps. You can't have both speed and the level of access California offers. They chose access.