Nav: Home

Despite partisanship surrounding voter ID, most voters don't believe it suppresses turnout

May 23, 2017

LAWRENCE -- Most Americans -- even average Democrats -- do not accept the argument that voter identification laws can suppress voter turnout, according to a new study that includes a University of Kansas professor.

The findings can help illuminate why polarization surrounding voter ID laws occurs mostly among party leaders but has not trickled down much to the public, even among groups of Americans like racial minorities, the young, and the low income who are most likely to be affected by voter ID laws, said Patrick Miller a KU assistant professor of political science.

"For most Americans, especially middle-class white people, who possess a government-issued ID, it's difficult for them to understand why people might not have one, and it's difficult for them to understand how it can be challenging to get one sometimes," Miller said. "It's an argument that I think a lot of people aren't really sympathetic to."

Miller's study with co-author Pamela Johnston Conover, distinguished professor of political science at The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, was published recently in the journal Social Science Quarterly.

It is among the first research examining how voters think about voter ID laws, which has been a hot topic for the past decade in several states. A recent federal court decision found a North Carolina law -- that required voters to show ID but rejected forms most commonly used by African Americans -- was unconstitutional. President Donald Trump has repeated a claim several times that "millions" of noncitizens voted illegally in the 2016 election and appointed an advisory commission that includes Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach to examine the issue.

Miller said separate from this study, other researchers have found that voter fraud occurs very rarely and if it does, is often due to clerical error and not malicious intent. However, much of the public believes voter fraud is a widespread problem and that voter ID laws are a potential solution.

The online survey conducted in October 2014 included 1,040 American adults as a reasonable representation of the U.S. population. Generally, Republicans and most Democrats in the survey considered voter fraud a moderate or widespread problem, believed voter suppression is not likely, and supported voter ID laws. The only Democrats who were opposed to voter ID laws were those who believed both that voter fraud is nonexistent and that voter ID laws were highly likely to suppress voter turnout.

"It's not very surprising in our study that the opinions of average Republicans mimic what elected Republicans are saying," Miller said. "It's really Democrats who are the interesting ones. They don't mimic their party leaders. They think voter fraud is a serious problem and is affecting the outcome of elections. They think voter impersonation is common, for example, and that non-citizens are regularly voting in our elections. They have completely, in that sense, adopted the Republican argument, but also importantly, they have rejected their own party's frame."

African Americans, Latinos, young voters, senior citizens, and the poor are typically the most vulnerable to strict voter ID laws because they tend to disproportionately not have a government-issued photo ID and tend to have the greatest difficulty obtaining that identification. However, Miller said, Americans in those subgroups also overwhelmingly support voter ID laws, believe that voter fraud is widespread, and reject the notion that voter ID suppresses turnout.

That means most Americans have accepted the way in which Republican leaders talk about the issue, especially that voter fraud is a major problem, Miller said. Democratic leaders have sought to frame it as a moral issue and that voter ID can infringe upon people's voting rights.

"Average Democrats have not followed along," Miller said. "They are not seeing this as a moral issue in the way that Republicans are."

Potentially, the simplicity of the Republican argument that voter fraud is a problem and voter ID is the remedy could be the key to its success, he said. For one, it taps into most people's negative attitude about politics.

"Americans are very negative, distrusting, and cynical about the political process. We don't like politicians. We don't feel very efficacious toward them, and we feel that the process is corrupt and that people don't have a voice," Miller said.

Secondly, most Americans are accustomed to showing identification in all kinds of situations. Most people also have a government-issued ID, usually a driver's license.

"I think for most people, including most people in the most vulnerable groups, they really can't connect with the reality of some voters that they don't have a government-issued ID and might have a hard time obtaining one," he said. "They just don't understand that reality. And that lack of empathy is true across partisan, racial, age, and economic lines."

University of Kansas

Related Research Articles:

More Research News and Research Current Events

Trending Science News

Current Coronavirus (COVID-19) News

Top Science Podcasts

We have hand picked the top science podcasts of 2020.
Now Playing: TED Radio Hour

Listen Again: The Power Of Spaces
How do spaces shape the human experience? In what ways do our rooms, homes, and buildings give us meaning and purpose? This hour, TED speakers explore the power of the spaces we make and inhabit. Guests include architect Michael Murphy, musician David Byrne, artist Es Devlin, and architect Siamak Hariri.
Now Playing: Science for the People

#576 Science Communication in Creative Places
When you think of science communication, you might think of TED talks or museum talks or video talks, or... people giving lectures. It's a lot of people talking. But there's more to sci comm than that. This week host Bethany Brookshire talks to three people who have looked at science communication in places you might not expect it. We'll speak with Mauna Dasari, a graduate student at Notre Dame, about making mammals into a March Madness match. We'll talk with Sarah Garner, director of the Pathologists Assistant Program at Tulane University School of Medicine, who takes pathology instruction out of...
Now Playing: Radiolab

What If?
There's plenty of speculation about what Donald Trump might do in the wake of the election. Would he dispute the results if he loses? Would he simply refuse to leave office, or even try to use the military to maintain control? Last summer, Rosa Brooks got together a team of experts and political operatives from both sides of the aisle to ask a slightly different question. Rather than arguing about whether he'd do those things, they dug into what exactly would happen if he did. Part war game part choose your own adventure, Rosa's Transition Integrity Project doesn't give us any predictions, and it isn't a referendum on Trump. Instead, it's a deeply illuminating stress test on our laws, our institutions, and on the commitment to democracy written into the constitution. This episode was reported by Bethel Habte, with help from Tracie Hunte, and produced by Bethel Habte. Jeremy Bloom provided original music. Support Radiolab by becoming a member today at     You can read The Transition Integrity Project's report here.