California State Room
Secretary of State — California
Articles, candidate report cards, office explainers & public accountability
California 2026 — and the Road Beyond
Election: November 3, 2026. Research checked: October 7, 2026.
Every office deserves an explanation, and every candidate deserves the same questions. This page begins the public record for California’s secretary of state contest, with evidence that readers can inspect and challenge.
WHAT THIS OFFICE DOES
The secretary of state oversees elections, campaign and lobbying disclosures, business filings, notaries, and state archives.
THE CANDIDATES
Donald P. (Don) Wagner
Republican. His statement proposes faster counting, voter identification, voter-roll maintenance, and a less partisan elections office. His allegations about election administration require separate verification.
Question for the candidate: What lawful changes would speed counting without excluding eligible voters or skipping verification?
Shirley N. Weber
Democratic. Her statement emphasizes voting access, vote-by-mail, eligible voters’ participation, and protection of election officials.
Question for the candidate: What measurable improvements will you make in counting speed, access, and business-service turnaround?
PROVISIONAL SCORECARD
| Candidate | Clear commitments / 10 | Full report / 90 |
|---|---|---|
| Donald P. (Don) Wagner | 6 | Not assigned |
| Shirley N. Weber | 4 | Not assigned |
Why these limited scores: Wagner names administrative changes, while Weber states an access-focused direction. Neither statement supplies a complete implementation timetable.
HOW TO READ THE SCORE
Provisional AI research assessment — not Omar’s final score or endorsement. This first pass rates only the clear, measurable commitments category using the candidate’s published statement. It does not rate personal character, policy desirability, or the likelihood of winning.
The 10-point rule gives up to two points each for: a stated action; an identifiable delivery mechanism; a connection to this office’s responsibilities; a quantified success target; and an implementation deadline. Two means explicit, one means partial, and zero means absent from the reviewed statement. Here, zero describes a missing element in this specific document, not the candidate’s ability or complete platform. A candidate with no reviewed statement remains unscored.
The other eight categories require broader evidence: relevant experience; accountability; education; affordability; economic opportunity; civil rights and religious freedom for everyone; environment; and practical use of office powers. They remain unscored in this first pass. No total out of 90 is assigned. A fuller record may change the provisional category score.
THREE VOICES — ONE OPEN RECORD
AI research: the sourced snapshot and limited assessment above. Voter response: Omar and other readers can give their own assessments. Candidate response: candidates can provide evidence, corrections, and their own scores. No candidate responses or endorsements are claimed here.
Who will win? No election forecast is assigned. This report contains no reviewed polling; a statement score is not a probability of winning.
We wish every candidate the best of luck and hope the result serves the people of California. The research remains open. The human decides.
SOURCES AND PORTRAITS
Official candidate statements and office responsibilities. Statements are supplied by candidates and are not independently fact-checked by the Secretary of State. The score evaluates the submitted wording; it does not validate every claim.
Official guide’s candidate list. Check the certified list and your own ballot for the complete applicable contest.
