From hanging chads to the gold standard: Florida is the nation's leader on elections 

When Florida’s 2000 presidential election descended into the now-historic Bush v. Gore legal battle, its name became synonymous with electoral dysfunction. The world was laughing at a count marred by hanging chads, poor ballot design, and delayed results that plunged the nation into political uncertainty. News vans camped outside the courthouse. Late-night hosts reveled in the chaos.

Yet more than two decades later, according to a recently released report from The James Madison Institute, Florida has emerged as the benchmark of competence and credibility and has become the gold standard in electoral excellence.

This transformation was not accidental or overnight. It resulted from a series of pragmatic, detail-oriented reforms. Ballots were redesigned for improved functionality and clarity. Electronic tabulation was backed up by paper audit trails. Structured pre-canvassing procedures were instituted to process early votes and ensure timely reporting, systematic voter roll updates, and increased transparency and accountability in vote-by-mail protocols.

While some critics label these measures as restrictive or “anti-voter,” with some even recklessly comparing them to the modern equivalent of “poll taxes,” Florida’s own turnout data easily undercuts that false narrative. Over the same period as these reforms, voter participation among African American and Hispanic communities has increased more rapidly than among white voters, refuting any argument that reform has come at the expense of access.

Georgia responded to its own election controversies with the 2021 Election Integrity Act, imposing stricter identification requirements for absentee voting, narrowing deadlines, and expanding early voting windows — an approach that blends tighter controls with broader availability.

Utah, meanwhile, had embraced a more permissive vote-by-mail system, only to announce a retrenchment beginning in 2025. The state plans to eliminate grace periods for mail-in ballots, impose renewal requirements for mail-ballot eligibility, and withdraw from the Electronic Registration Information Center, a multistate collaborative aimed at maintaining accurate voter rolls. These steps reflect a departure from Florida’s more balanced emphasis on both access and oversight.

Wisconsin has focused on improving the mechanics of ballot processing, while states like Colorado, Nevada, and Hawaii have committed to universal mail voting. Colorado, for example, has operated entirely by mail since 2013, and Nevada codified mail-in voting as permanent following its emergency use during the 2020 pandemic.

Although these systems differ technically from Florida’s hybrid structure — combining early voting and vote-by-mail — Florida's system shows that, if instituted with proper safeguards, the outcome often remains similar: broader participation from voters of every background.

Nationally, the White House issued an executive order in March addressing voting by non-citizens. It more recently expressed concerns about lax parameters used by some states with mail-in voting. This demonstrates an acknowledgement that more needs to be done nationally where applicable, and some states have work to do in order to restore confidence in their voting processes.

But Florida’s evolution from disorder to dependability is instructive. It provides a compelling template for the rest of the nation. The state's current approach demonstrates that voter accessibility need not come at the expense of accuracy, security, administrative efficiency, and quick, accurate counting of votes. Florida stands in stark contrast to the concept that states cannot modernize security while expanding access and ensuring accuracy.

But imitation without context can distort intent. Georgia’s reforms, for example, borrow from Florida’s electoral toolkit but then apply a heavier regulatory hand that may erode voter confidence. Utah’s pivot away from inclusive practices signals a different philosophical direction altogether.

The takeaway? Florida offers a powerful, tested model, but not a one-size-fits-all. Its success isn’t ideological; it is operational, backed by administrative discipline. States looking to reform should resist the temptation of copy-paste solutions and instead engage deeply with the principles underpinning Florida’s gains: efficiency, accuracy, accountability, and equitable access; balancing security and participation in ways tailored to each state’s legal frameworks and voter demographics.

Florida’s elections today are a testament to what deliberate and sustained commitment can yield: timely outcomes, robust turnout, and, most importantly, public faith in the process. For states seeking electoral reform, the Sunshine State represents both opportunity and caution. The opportunity lies in studying what has worked. The warning: arbitrary replication without serious intent and adaptation risks replicating form without function.

If states genuinely wish to restore confidence in the democratic process, they would do well to study Florida’s systems and go beyond headlines and feel-good catch phrases. They must design and deliver their own standard of election integrity for their unique electorates, with an election system that is not only functional but also trusted by the electors.

Doug Wheeler is the director of the George Center for Economic Prosperity at the James Madison Institute, where Dr. Robert McClure is president and CEO.