Skepticism About Voter ID Laws Having Disproportionate Impact

[Brainster]

Somebody in another thread pointed to an Atlantic article regarding this study, which purports to find disproportionate impact to voter turnout among racial minorities from voter ID laws. Here's the claim from the abstract:

The analysis shows that strict photo identification laws have a differentially negative impact on the turnout of Hispanics, Blacks, and mixed-race Americans in primaries and general elections. Voter ID laws skew democracy in favor of whites and those on the political right.

From the Atlantic:

Using this refined methodology, researchers found that strict ID laws doubled the turnout gap between whites and Latinos in the general elections, and almost doubled the white-black turnout gap in primary elections.

Now first of all, notice the sleight of hand there. Why are we told about the turnout gap between whites and Latinos in general elections and whites and blacks in primary elections, and nothing at all about the turnout gap between whites and blacks in general elections and whites and Latinos in primary elections?

But my main problem with the study is pretty much simple math. The authors admit that they found, as other researchers have, that voter ID laws do not decrease turnout:

In both cases, there is no apparent relationship between strict photo ID laws and overall voter turnout. Net other factors, whether or not a state requires photo identification to cast a standard ballot has no significant effect on the likelihood of any individual voting. This holds true regardless of how we measure voter identification laws or which other factors we include in our regression model. If we focus instead on the strength of voter identification laws in each state rather than on the presence of a strict photo ID, the results do not change. If we drop the other variables measuring electoral context and electoral structure, the conclusion is the same: voter identification laws do not increase or decrease overall turnout.

Well, if minority turnout is decreased, but overall turnout remains the same, then it seems like the only possibility is that voter ID laws somehow magically increase white turnout. But they do not state that:

Thus, while whites were largely unaffected by these laws, racial and ethnic minorities were falling further and further behind and increasingly losing their place in the democratic process.

If one group's turnout stays the same and another group's turnout decreases, how does overall turnout remain the same? I assume they are not claiming that whites are an increasing share of the population?

But wait, it gets even more confusing:

Democratic turnout drops by an estimated 7.7 percentage points in general elections when strict photo identification laws are in place. By comparison, the predicted drop for Republicans is only 4.6 points.

But keep in mind that:

...there is no apparent relationship between strict photo ID laws and overall voter turnout.

So how do both the Democrats and the Republicans both lose so many voters and yet the overall turnout remains the same? Do Libertarians suddenly feel like their vote matters and turn out in droves? Does the lost tribe of liberals suddenly emerge to vote Green?

 

[theprestige]

The word "predicted" confused me.

Reading through the abstract, it looks like what they're doing is applying existing data to a set of assumptions that form a predictive model for different policy choices. Then they're reporting the predictions of their model.

 

[dudalb]

Let's not talk about gerrymandering or other forms of voter suppression..l

 

[theprestige]

Let's not talk about gerrymandering or other forms of voter suppression..l

In a thread that's not about those topics? Yeah, let's not talk about those topics.

 

[ahhell]

I'm ambivalent about these laws frankly. I don't think they accomplish much but how do you even exist in modern American with out some form of ID? So, its hard for me to get excited about. Better to spend capital on reforming redistricting, even middle class whites that benefit from it can see the plan injustice where voter ID laws are more likely to get a, meh response.

I would not be surprised if they do disproportionately effect minorities.

 

[3point14]

how do you even exist in modern American with out some form of ID?

Argument from incredulity?

 

[The_Animus]

If voter ID doesn't have a disproportionate impact why has it been pushed by Republicans when their stated reason of voter fraud has been shown over and over to be BS?

ETA: Also if I recall correctly there is evidence of Republicans flat out saying it's meant to have a disproportionate impact

 

[JoeMorgue]

//Devil's Advocate//

Something can "disproportionately represent" a demographic with zero intention. Simple demographic clustering via random chance is a thing.

//Devil's Advocate Off/

Is there any reasonably objective guess as to how many Americans don't have some form of ID?

 

[ahhell]

Argument from incredulity?

Yes it was but I am really curious. There must be a significant underground economy, I'm sure there's some research out there.

Part of my ambivalence is also because it seems unlikely to me that some who does not have ID is actually voting much. Again, not really an argument for such laws just things that keep me from getting worked up over the issue. Its hard for me to believe that they have much impact. I wouldn't vote for such a law but I'm not going to fight it much either. As noted in the OP the evidence doesn't seem very strong.

 

[JoeMorgue]

I posted this over in another thread when the topic was brought up in the Scotus thread:

_______________

one of this would be an issue if American would just get over their paranoid kneejerk objection to a national ID.

By resisting anything resembling a national ID card we've forced a situation where things which were never meant to be used as an ID card have to be used as one.

We're so scared of a "You vill show me your papers Sir" scenario that we've created the worst of both worlds where we have to "show our papers" but don't have papers to show.

I have a Florida State Drivers License (issued by the State of Florida's Highway Safety and Motor Vehicle Department), a US Passport (issued by the United State's Department of State), a Social Security Card (Issued by the Social Security Administration), an official stamped copy of my birth certificate (issued by the county in NC where I was born), a United States Navy retiree ID card (issued by the Department of Defense),and a loose smattering of other various things (A Florida concealed carry permit, a Florida Salt and Fresh Water fishing license, a library card, a university ID, a couple of different work security badges...) none of which are an ID in every possible scenario. Some are an ID in some cases, some are in ID in other cases, some are an ID when combined with another one but not this other one and so forth and so on. Due to the RealID act some states drivers license don't count as anything outside the state they were issued in so they are useless for dealing with the Federal government. Most Americans don't have a passport and fewer still have a military ID for obvious reason.

The only two documents pretty much everybody is going to have issued to them in some manner; a birth certificate and a Social Security card, are useless for identification because they contain no identifying information, generally aren't carried on your person and in many cases not even retained by the individual.

 

[Bob001]

......

The only two documents pretty much everybody is going to have issued to them in some manner; a birth certificate and a Social Security card, are useless for identification because they contain no identifying information, generally aren't carried on your person and in many cases not even retained by the individual.

I just note that some older people in rural areas came into the world outside hospitals, and their births weren't properly recorded, so they don't even have birth certificates. Many other people might once have had a birth certificate, but lost it or can't locate it. And if you want to get a copy from your city or county, you usually have to present ID -- a catch-22 if you don't already have it. SS cards can't be used as IDs, and explicitly say so on their face.

A state driver's license or non-driver ID that meets Real ID standards is good for almost any purpose except international travel. The question is whether it should be required to exercise the fundamental constitutional right to vote.

 

[G6000]

I've never seen anyone provide an example of actual voter fraud which would have been prevented by Voter ID. Voter ID is a hoax. Theater for the rubes. A waste of tax dollars.

You know what we used to call ineffective government programs which interfere in the exercising of our rights?

Liberalism.

 

[Bob001]

I posted this over in another thread when the topic was brought up in the Scotus thread:

_______________

one of this would be an issue if American would just get over their paranoid kneejerk objection to a national ID.
.....

The ACLU has listed a few problems with a national ID card (there are certainly others):
https://www.aclu.org/other/5-problems-national-id-cards

Without derailing the thread, the fact is that elections are conducted by states and localities who set their own standards about who can for office, how elections will be conducted, etc., etc. If any ID is required to vote -- a debatable proposition -- a state-issued ID should be sufficient.

 

[G6000]

one of this would be an issue if American would just get over their paranoid kneejerk objection to a national ID.

By resisting anything resembling a national ID card we've forced a situation where things which were never meant to be used as an ID card have to be used as one.

Vee need zee national identity papers!

Papers! Papers, please! Vee must be able to tr-r-r-r-r-ack your moofments at all TIMES, citizen!

And now a message from the Department of Fatherland Security:

Secure driver's licenses and identification documents are a vital component of a holistic national security strategy. Law enforcement must be able to rely on government-issued identification documents and know that the bearer of such a document is who he or she claims to be.

 

[Arcade22]

Why would Republicans push voter ID laws if they didn't at least believe it would have the effect of depressing votes for their competitors? Are they stupid enough to believe their own lies about it being about preventing electoral fraud, something that's actually statistically insignificant? Do they buy Trumps lies that millions of invalid votes were cast for Hillary Clinton and cost him the popular vote?

Are Republicans simply falling for their own lies or wasting their time pushing something that's completely ineffective? Either way it reflects incredibly poorly on the Republicans either being bad, mad or both.

 

[The_Animus]

Why would Republicans push voter ID laws if they didn't at least believe it would have the effect of depressing votes for their competitors? Are they stupid enough to believe their own lies about it being about preventing electoral fraud, something that's actually statistically insignificant? Do they buy Trumps lies that millions of invalid votes were cast for Hillary Clinton and cost him the popular vote?

Are Republicans simply falling for their own lies or wasting their time pushing something that's completely ineffective? Either way it reflects incredibly poorly on the Republicans either being bad, mad or both.

All of the above. Some know the real purpose and have said so. Others likely believe the voter fraud BS and if it happens to disproportionately disenfranchise democratic voters that's just a bonus.

As you say, either way it reflects poorly on them

 

[Brainster]

I see nobody is going to defend the study.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

...
ETA: Also if I recall correctly there is evidence of Republicans flat out saying it's meant to have a disproportionate impact

Yeah, there was that GOP legislator caught on tape saying getting the ID law meant their guy would be elected.

The names/date will come to me...

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

I see nobody is going to defend the study.

The study in the OP that concludes this?

The analysis shows that strict photo identification laws have a differentially negative impact on the turnout of Hispanics, Blacks, and mixed-race Americans in primaries and general elections. Voter ID laws skew democracy in favor of whites and those on the political right.

Or the Atlantic article that says this?

How Voter ID Laws Discriminate A new comprehensive study finds evidence that strict voting laws do suppress the ballot along racial lines.

 

[thaiboxerken]

If voter ID doesn't have a disproportionate impact why has it been pushed by Republicans when their stated reason of voter fraud has been shown over and over to be BS?

ETA: Also if I recall correctly there is evidence of Republicans flat out saying it's meant to have a disproportionate impact

Yes, some Republicans have stated that the purpose of VoterID laws is to disenfranchise some voters.