Hans A. von Spakovsky and Benjamin Janacek wrote in the National Review article, No, Hillary, Voter-ID Laws Don’t ‘Suppress’ Turnout:
In fact, turnout data from 2012 and 2016 do not show any “voter suppression” because of ID requirements. Nine of the eleven states that have implemented so-called strict ID Laws either saw an increase in turnout or exceeded the national average in turnout in 2016. Two of them, Wisconsin and New Hampshire, finished in the top five nationally. Meanwhile only two of the 17 states plus Washington, D.C., that have no ID requirement finished among the top five.
In short, there is no credible evidence that voter-ID laws have impeded turnout, especially among minorities and Democrats, as their opponents suggest.
The debunked Wisconsin study is, unfortunately, not alone in misusing the data for political gain. A January 2017 study by three professors from the University of California San Diego and Bucknell University — frequently referenced in liberal media outlets — is another unfortunate example. The study erroneously claims that voter-ID laws have a disparate impact on minorities and “diminish the participation of Democrats and those on the left, while doing little to deter the vote of Republicans and those on the right.” This sensational finding generated a media storm, with the help of several opinion pieces from the authors making the politically charged (and false) claim that voter-ID laws “lower minority turnout and benefit the Republican Party.”
But these claims, too, were recently debunked by a group of professors from Yale, Stanford, and the University of Pennsylvania. Upon examining the data in the original study, the group found “no definitive relationship between strict voter ID laws and turnout.” It also found that the original study contained measurement errors, omitted-variable bias, and misinterpreted data.
In reality, then, such studies are designed to obscure the truth. The Heritage Foundation has published numerous papers looking at turnout data in states that implemented voter-ID laws. All of those studies show that ID requirements do not keep voters from the polls, and that some states have even seen increases in turnout after their ID laws went into effect. A University of Missouri study found that Indiana’s turnout increased 2 percent after its voter-ID law was implemented, with no negative impact on minority voters in particular, and increased turnout for Democrats as a whole. Yet another study, this one by the University of Delaware and the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, found that at both the aggregate and individual levels, voter-ID laws did not affect turnout across racial, ethnic, or socioeconomic lines during the 2000, 2002, 2004, and 2006 elections.
In short, there is no credible evidence that voter-ID laws have impeded turnout, especially among minorities and Democrats, as their opponents suggest. Meanwhile, a Heritage Foundation database tracking documented voter fraud now contains 492 cases and 773 criminal convictions, with untold other cases unreported and unprosecuted…. https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/06/hillary-clinton-wisconsin-voter-suppression-claim-dubious-excuse-flawed-campaign/
Voter ID requirements are intended to reduce voter fraud. See, Is Voter Fraud Real? A look at California’s illegal voter-registration problem https://www.theepochtimes.com/is-voter-fraud-real_2704461.html
Guy Benson wrote in the Town Hall article, ‘Suppression,’ Debunked: Study Concludes Voter ID Laws Do Not Depress Voter Turnout:
One pillar of dogma among leftist activists is that voter ID laws, under which citizens are required to present a valid form of identification in order to cast ballots in elections, amount to insidious and racist forms of “voter suppression.” That term deserves to be placed in scare quotes because it’s often employed as a catch-all phrase to describe any policy or idea that liberals believe would reduce their chances of winning. Voter ID laws have been upheld by the Supreme Court as constitutional, and enjoy overwhelming public support — including approval from large majorities of racial minorities, who evidently don’t share the professional Left’s racialized hysteria. We’ve written previously about how, if reducing turnout among certain populations truly were the goal of such laws, they’ve failed miserably. This example out of Georgia comes to mind:
When Georgia became one of the first states in the nation to demand a photo ID at the ballot box, both sides served up dire predictions. Opponents labeled it a Jim Crow-era tactic that would suppress the minority vote…Turnout among black and Hispanic voters increased from 2006 to 2010, dramatically outpacing population growth for those groups over the same period…“I think the rhetoric on both sides has been overstated,” said Edward Foley, executive director of an election law center at The Ohio State University’s Moritz College of Law. “It hasn’t had the voter-suppressing effect that some people feared,” Foley said.
Far more useful details are available here. Speaking of Georgia and alleged voter suppression, and given the recently-raised profile of that state’s failed 2018 gubernatorial nominee….. A new academic study reviewed the data and reached important conclusions:
Strict voter ID laws do not suppress turnout, a new paper finds, regardless of sex, race, Hispanic identity, or party affiliation…In total, 10 states, ranging from Georgia to Wisconsin, require voters to show ID in order to vote. Seven of those states require a photo ID, and three do not. An additional 25 states “request” that voters display ID, but may still permit them to vote on a provision ballot if they cannot. The remaining states “use other methods to verify the identity of voters,” according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. The new research, from an economics professor at the University of Bologna and another at Harvard Business School, indicates that “strict” voting laws of the type implemented in those ten states do not have a statistically significant effect on voter turnout…”Strict ID laws have no significant negative effect on registration or turnout, overall or for any subgroup defined by age, gender, race, or party affiliation,” the paper’s authors found. “Most importantly,” they write, strict ID laws “do not decrease the participation of ethnic minorities relative to whites. The laws’ overall effects remain close to zero and non-significant whether the election is a midterm or presidential election, and whether the laws are the more restrictive type that stipulate photo IDs.”
Confirmed: The top talking point against Voter ID laws is bogus…. https://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2019/02/13/suppression-debunked-study-concludes-voter-id-laws-dont-decrease-voter-turnout-n2541344
Citation:
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 1.3-billion-observations panel, we find 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 and cannot be attributed to mobilization against the laws, measured by campaign contributions and self-reported political engagement. ID requirements have no effect on fraud either – actual or perceived. Efforts to improve elections may be better directed at other reforms.Citation:
Cantoni, Enrico, and Vincent Pons. “Strict ID Laws Don’t Stop Voters: Evidence from a U.S. Nationwide Panel, 2008–2016.” Harvard Business School Working Paper. (Harvard Business School Working Paper, No. 19-076, February 2019.)
Hans A. Von Spakovsky wrote in the U.S. News article, Voter ID Laws Protect the Integrity of Our Democracy:
Opponents are wrong that voter ID will depress turnout or prevent large number of individuals from voting. ID laws have been in place in Georgia and Indiana for more than five years, and there has been no decrease in the turnout of minority, poor, and elderly voters. That is because Americans of every background overwhelmingly have photo ID. And the few who do not can easily obtain a free one in the states that have implemented such laws.
Americans have to use photo ID constantly in everyday life—to drive a car, board a plane, buy a beer, check into a hotel, get into many government buildings, or see a doctor. They even need one to get into the Justice Department in Washington where Eric Holder is unjustly and unfairly fighting election integrity by trying to stop voter ID laws.
Voter ID is a perfectly reasonable and easily met requirement that protects the integrity of our democracy. That is why the American people support it….. https://www.usnews.com/debate-club/should-photo-id-be-required-to-vote/voter-id-laws-protect-the-integrity-of-our-democracy
For those who lie, yes lie and say VOTER INTEGRITY is RACIST, Mexico is among many countries who require ID. Both Mexico and India have Voter ID.
Gary Maher wrote in Mexico and India Have Voter ID But Democrats Think Blacks Are Too Stupid to Get ID:
Our ruling:
Miller said: “To vote in Mexico every eligible Mexican citizen has to have a tamper-proof photo-ID card with a thumbprint and an embossed hologram.”
But not the United States of America.
Democrats think blacks are too stupid to get an ID card and they want illegals voting so the party opposes voter ID.
But they’re not racists.
Mexico has required secure photo IDs at the polls for nearly 20 years. We rate the statement True…. https://www.usapoliticstoday.org/mexico-india-voter-photo-id/
Without Voter Integrity, AMERICAN CITIZENS are robbed of the RULE OF LAW!
Nobody will ever deprive the American people of the right to vote except the American people themselves and the only way they could do this is by not voting.
Franklin D. Roosevelt
THE KEY POINT IS VOTING IS A RIGHT OF AMERICAN CITIZENS, PERIOD.
Where information leads to Hope. © Dr. Wilda.com
Dr. Wilda says this about that ©
Blogs by Dr. Wilda:
COMMENTS FROM AN OLD FART©
http://drwildaoldfart.wordpress.com/
Dr. Wilda Reviews ©
http://drwildareviews.wordpress.com/
Dr. Wilda ©
https://drwilda.com/
drwilda 