Assemblyman Carl DeMaio, Chairman of Reform California, and Rep. Ken Calvert carries signatures for the Voter ID initiative (Screenshot)
Reform California Submits 1.35 Million Signatures to Place Voter ID Initiative on 2026 Ballot
DeMaio vows that the grassroots effort will bring this energy to races in the fall: ‘This is what Democracy looks like’
By Megan Barth, March 5, 2026 11:51 am
In a significant push for election integrity, Reform California Chairman and State Assemblyman Carl DeMaio (R-San Diego) announced on Tuesday that his organization has collected and is submitting over 1.35 million signatures to qualify a Voter ID initiative for the November 2026 ballot. The initiative, which aims to require photo identification for in-person voting, citizenship verification for voter registration, and enhanced safeguards against non-citizen voting, represents a major grassroots effort to address long-standing concerns about California’s election processes.
DeMaio shared the milestone via a post on X (formerly Twitter), stating, “1.35M Signatures! Yesterday and today in each of the 58 counties in California, we are turning in signatures to force a vote on the CA Voter ID Initiative! We got it on the ballot, but now we need to PASS IT!” He urged supporters to join the campaign through Reform California’s website. The announcement was accompanied by photos of petition boxes and supporters at various county registrar offices, underscoring the statewide scope of the signature drive.
1.35M Signatures! Yesterday and today in each of the 58 counties in California, we are turning in signatures to force a vote on the CA Voter ID Initiative! We got it on the ballot, but now we need to PASS IT! Join the fight at https://t.co/TFn2RnSajd pic.twitter.com/1HzY1yjMjW
— Carl DeMaio (@carldemaio) March 3, 2026
In a conversation with the California Globe, DeMaio highlighted that the over 18,000 grassroots volunteers are “going to stay the course” to “bring change and reform in California to the ballot box.”
“Voter ID is a bipartisan issue and common sense. The only people who don’t want it is politicians. The fewer voters that show up in an election, the less expensive their campaigns are. They want to use every opportunity to divide us by partisan lines. But the majority of voters want Voter ID. The politicians never give us what we want–they are not acting on 70 percent of what voters want,” DeMaio charged.
“If we get this across the finish line in November, it becomes a model of how we address other issues in the future,” DeMaio promised, noting, “No one thought we could do this, but we have over 18,000 volunteers across the state and Republicans didn’t have that for decades. We are gong to stay the course and bring this energy to races this fall and build on the momentum. We worked with Howard Jarvis Taxpayers association to gather signatures to save Prop 13 and we are confident that in the 2028 cycle, we will put more reforms on the ballot because change and reform will have to be done at the ballot box. This is what democracy looks like.”
The Voter ID initiative traces its roots to legislative efforts by DeMaio and former Assemblyman Bill Essayli (R-Riverside), who introduced AB 1485 in early 2025 to mandate voter ID for both in-person and mail-in ballots. Although the bill was killed by Democrats in committee, who argued it would restrict voting access, DeMaio pivoted to a ballot measure strategy. In July 2025, DeMaio and Senator Tony Strickland (R-Huntington Beach) formally launched the campaign for the constitutional amendment, emphasizing the need for proof of citizenship to prevent non-citizen voting.
Public polling has consistently shown strong backing for such reforms. A May 2025 UC Berkeley IGS poll found that 71% of Californians support requiring proof of citizenship for first-time voter registration, with 54% favoring it before each election. DeMaio has framed the initiative as a response to perceived vulnerabilities in California’s no-ID voting system, which he and supporters argue enables fraud and undermines confidence in elections.
“We are absolutely thrilled with the overwhelming and broad-based support for the CA Voter ID initiative,” DeMaio said in a prior statement. “By submitting 1.35 million signatures, we are confident this initiative will qualify for the November 2026 midterm ballot.” He has also warned of potential “dirty tricks” from opponents and vowed to assemble a legal team to ensure the measure’s placement on the ballot.
Critics, including Democratic leaders and voting rights groups, have dismissed the initiative as unnecessary and suppressive, pointing to low rates of documented voter fraud in the state. However, recent legal battles, such as the California Supreme Court’s January 2026 ruling striking down Huntington Beach’s local voter ID law, have intensified the debate over election security at the municipal and state levels.
If validated by county election officials and the Secretary of State—requiring at least 874,641 valid signatures—the measure will appear on the 2026 ballot as a constitutional amendment. Once approved by voters, it would bind state politicians to implement the reforms, bypassing potential legislative resistance.
- DHS Refers Swalwell Brazilian Nanny Allegations to Law Enforcement - April 12, 2026
- Swalwell’s Gubernatorial Campaign Collapses as Explosive Sexual Assault Allegations Trigger Mass Democratic Defections - April 10, 2026
- Frontline Victory Fund Launches $500,000 Ad Blitz for Republican AG Candidate Adriana Guzmán Fralick in Nevada - April 10, 2026
RELATED ARTICLES
-
- January 28, 2025
-
-
-
-
- November 13, 2025
I am all for voter ID, but it seems there is a huge loophole, and that’s mail-in voting. Mail-in voting, drop-box voting and ballot harvesting need to be banned. If that’s not done, the fraudsters will just move on to non in person voting.
If a republican is elected governor, they need to submit an executive order to return to pre-covid voting policies: in-person voting was standard and mail-in ballots were by request. Governor Opportunist-in-a-Hurry reversed the normal order of things based on pseudoscience.
100% agree with both of the above comments & observations….
baby steps! if we don’t purge illegal aliens and other non-citizens and prison inmates from voter rolls, and ensure 1 person, 1 vote, you would never have a fair election to ban mail in ballots. Clean up the elections even 70-80% of the way, and you have the chance to get the other 20% in a future election, or better yet, bring in a MAGA majority to Sac and let them pass the legislation!
As usual, I agree with Cali’s comments, except the “1 person, 1 vote” concept. When applied to representation in the CA Senate (e.g., our Senate is based on approx. equal populations, not by county or other geographic approach like the US Senate), the rural areas become completely disenfranchised. This gives the metro areas too much power. The “1 person, 1 vote” concept was solidified in Reynolds v. Sims (1964). This continues to cuase grief for states that have dense population centers.
I’d like to think that Republican candidates can ride this measure to victory and this is a hopeful sign that cheating will no longer be a feature of California politics. All the major Democrat candidates will claim it’s “Jim crow 2.0” and that “democracy is on the line” but these phrases have been rejected in national polls. The cheating this election cycle will be intense, so I hope Republicans have thee legal resources to fight.
I fear that the partisan divide in CA (wealthy coastal versus inland areas) is too firmly entrenched to ever allow such a common sense initiative to be passed or implemented by the legislature. The opposition will create some slick ad campaign and sucker in the coastal elites to believe they are disenfranchising the downtrodden. This opinion is formed based on discussions with my family that resides in the Bay Area. Logic and reason are no match for their feelings…
If it does pass, it will languish is the same pit of despair as Prop 209, where the voters approved the measure and the CA courts rejected it with the Democrat AG declining to argue it beyond the state Supreme Court.
Hate to be a Debbie downer as we are planning to leaving this once great state, but if you don’t learn from history….
“Logic and reason are no match for their feelings…”. Classic….its so true here in the Bay Area.
Pete, I look at you more as a Realist than a Debbie Downer. How many propositions have been passed that the Democrats running this state just ignore? Prop. 36 is the latest. Did they put funding in the Voter ID proposition? That’s been their excuse for Prop. 36. They need to run these propositions by at least 100 lawyers, all looking for loopholes.
I took the text of the ballot initiative found here. https://www.voteridca.org/press-1
I asked Leo AI where potential loopholes are that could result in the proposition not being implemented. Here is what it came up with.
————————————————
Based on the text, here are potential loopholes or ways compliance could be weakened:
Ambiguous Language & Implementation Gaps
“Best efforts” standard (Section 3.1(a)): The requirement to “use best efforts to verify citizenship” is subjective and not clearly defined. The state could argue it has met this standard with minimal resources or outdated verification methods.
“Government data” undefined: The amendment doesn’t specify which government databases must be used or how comprehensive the verification needs to be, leaving room for selective or incomplete verification.
Audit & Enforcement Weaknesses
Audits are advisory only: The State Auditor’s biennial reports (Section 3.1(c)) provide findings and recommendations but lack explicit enforcement mechanisms or penalties for non-compliance.
Judicial review burden: Citizens must initiate lawsuits to challenge compliance. This places the burden on individuals rather than automatic enforcement, and litigation is costly and time-consuming.
Implementation Delays
Legislative discretion: Section 3.1(c) says the Legislature “shall promptly enact laws” but doesn’t define “promptly” or include deadlines, allowing indefinite delays in implementing regulations.
Funding Issues
No funding mechanism: The amendment doesn’t allocate specific funding for citizenship verification systems, free ID cards, or compliance infrastructure. Budget constraints could justify limited implementation.
——————————————————
Here we go again. Do these conservatives who write these propositions have any common sense at all to check their proposition before going to all this trouble? (banging head against wall)
Protect Freedom…wow, just WOW. Good job. It’s almost as if the “our side”, conservative side…dont have any lawyers working for them. Yes. We need to do better because the hatred the progressives have for this president and conservatives, Christian’s, and everything else we believe in runs very, very deep. They are relentless, they will not stop for anything and do anything to counter us and especially stopping Trump. I live it. TDS runs very deep in these people. Around here it’s “ I hate Trump” 24/7/365 (yea, it’s getting real, real, real old) yea, they will do ANYTHING to get to him, especially cheating .yea. We’ve got to do better. But how, I’ve signed everything I can. One vote. Talk to friends about politics…etc. I even try to get them interested in California politics but they will not get off Trump. No reason, no logic…none, just feelings.