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

Abstract

U.S. states increasingly require identification to vote – an ostensive attempt to deter fraud that prompts complaints of selective disenfranchisement. Using a difference-in-differences design on a 1.6-billion-observations panel dataset, 2008–2018, we find that the laws have no negative effect on registration or turnout, overall or for any group defined by race, gender, age, or party affiliation. These results hold through a large number of specifications. Our most demanding specification controls for state, year, and voter fixed effects, along with state and voter time-varying controls. Based on this specification, we obtain point estimates of -0.1 percentage points for effects both on overall registration and turnout (with 95 percent confidence intervals of [-2.3; 2.1 pp] and [-3.0; 2.8 pp], respectively), and +1.4 pp for the effect on the turnout of nonwhite voters relative to whites (with a 95 percent confidence interval of [-0.5; 3.2 pp]). The lack of negative impact on voter turnout cannot be attributed to voters’ reaction against the laws, measured by campaign contributions and self-reported political engagement. However, the likelihood that nonwhite voters were contacted by a campaign increases by 4.7 percentage points, suggesting that parties’ mobilization might have offset modest effects of the laws on the participation of ethnic minorities. Finally, strict ID requirements have no effect on fraud – actual or perceived. Overall, our findings suggest that efforts to improve elections may be better directed at other reforms.

The durable differential deterrent effects of strict photo identification laws

“…which is about 0.116 percent of the 2016 primary electorate in North Carolina. This is consistent with Cantoni and Pons (2019), which finds small effects of voter ID laws on overall turnout using a nationwide voter file panel. Even in a large nationwide panel researchers lack the power to detect this sized effect.…”

“…To assess the effects of voter ID laws, scholars compare turnout in states that have voter ID requirements with those that do not, using either aggregate state-level turnout or self-reported turnout data (Erikson and Minnite, 2009). Some designs have found no effect on turnout (Mycoff et al, 2009;Hood and Bullock, 2012;Highton, 2017;Cantoni and Pons, 2019), while others have found negative effects on turnout (Alvarez et al, 2008;Barreto et al, 2009;Alvarez et al, 2011;Hajnal et al, 2017). Yet, if the effect of voter ID laws persists, then states that are classified as "control" states after a law is repealed will still have voters affected by the law being in place; and as a result, the most common research designs will be biased toward finding no effect.…”

Battling the Hydra: the disparate impact of voter ID requirements in North Dakota

“…Research around the impact of voter identification laws on turnout is mixed (Erikson and Minnite, 2009; Hershey, 2009). Several studies conclude that the impact of voter ID laws on turnout is negligible (Erikson and Minnite, 2009; Mycoff et al ., 2009; Grimmer et al ., 2018; Cantoni and Pons, 2021). Others find that the strictest laws have a depressive effect, but do not find differences among racial and ethnic groups (Hood and Bullock, 2012; Hood and Buchanan, 2020).…”

Democratic Capacity: Election Administration as Bulwark and Target

“…16 A working paper found that new laws to require voter identification between 2008 and 2018 failed to depress registration or turnout including among voters of color. Part of the reason is countermobilizationincreased contacts by the candidate organizations and Democratic Party (Cantoni and Pons 2021).…”