Do non-citizens vote in U.S. elections?

Richman, Jesse T.; Chattha, Gulshan A.; Earnest, David C.

doi:10.1016/j.electstud.2014.09.001

Cited by 20 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In the end, few scholars have been able to effectively counter the 2. Research has uncovered little documented evidence of significant voter fraud (Ahlquist et al 2014; but see Richman et al 2014).…”

Section: Evaluating Voter Id Lawsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Voter Identification Laws and the Suppression of Minority Votes

Hajnal

Lajevardi

Nielson

2017

The Journal of Politics

227

111

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The proliferation of increasingly strict voter identification laws around the country has raised concerns about voter suppression. Although there are many reasons to suspect that these laws could harm groups like racial minorities and the poor, existing studies have been limited, with most occurring before states enacted strict identification requirements, and they have uncovered few effects. By using validated voting data from the Cooperative Congressional Election Study for several recent elections, we are able to offer a more definitive test. The analysis shows that strict identification laws have a differentially negative impact on the turnout of racial and ethnic minorities in primaries and general elections. We also find that voter ID laws skew democracy toward those on the political right. V oting is the bedrock of democracy. Through the vote, citizens choose leaders, sway policy, and generally influence democracy. By contrast, citizens who do not vote can be ignored. It is thus not surprising to see that the laws that shape turnout and determine who can and who cannot vote generate enormous attention and controversy. The latest front in this debate concerns voter identification laws. Voter identification laws have been a topic of discussion since 1950, when South Carolina became the first state to request some form of identification at the polls (NCSL 2015). Since then, more and more states have instituted some form of voter ID law. But it is only within the past decade that the strictest forms of voter ID have proliferated and that voter ID laws have received widespread attention. Today these voter ID laws take several distinct forms. Strict voter ID laws require identification in order to cast a regular ballot. Other more lenient laws request, but do not require, voters to show some kind of identification document at the polls. These laws can also be distinguished by whether or not they allow or consider nonphoto identification. All told, 34 states currently enforce some form of a voter identification law (NCSL 2015). Of these, 11 are strict ID law states that require a person to show identification in order to vote. 1 More states appear to be waiting in the wings. New Mexico, Nevada, Iowa, and others are all considering new stricter voter identification laws (NCSL 2015). The consequences of all of this could be enormous. Given that more than half of the nation's population is currently subject to these laws, that stricter laws are being considered in multiple states, and that the courts are actively evaluating the merits of these laws in a series of landmark cases, there is a compelling need to know exactly what the true impact of these laws is. There is no shortage of opinions about these laws. On one side, the proliferation of these laws raises real concerns for critics who believe that they are unnecessary and ultimately detrimental to democracy. Activist groups, like the Brennan Center for Justice, claim that voter ID laws serve as effective barriers that limit the legitimate participation of racia...

show abstract

Section: Evaluating Voter Id Lawsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Voter Identification Laws and the Suppression of Minority Votes

Hajnal

Lajevardi

Nielson

2017

The Journal of Politics

227

111

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Unfortunately, such a unique identifier is often unavailable. Under these circumstances, some researchers have used a deterministic algorithm to automate the merge process (e.g., Adena et al 2015; Ansolabehere and Hersh 2017; Berent, Krosnick, and Lupia 2016; Bolsen, Ferraro, and Miranda 2014; Cesarini et al 2016; Figlio and Guryan 2014; Giraud-Carrier et al 2015; Hill 2017; Meredith and Morse 2014) whereas others have relied on a proprietary algorithm (e.g., Ansolabehere and Hersh 2012; Engbom and Moser 2017; Figlio and Guryan 2014; Hersh 2015; Hill and Huber 2017; Richman, Chattha, and Earnest 2014). However, these methods are not robust to measurement error (e.g., misspelling) and missing data, which are common to social science data.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using a Probabilistic Model to Assist Merging of Large-Scale Administrative Records

ENAMORADO,

FIFIELD,

IMAI

2019

Am Polit Sci Rev

120

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since most social science research relies on multiple data sources, merging data sets is an essential part of researchers’ workflow. Unfortunately, a unique identifier that unambiguously links records is often unavailable, and data may contain missing and inaccurate information. These problems are severe especially when merging large-scale administrative records. We develop a fast and scalable algorithm to implement a canonical model of probabilistic record linkage that has many advantages over deterministic methods frequently used by social scientists. The proposed methodology efficiently handles millions of observations while accounting for missing data and measurement error, incorporating auxiliary information, and adjusting for uncertainty about merging in post-merge analyses. We conduct comprehensive simulation studies to evaluate the performance of our algorithm in realistic scenarios. We also apply our methodology to merging campaign contribution records, survey data, and nationwide voter files. An open-source software package is available for implementing the proposed methodology.

show abstract

“…On benefits, advocates insist that electoral fraud still exists today -about one third of Americans believe it is widespread (Kobach, 2011;Richman et al, 2014). They argue that strict ID laws are required to deter voter impersonation, double-voting, and non-citizen voting, and to boost public confidence in the integrity of elections (von Spakovsky, 2012).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Strict ID Laws Don’t Stop Voters: Evidence from a U.S. Nationwide Panel, 2008–2018

Cantoni

Pons

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We thank Catalist for providing the U.S. individual-level panel data and responding to our queries about them, and Robert Freeman for invaluable help setting up the data work. We gratefully acknowledge generous funding from the Foundations of Human Behavior Initiative. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Bureau of Economic Research. NBER working papers are circulated for discussion and comment purposes. They have not been peer-reviewed or been subject to the review by the NBER Board of Directors that accompanies official NBER publications.

show abstract

Do non-citizens vote in U.S. elections?

Cited by 20 publications

References 9 publications

Voter Identification Laws and the Suppression of Minority Votes

Voter Identification Laws and the Suppression of Minority Votes

Using a Probabilistic Model to Assist Merging of Large-Scale Administrative Records

Strict ID Laws Don’t Stop Voters: Evidence from a U.S. Nationwide Panel, 2008–2018

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About