California Democrats Attempt To Sabotage Voter ID Initiative

California voters will decide on Proposition 39 this November. Officially known as the Voter Identification, Citizenship Verification, and Registered Voter List Administration Initiative, the measure would require voters to present identification at the polls or provide the last four digits of a government-issued ID number for mail ballots. It would also direct the state to issue free voter ID cards upon request and require elections officials to report annually on citizenship verification efforts for registered voters in each county.

Public support appears strong. A May poll from the UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies found 71% of Californians favor requiring proof of citizenship for first-time voter registration, while 54% support it before every election.

Attorney General Rob Bonta recently revised the official ballot title for the measure. On July 21, months before the election, he replaced the language he had previously approved. The original title, which appeared on petitions signed by more than 1.3 million voters during the qualification process, read:

“ESTABLISHES ADDITIONAL VOTER IDENTIFICATION AND CITIZENSHIP VERIFICATION REQUIREMENTS. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT. This measure would amend the California Constitution to further require that voters present government-issued identification at the polls or the last four digits of a government-issued identification number when voting by mail; the State provide voter identification cards on request; and elections officials annually report percentage of each county’s voters whose citizenship they have verified.”

The updated version states:

“PROHIBITS CITIZENS FROM VOTING UNLESS THEY PRESENT GOVERNMENT-ISSUED IDENTIFICATION. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT. Invalidates mail ballots that do not have last four digits of designated government-issued identification number written on envelope. Prohibits in-person voting without presenting government-issued identification.”

Republican Assemblymember Carl DeMaio, who chairs Reform California and is a proponent of the measure, described the change as a deliberate effort to undermine the proposal. He argued that officials recognized broad bipartisan support for voter ID requirements and altered the title to create a more negative impression. DeMaio noted the timing, saying a more neutral title was provided when signature collection seemed uncertain, only for the language to shift after the measure qualified for the ballot. He has filed a lawsuit seeking restoration of the earlier title, though he acknowledged the legal challenge faces significant obstacles given past court rulings on similar issues.

Bonta’s office rejected claims of improper influence, stating the revision is standard procedure and required by law. A spokesperson emphasized that California election code permits the official ballot title to differ from the circulating title, and noted that all nine voter-initiated measures qualifying this cycle received updated titles.

Similar title changes have occurred before. In 2018, then-Attorney General Xavier Becerra altered the description of Proposition 6, a gas tax repeal effort, framing it as eliminating road repair and transportation funding. Support for that measure fell from roughly 65% to 45%, and it failed.

DeMaio remains optimistic that Proposition 39 will still succeed in November, viewing the title dispute as further evidence of the need for the reforms it proposes. Critics of the process point to other recent examples where voter-approved measures, such as the 2024 tough-on-crime Proposition 36, faced subsequent legislative resistance over funding.