Integrity on the ballot: Election deniers target secretary of state races in key states
-
Click here to listen to this article - Share via
See more from the L.A. Times in Google Search. Set us as preferred
- Trump’s attempts to undermine our democracy have elevated the import of the secretary of state’s office.
- Election deniers on the ballot in Arizona, Nevada and Wisconsin could make mischief in 2028.
Free and fair elections are foundational to our representative democracy. A government intended to reflect and honor the will of the people works only if the people can express their will. That’s why we have elections.
But don’t take the word of your friendly political columnist.
John Lewis, the late Georgia congressman and hero of the civil rights movement, said voting is precious and “the most powerful non-violent tool we have in a democratic society.” Former President Reagan called the right to vote “the crown jewel of American liberties.”
Alas, we have a president who believes his most precious right, apart from lining his silken pockets, is nursing his over-ripened ego. Donald Trump can’t stand the fact he lost the 2020 election — which he most emphatically did — and so he’s built a carapace of lies: about illegal ballots, rigged election machinery, rampant voting by noncitizens, and so on.
Worse than his deceit — which has deeply undermined faith in our elections and the dedicated people who run them — is Trump’s brazen efforts to rig the system by disenfranchising millions of voters, all so he can keep Democrats from winning office.
Reagan, no less than Lewis, probably is turning cartwheels in his grave.
The effort is part of the implementation of President Trump’s executive order limiting mail voting and has been temporarily halted by a federal judge. The ruling is being appealed by the administration and the directive may ultimately end up back before the U.S. Supreme Court.
But there’s a chance to push back. In November, voters in 26 states will elect a secretary of state, choosing the officials who will oversee the 2028 presidential race throughout most of the country. What could possibly go wrong?
Let’s hope we don’t find out.
The secretary of state used to be one of those ministerial posts that few outside government knew or much cared about; from a political standpoint, the office and its occupant seemed dull and dry as Melba toast. That changed after 2000, when Republican Katherine Harris placed her weighty thumb on the scale and helped deliver Florida’s 25 electoral votes, and the White House, to George W. Bush.
What really politicized the office of secretary of state, though, was Trump’s obsessive compulsion with his 2020 defeat.
Spurred by his incessant lies about supposed fraud, allies and opportunists set out to hijack the country’s election machinery and do Trump’s dirty work from the inside. In 2022, a group calling itself the America First SOS Coalition endorsed a slate of cranks and quacks who ran for secretary of state in 14 states, including the presidential battlegrounds of Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada and Wisconsin.
Thankfully, all of them lost, save for one candidate in Indiana. Among those defeated was Tina Peters, the former county elections chief in Mesa County, Colo., who went on to infamy, and prison, for orchestrating a security breach aimed at “proving” 2020 votes were stolen from Trump. (Never mind that he won the county by nearly 30 percentage points.)
The SOS Coalition apparently is defunct; its website address now leads to an online gambling portal.
But more than two dozen election deniers ran for secretary of state this year, according to States United Action, a nonpartisan group that works to promote fair and secure elections nationwide. Six of those candidates won their primaries and made it to November’s ballot, including in three states — Arizona, Nevada and Wisconsin — that promise to be key once more to picking the next president.
The stakes in those races are considerable, said Peverill Squire, a University of Missouri expert on state elections. “Who’s going to be administering [election] rules? How they’re going to interpret those rules?” he said, offering examples of the office’s import. “Whether they’re going to try to make it more difficult to vote, or easier to vote. Whether they’re going to try to engage in activities that will further raise doubts in some people’s minds about how fairly the election has been conducted.”
The contest in Nevada is a rerun of 2022, when Democrat Cisco Aguilar narrowly defeated Republican Jim Marchant. Undeterred, Marchant continues to spout gibberish about sabotaged voting machines and other far-fetched claims of election chicanery. Among the remedies he’s floated, according to the Nevada Independent, is using technology to measure voters’ heartbeat as a way to verify their identity.
Um...
Meanwhile, in Arizona, incumbent Democrat Adrian Fontes faces Republican state Rep. Alexander Kolodin, an attorney who was sanctioned by the State Bar for pursuing baseless claims of 2020 election fraud. One of his Trump-inspired lawsuits was swiftly rejected by a federal judge who noted its conspicuous lack of “relevant or reliable evidence” — thus raising doubts not just about Kolodin’s discernment but also his capacity to cover even the basics.
In Wisconsin, where elections are overseen by a six-member, bipartisan commission, Republican Jay Schroeder is running on a pledge to dismantle that fair-minded system, calling it a “failed experiment.” Had he been secretary of state in 2020, Schroeder told NBC News, he would not have certified Joe Biden’s victory in the state.
That’s all you need to know, Wisconsin.
The four-seat gain Democrats need to win control once seemed all but out of reach. Odds are looking up, though the party still faces a tough path, with toss-up races in a half dozen (mostly red) states.
Great amounts of time, energy and resources are being devoted this election to races for Congress and for statehouses across the country, which makes sense.
Control of both the House and Senate are in play on Nov. 3. There are more than a dozen gubernatorial contests with at least some degree of competition, including close races in Ohio, Georgia and Wisconsin.
But with so much riding on the outcome, it’s also worth paying heed to those down-ballot races for secretary of state.
You can’t keep elections on the straight and narrow if the people running them are crooked.
Insights
L.A. Times Insights delivers AI-generated analysis on Voices content to offer all points of view. Insights does not appear on any news articles.
Viewpoint
Perspectives
The following AI-generated content is powered by Perplexity. The Los Angeles Times editorial staff does not create or edit the content.
Ideas expressed in the piece
- The column argues that free and fair elections are the foundation of representative democracy and that preserving broad access to the ballot is essential to honoring the will of the people.[8][9]
- It contends that Donald Trump’s false narrative of a stolen 2020 election has eroded public trust, empowered election deniers, and placed new pressure on the offices that oversee voting rules and certify results, especially secretaries of state in closely contested states.[2][5][6][7][10]
- The piece suggests that once-obscure secretary of state posts became intensely politicized after the disputed 2000 election and, more recently, through Trump-aligned efforts to challenge and overturn the 2020 outcome.[2][3][5][6][11]
- It notes that organized networks of election deniers targeted secretary of state races in multiple states in 2022, largely failed, and yet have returned in 2026 with a new slate of candidates seeking authority over voter registration, ballot counting, and certification ahead of the 2028 presidential race.[2][3][5][7][10][11]
- The article argues that key battlegrounds such as Arizona, Nevada and Wisconsin now feature secretary of state candidates who have questioned or denied the legitimacy of the 2020 results, raising fears that they could refuse to certify future elections or adopt rules that make voting more difficult.[2][3][5][6][7][11]
- It highlights contests where election-denying Republicans are challenging Democratic incumbents, including the rematch in Nevada and the race in Arizona, portraying these campaigns as tests of whether deniers can gain direct control over the machinery of elections.[3][6][7][10][11]
- The column portrays election denier candidates as spreading baseless claims about rigged voting machines, illegal ballots and noncitizen voting, and as advancing extreme or unproven “solutions” that signal a willingness to manipulate, rather than faithfully administer, elections.
- It underscores warnings from election scholars and watchdog groups that secretaries of state wield significant discretion over how rules are interpreted and enforced, and that officials hostile to established norms could use that power to restrict access or sow doubts about legitimate outcomes.[2][3][5][6][7][11]
- The piece ultimately urges voters to pay close attention to down-ballot secretary of state races, arguing that protecting democracy requires electing administrators who accept verified results and focus on secure, accessible elections rather than amplifying unfounded fraud narratives.[2][5][8][9][10]
Different views on the topic
- Coverage of 2026 races documents how many secretary of state candidates who deny or question the 2020 results present themselves as champions of “election integrity,” claiming that widespread fraud or mismanagement occurred and that stricter oversight is needed.[2][3][5][7][11]
- These candidates often argue that existing systems—especially mail voting, ballot drop boxes and electronic machines—are vulnerable to manipulation, and they promise more aggressive audits, tighter voter-roll maintenance or limits on certain voting methods as remedies.[3][5][7][11]
- In Nevada, reporting describes Jim Marchant and similar figures as insisting that past elections were compromised and that overhauling how ballots are verified and certified is necessary to reassure skeptical voters and prevent what they view as future “steals.”[3][7][10][11]
- Some conservative commentators and officials backing new election integrity initiatives contend that creating bipartisan task forces, reviewing list maintenance and scrutinizing county compliance are reasonable responses to public concern, framing these measures as strengthening—not threatening—confidence in elections.[1][4]
- Supporters of election-denying candidates, as reflected in analyses of battleground races, often maintain that mainstream institutions and media have minimized irregularities, and they argue that installing officials who share their skepticism will ensure that close contests undergo more thorough investigation before certification.[3][5][6][7][11]
- A number of political analysts note that these candidates continue to win Republican primaries in states such as Arizona and Wisconsin, suggesting that a sizable bloc of voters sees denialist or hard-line “integrity” platforms as a legitimate way to address lingering doubts about the 2020 and 2022 cycles.[3][5][6][11]
More From the Los Angeles Times
Podcasts
In this episode, we bring you the update on how an Altadena resident and her neighborhood are coming along, plus a re-run of the two-part series we did on the Poppyfields people back in June.
California once bet big on offshore wind to help power its clean-energy future, but the Trump administration is now paying developers billions to walk away from their projects. As California’s remaining offshore-wind leases hang in the balance, the state is fighting back in court.
The Hillside Strangler murders terrorized Los Angeles in the late 1970s. The killers were a pair of sadistic cousins. One confessed. The other was set to stand trial—until L.A. prosecutors flinched.
