WHY CAN'T WE AGREE ON ID? PARTISANSHIP, PERCEPTIONS OF FRAUD, AND PUBLIC SUPPORT FOR VOTER IDENTIFICATION LAWS

Much scholarship and media commentary contends that, with few documented instances of in-person voter fraud, voter identification laws (VID) are strategically enacted to advantage the Republican Party in future elections. Research on elected officials finds support for this contention, but as yet, no direct empirical test exists of whether citizens' attitudes toward VID are guided by such strategic considerations, particularly while accounting for differential perceptions of fraud prevalence. In this article, I first demonstrate the robustness of partisanship as a significant predictor of public support for strict VID with nationally representative survey data. Then, relying upon survey experiments, I uncover two important asymmetries among partisans. First, Republicans tend to increase support for VID upon learning of even a miniscule amount of in-person voter fraud, but appear relatively insensitive to strategic considerations. Second, Democrats' support for VID depends significantly upon which party stands to benefit from the laws, but Democrats do not appear sensitive to information about fraud. Overall, the evidence suggests that, in the mass public, Democrats' views toward VID are more rooted in strategic concerns about electoral outcomes than are Republicans'. In fact, Democrats who were told that VID will reduce Republican turnout were statistically indistinguishable from Republicans in terms of support for VID. Importantly, the results also suggest that efforts to correct misperceptions about the actual prevalence of voter fraud may, paradoxically, further stoke Republicans' (and, to a lesser extent, Independents') support for stringent voter identification legislation. Republicans win when ... you have a small voter turnout, which, by the way, is why they love voter suppression. -Senator Bernie Sanders (D), Vermont