Arguments Against Voter Identification Laws

The ability to vote is one of the most fundamental rights offered by our constitution, and it is intrinsically valuable to our democracy. Preventing voter fraud is essential to the stability of our political system, and that must be achieved while simultaneously not encumbering the voters with stipulations. Voter Identification laws and regulations have created intense controversy in both the public arena and political sphere. Voter identification laws require voters on election day to show specific forms of government-issued identification before casting a ballot. (Sobel et al. 2009) Those in support of voter identification laws and regulations often assert that these laws discourage fraudulently cast votes, and preserve the integrity of our elections. Generally, those who argue against voter identification laws suggest these laws are discriminatory in nature and are put forth to legally suppress lawful voters. Often the opponents of these laws liken them to previously found unconstitutional methods to suppress voter turnout. While giving a speech at the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) convention then Attorney General Eric Holder chastised the states that began to turn away registered

voters unless presented with particular forms of identification; “Under proposed voter identification laws, many would struggle to pay for identification needed to vote. We call this a poll tax,”. We will review the surrounding attitudes and justification for support for strict voter identification laws. as well as the ideological arguments against such laws.

Support for Voter Identification
Advocates for voter identification normally express one argument as justification for their beliefs, voter fraud. Supporters of strict voter identification laws often point to alleged historical examples to justify their beliefs, in part because no recent empirical study has been performed that indicates widespread fraud exists. A study of the public opinion on voter fraud performed suggests the general public may lack proper information and facts surrounding voter ID laws, therefore opinions on these issues may simply be influenced by group predispositions, media and political information. (Wilson et al. 2013)
Does Voter Fraud Exist, if so how widespread is it?
Voter fraud is when an individual purposely cast a ballot in an attempt to defraud the electoral system albeit knowingly they are ineligible to do so. (Levitt et al. 2007) Belief in voter fraud is the expressed core component for the desire to enact voter identification laws. After the 2000 election voter fraud has become a common debate within the political sphere.
It appears there is not much debate within the academic community on this issue, seemingly because no credible reports have shown any evidence of widespread voter fraud. On the contrary, many prominent academics suggest widespread voter fraud is a fable. (Schultz, 2008; Minnite; 2008; Zalan 2012) Most of the debate on voter fraud is argued within the public and amongst political actors. The public’s opinion to which the degree of fraudulent votes cast during election cycles vary greatly. Many opponents of voter identification laws suggest voter fraud is virtually non-existent. A study performed by Minnite (2010) concluded “almost no one knowingly and willfully casts an illegal vote in the United States today” and “voter fraud is a politically constructed myth”. After the U.S 2016 election, President Donald Trump claimed that 3-5 million illegal ballots cast lost him the popular vote.
Stewart (2016) analyzed surveys from 2008-2014 that examined relationships between voter identification laws and perception of voter fraud.

The study suggests that an individual’s degree of belief of voter fraud correlates to their political ideology. Republican voters are more likely to believe in widespread voter fraud and support for voter identification laws has increased in the examined time frame. Also, the inverse is true, democratic voters believe tend to believe that there is less voter fraud, and attitudes towards opposing voter identification laws have strengthened in the examined time frame. Many allegations of voter fraud have turned up in the media over the years, but when the facts are scrutinized often they fall short of the

claims
Suppressing Minority Groups
Those who oppose voter-identification laws often do so because they believe the law discourages or suppress votes from identifiable minority groups. Many of these lawful voters, lack an accurate, unexpired government-issued photo ID, and cannot easily acquire one. Data collected from Milwaukee in 2006 finds that less than half (47%) of Milwaukee County African American adults have an unexpired government issued photo ID, this is a stark contrast to the 85% of white adults that have ID in Wisconsin. (Pawasarat, 2006) Oftentimes these voters are racial minorities or belong to lower socio-economic groups who tend to vote in favor of Democrats and often draws claims of racism and partisanship. (Gilbert, 2015) The Brennan Center for Justice a voting activist group suggest that voter identification laws act as hurdles that limit the participation of minorities and people from disadvantaged groups. (Weiser, 2014) Many political pundits such as Berman (2011) suggest voter identification has a more nefarious purpose rather than of protecting the integrity of our democracy. He writes,
AS THE NATION GEARS UP FOR the 2012 presidential election, Republican officials have launched an unprecedented, centrally coordinated campaign to suppress the elements of the Democratic vote Thet elected Barack Obama in 2008. Just as Dixiecrats once used poll taxes and literacy tests to bar black Southerners from voting, a new crop of GOP governors and state legislators has passed a series of seemingly disconnected measures Thet could prevent millions of students, minorities, immigrants, ex-convicts and the elderly from casting ballots.
Attempting to bring empirical understanding to the subject of restrictive voter policies, Bentele (2013) used multiple specialized regression approaches to scrutinize the connection between the proposal and adoption of restrictive voter legislation from 2006-2011. The findings of this study suggest that from the onset of the proposal to enforcement as law, these policies are partisan, strategic and racialized. “First, they are race, gender, and class neutral on paper, but have disparate political impacts in practice. … The net effect of these policy regimes is to reduce, to varying degrees, full political incorporation among the socially marginalized.” (Bentele, 2013) A recent scholarly study found important patterns correlating with racial attitudes and political ideology. Support for strict voter ID laws is strongest among Republicans, conservatives and individuals with higher levels of racial resentment, as well as with regular Fox News viewers and individuals who believe voter fraud to be widespread and common. (Wilson et al. 2013)
Conclusion
Many studies have shown that the type of alleged voter fraud suggested by proponents of voters identification laws is very uncommon. The majority of studies performed suggest that strict voter identification laws decreases voter turnout and disproportionately effects minorities and disenfranchised groups. Republican legislators in critical swing states are the loudest advocates for strict voter identification laws. With the understanding that no empirical studies have been performed showing the existence of widespread voter fraud, is there possible alternate reason for advocation of voter identification laws? What explains general public’s belief in voter fraud?