Voter Photo ID Laws: Using Primary Source Election Turnout Data and Foreign Examples to Identify the Proper Mechanisms for Implementation

Abstract

The United States Constitution authorizes Congress to establish the time and manner for electing Senators and Representatives,1 “[b]ut States have broad powers to determine the conditions under which the right of suffrage may be exercised.”2 Specifically, “[e]ach State has the power to prescribe the qualifications of its officers and the manner in which they shall be chosen.”3 Further, “the Tenth Amendment reserves to the States all powers not specifically granted to the Federal Government, including ‘the power to regulate elections.’”4 It then follows that these principles allow states to decide whether to implement laws requiring voters to show identification when they vote. The leading case in this area is Crawford v. Marion County Board of Elections.5 In this case, the United States Supreme Court upheld Indiana’s voter photo ID law.6 By upholding the law, the Supreme Court made the concept of voter photo ID laws constitutionally permissible.7 While the concept of the voter photo ID laws has been validated, many of these laws continue to be challenged based on the mechanisms by which they are implemented. In a republican system of government, the only way the people can trust their government and the laws enacted by it is to have confidence that public officials were properly elected. Enacted laws that verify the identity of a voter provide one of the strongest ways to ensure only eligible citizens vote and vote only once. Data on in-person voter fraud is sparse because this type of fraud is easy to commit but difficult to spot.8 However, a study by the non-