Hostname: page-component-76d6cb85b7-7262s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-07-14T17:26:18.366Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The durable differential deterrent effects of strict photo identification laws

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 January 2021

Justin Grimmer  and
Jesse Yoder Open the ORCID record for Jesse Yoder [Opens in a new window]
Justin Grimmer
Affiliation:
Department of Political Science, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA
Jesse Yoder*
Affiliation:
Department of Political Science, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA
*
*Corresponding author. Email: yoderj@stanford.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An increasing number of states have adopted laws that require voters to show photo identification to vote. We show that the differential effect of the laws on turnout among those who lack ID persists even after the laws are repealed. We leverage administrative data from North Carolina and a photo ID law in effect for a primary, but not the subsequent general, election. Using exact matching and a difference-in-differences design, we show that for the 3 percent of voters who lack ID in North Carolina, the ID law caused a 0.7 percentage point turnout decrease in the 2016 primary election relative to those with ID. After the law was suspended, this effect persisted: those without ID were 2.6 percentage points less likely to turnout in the 2016 general election and 1.7 percentage points less likely to turnout in the 2018 general.

Keywords

Causal inferencevoter ID

Information

Type
Original Article
Information
Political Science Research and Methods , Volume 10 , Issue 3 , July 2022 , pp. 453 - 469
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the European Political Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Alvarez, RM, Bailey, D and Katz, JN (2008) The Effect of Voter Identification Laws on Turnout. Technical Report 1267R California Institute of Technology Social Science Working Paper Series.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alvarez, RM, Bailey, D and Katz, JN (2011) An empirical bayes approach to estimating ordinal treatment effects. Political Analysis 19, 20–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ansolabehere, S (2012) Report on Racial Differences in Matching Voter Registration Lists to Driver's License and License to Carry Databases in the State of Texas. Technical report Paper Submitted in Texas v. Holder, June 30, No. 12-0128 (D.D.C.).Google Scholar
Atkeson, LR, Kerevel, YP, Alvarez, RM and Hall, TE (2014) Who asks for voter identification? Explaining poll-worker discretion. Journal of Politics 76, 944–957.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barreto, MA, Nuño, SA and Sanchez, GR (2009) The disproportionate impact of voter ID requirements on the electorate: new evidence from Indiana. PS: Political Science & Politics 42, 111–116.Google Scholar
Barreto, MA, Sanchez, GR and Walker, H (2012) Rates of Possession of Valid Photo identification, and Public Knowledge of the Voter ID Law in Pennsylvania. Technical report Paper Submitted in Applewhite v. Commonwealth, July 16, No. 330 MD 2012 (Pa. Commw. Ct.).Google Scholar
Beatty, L (2012) Technical report Declaration Submitted in League of United Latin American Citizens v. Deininger, April 23, No. 12-00185 (E.D. Wis.).Google Scholar
Brody, RA and Sniderman, PM (1977) From life space to polling place: the relevance of personal concerns for voting behavior. British Journal of Political Science 7, 337–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cantoni, E and Pons, V (2019) Strict ID laws don't stop voters: evidence from a US Nationwide Panel, 2008–2016. National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper No. 25522.Google Scholar
Claibourn, MP and Martin, PS (2012) Creating constituencies: presidential campaigns, the scope of conflict, and selective mobilization. Political Behavior 34, 27–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erikson, RS and Minnite, LC (2009) Modeling problems in the voter identification-voter turnout debate. Election Law Journal 8, 85–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Esposito, FM, Focanti, D and Hastings, JS (2019) Effects of photo ID laws on registration and turnout: evidence from Rhode Island. National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper No. 25503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fraga, B and Miller, M (2018) Who does voter ID keep from voting?.Google Scholar
Gerber, AS, Green, DP and Shachar, R (2003) Voting may be habit-forming: evidence from a randomized field experiment. American Journal of Political Science 47, 540–550.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grimmer, J, Hersh, E, Meredith, M, Mummolo, J and Nall, C (2018) Obstacles to estimating voter ID laws’ effect on turnout. The Journal of Politics 80, 1045–1051.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hajnal, Z, Lajevardi, N and Nielson, L (2017) Voter identification laws and the suppression of minority votes. The Journal of Politics 79, 000–000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henninger, P, Meredith, M and Morse, M (2018) Who votes without identification? Using affidavits from michigan to learn about the potential impact of strict photo voter identification laws.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hicks, WD, McKee, SC, Sellers, MD and Smith, DA (2015) A principle or a strategy? Voter identification laws and partisan competition in the American states. Political Research Quarterly 68, 18–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Highton, B (2017) Voter identification laws and turnout in the United States. Annual Review of Political Science 20, 149–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hobby, B, Huang, C, Llanos, D, Mainka, C, Wan, K-W, Wang, C-H and Warner, I (2015) The Texas voter ID law and the 2014 election: a study of Texas's 23rd congressional district.Google Scholar
Hood, MV and Bullock, CS (2008) Worth a thousand words? An analysis of Georgia's voter identification statute. American Politics Research 36, 555–579.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hood, MV and Bullock, CS (2012) Much ado about nothing? An empirical assessment of the georgia voter identification statute. State Politics & Policy Quarterly 12, 394–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hopkins, DJ, Meredith, M, Morse, M, Smith, S and Yoder, J (2017) Voting but for the law: evidence from virginia on photo identification requirements. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies 14, 79–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mycoff, JD, Wagner, MW and Wilson, DC (2009) The empirical effects of eoter-ID laws: present or absent? PS: Political Science & Politics 42, 121–126.Google Scholar
Nyhan, B, Skovron, C and Titiunik, R. 2017. Differential registration bias in voter file data: a sensitivity analysis approach. American Journal of Political Science 61, 744–760.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stewart, III C (2013) Voter ID: who has them; Who shows them. Oklahoma Law Review 66, 21.Google Scholar
Valentino, NA and Neuner, FG (2017) Why the sky didn't fall: mobilizing anger in response to voter ID laws. Political Psychology 38, 331–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: Link

Grimmer and Yoder Dataset

Dataset

https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/IWR4HE
Link
Supplementary material: PDF

Grimmer and Yoder supplementary material

Online Appendix

Download Grimmer and Yoder supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 466.2 KB