{ "id": "R42806", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "number": "R42806", "active": true, "source": "EveryCRSReport.com, University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "versions": [ { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 456655, "date": "2016-10-21", "retrieved": "2016-10-28T18:20:10.674069", "title": "State Voter Identification Requirements: Analysis, Legal Issues, and Policy Considerations", "summary": "About 60% of U.S. voters live in the 32 states that require a voter at a polling place to produce an identification document (ID) before casting a ballot. Among those states, 19 permit voters without ID to cast a ballot through alternative means, such as signing an affidavit; 13 strictly enforce the ID requirement. The other 18 states and the District of Columbia have a range of nondocument requirements instead. \nOver the last two decades, the number of states requiring voter IDs has tripled. The stringency of those requirements is controversial. States vary substantially in the range of IDs accepted, the information they must contain, and the ease with which a voter can procure an ID. Although all states requiring voter ID accept a local driver\u2019s license, no two states have the same overall requirements. Among states with voter ID laws, 18 require photographic identification (photo ID), while 14 permit a nonphoto ID. In addition, eight states require ID for voters casting absentee or mail-in ballots. \nSeveral states enacted voter ID laws that have been struck down by courts or are not yet in effect. Recent congresses have seen a number of bills with voter ID provisions, including H.R. 885, H.R. 2867, H.R. 3277, H.R. 3364, H.R. 5557, S. 1659, and S. 1912 in the 114th Congress. State legislatures also continue to consider the issue.\nSupporters of the more stringent requirements often emphasize the need to prevent voter fraud, while opponents emphasize the need to avoid disenfranchising legitimate voters who do not have ready access to an accepted ID. Polling data suggest that most voters and most local election officials support a voter ID requirement but that many are also concerned about the risk of disenfranchisement. Both voter fraud and disenfranchisement pose potential risks to the integrity of the electoral process, but the policy debate is being conducted in the absence of a consensus about the evidence pertaining to those risks, with available studies producing a broad range of results.\nAs with the 2014 election, leading up to the November 8, 2016, presidential election, state voter photo ID laws have been challenged under the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA), and state constitutional provisions. Such challenges have drawn attention in view of a 2008 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that upheld the constitutionality under the Fourteenth Amendment of a voter photo ID law, and because some suits have been brought under Section 2 of the VRA, which in the past, has generally been invoked in the context of redistricting. As the case law challenging voter photo ID laws under Section 2 of the VRA is just beginning to develop, it ultimately may be considered by the U.S. Supreme Court.\nElection administration is complex, and changes in voter ID requirements may affect elections in unanticipated ways, such as a need for more provisional ballots, increased waiting times at polling places, and misapplication of the rules by pollworkers. The longer that election officials have to implement changes to voting procedures, the lower the risk of unintended and potentially harmful consequences may be.\nThe impact of state voter ID laws is likely to continue to be a topic of high interest beyond November 2016. It seems likely that state legislators will continue to consider such legislation in the future. The 2016 election may provide useful data on the implementation and performance of voter ID laws, which Congress may choose to examine, and which may lead to greater consensus about the benefits and disadvantages of voter identification requirements.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": true, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/R42806", "sha1": "5defe903808a1c230e3d866ae71d1ef42bca1609", "filename": "files/20161021_R42806_5defe903808a1c230e3d866ae71d1ef42bca1609.html", "images": null }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R42806", "sha1": "cb337556593ee1718a57559a3ae8cbc053f01b2d", "filename": "files/20161021_R42806_cb337556593ee1718a57559a3ae8cbc053f01b2d.pdf", "images": null } ], "topics": [ { "source": "IBCList", "id": 4833, "name": "Census, Redistricting, Voting, & Elections" }, { "source": "IBCList", "id": 4852, "name": "Science & Technology R&D" }, { "source": "IBCList", "id": 4916, "name": "Technology & Innovation" } ] }, { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 454578, "date": "2016-07-27", "retrieved": "2016-09-09T19:07:03.415585", "title": "State Voter Identification Requirements: Analysis, Legal Issues, and Policy Considerations", "summary": "About 60% of U.S. voters live in the 33 states that require a voter at a polling place to produce an identification document (ID) before casting a ballot. Among those states, 20 permit voters without ID to cast a ballot through alternative means, such as signing an affidavit; 13 strictly enforce the ID requirement. The other 17 states and the District of Columbia have a range of nondocument requirements instead. \nOver the last two decades, the number of states requiring voter IDs has tripled. The stringency of those requirements is controversial. States vary substantially in the range of IDs accepted, the information they must contain, and the ease with which a voter can procure an ID. Although all states requiring voter ID accept a local driver\u2019s license, no two states have the same overall requirements. Among states with voter ID laws, 20 require photographic identification (photo ID), while 13 permit a nonphoto ID. In addition, eight states require ID for voters casting absentee or mail-in ballots. \nSeveral states enacted voter ID laws that have been struck down by courts or are not yet in effect. Recent congresses have seen a number of bills with voter ID provisions, including H.R. 885, H.R. 2867, H.R. 3277, H.R. 3364, H.R. 5557, S. 1659, and S. 1912 in the 114th Congress. State legislatures also continue to consider the issue.\nSupporters of the more stringent requirements often emphasize the need to prevent voter fraud, while opponents emphasize the need to avoid disenfranchising legitimate voters who do not have ready access to an accepted ID. Polling data suggest that most voters and most local election officials support a voter ID requirement but that many are also concerned about the risk of disenfranchisement. Both voter fraud and disenfranchisement pose potential risks to the integrity of the electoral process, but the policy debate is being conducted in the absence of a consensus about the evidence pertaining to those risks, with available studies producing a broad range of results.\nLeading up to the 2014 elections, state voter photo ID laws were challenged under the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA), and state constitutional provisions. In some instances, due to ongoing appeals, the question of whether a particular photo ID law would be in effect was resolved only in the final months or, in some cases, weeks preceding the 2014 general election. Such challenges have drawn attention in view of a 2008 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that upheld the constitutionality under the Fourteenth Amendment of a voter photo ID law, and because some suits have been brought under Section 2 of the VRA, which in the past, has generally been invoked in the context of redistricting. Similarly, in the midst of the 2016 presidential election cycle, there is ongoing litigation challenging certain state laws. As a result, it is unclear whether, and to what degree, some state voter ID laws will be in effect for the November 2016 general election.\nElection administration is complex, and changes in voter ID requirements may affect elections in unanticipated ways, such as a need for more provisional ballots, increased waiting times at polling places, and misapplication of the rules by pollworkers. The longer that election officials have to implement changes to voting procedures, the lower the risk of unintended and potentially harmful consequences may be.\nThe impact of state voter ID laws is likely to continue to be a topic of high interest beyond November 2016. It seems likely that state legislators will continue to consider such legislation in the future. The 2016 election may provide useful data on the implementation and performance of voter ID laws, which Congress may choose to examine, and which may lead to greater consensus about the benefits and disadvantages of voter identification requirements.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": true, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/R42806", "sha1": "839c28288cbc3a64a60bdb713764cbe9d7d63e67", "filename": "files/20160727_R42806_839c28288cbc3a64a60bdb713764cbe9d7d63e67.html", "images": null }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R42806", "sha1": "319f89d3c995bb537a36601b798238af0c332818", "filename": "files/20160727_R42806_319f89d3c995bb537a36601b798238af0c332818.pdf", "images": null } ], "topics": [ { "source": "IBCList", "id": 3427, "name": "Voting and Elections" } ] }, { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 435588, "date": "2014-11-10", "retrieved": "2016-04-06T19:56:44.320187", "title": "Voter Identification Requirements: Background and Legal Issues", "summary": "Some states require voters at a polling place to produce identification before casting a ballot. Such requirements have emerged as a controversial issue in recent elections, particularly requirements in some states for photographic identification (photo ID), and they are the focus of this report. \nSince 2008, more than 30 states have enacted laws relating to voter identification, with several containing photo ID requirements. Several states enacted voter identification laws that have either been struck down by courts or are not yet in effect. A number of bills with voter identification provisions have been introduced in the 113th Congress and one (S. 1945) has received committee consideration. \nThirty states require voters to provide an accepted identification document when voting in person, although few require such documentation for absentee voters. Eighteen states require photo ID for voting. With respect to what type of photo ID is acceptable and what happens if a voter does not have it, no two states are the same. Nine of the 18 photo ID states require it for polling-place voting but permit alternatives such as signing an affidavit for voters without an ID. Eight states\u2014Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Mississippi, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia\u2014permit only voters who present a photo ID to cast a ballot, with few exceptions. Arkansas, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin enacted similarly stringent photo ID laws that, due to court action, were not in effect for the November 4, 2014, election. Washington conducts its elections by mail, but one in-person vote center is open in each county on Election Day and photo ID is required; thus, it is included among the photo ID states. \nLeading up to the 2014 midterm election, state voter photo ID laws were challenged under the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA), or state constitutional provisions. In some instances, due to ongoing appeals, the question of whether a particular photo ID law would be in effect was resolved only in the final months or weeks preceding the November 4 election. In view of a 2008 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that upheld the constitutionality under the Fourteenth Amendment of a voter photo ID law, such challenges have drawn attention. They are also notable because of their application of Section 2 of the VRA, which has generally been invoked in the context of redistricting plans, at-large elections, and felony disenfranchisement laws. Further litigation in this area is expected, and it is unclear how courts in other jurisdictions or appellate courts will rule.\nSupporters of photo ID requirements in particular emphasize the need to prevent voter fraud, while opponents emphasize the need to avoid disenfranchising legitimate voters who do not have ready access to a photo ID. Polling data suggest that most voters and most local election officials support a photo ID requirement but that many are also concerned about the risk of disenfranchisement. The policy controversy centers largely on whether the risk of disenfranchisement or the risk of voter fraud is the greater threat to the integrity of the electoral process. This policy debate is being conducted in the absence of a broad consensus about the evidence pertaining to those risks.\nElection administration is complex, and changes in voter ID requirements may affect elections in unanticipated ways, such as a need for more provisional ballots, increased waiting times at polling places, and misapplication of the new rules by poll workers. The longer that election officials have to implement changes to voting procedures, the lower the risk of unintended and potentially harmful consequences may be.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": true, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/R42806", "sha1": "5d6e96e7aa197edfd7e9028272262fdd4ca580e5", "filename": "files/20141110_R42806_5d6e96e7aa197edfd7e9028272262fdd4ca580e5.html", "images": null }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R42806", "sha1": "665ddf580417562c6771f6c936c5b655f678a081", "filename": "files/20141110_R42806_665ddf580417562c6771f6c936c5b655f678a081.pdf", "images": null } ], "topics": [ { "source": "IBCList", "id": 3427, "name": "Voting and Elections" } ] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc227821/", "id": "R42806_2012Nov02", "date": "2012-11-02", "retrieved": "2013-11-05T18:07:05", "title": "Photo ID Requirements for Voting: Background and Legal Issues", "summary": "Report concerning the controversy surrounding some states' requirements that voters provide photographic identification before casting a ballot.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20121102_R42806_956704e8ae60a5373a014885efd4377312640c03.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20121102_R42806_956704e8ae60a5373a014885efd4377312640c03.html", "source": "pymupdf" } ], "topics": [ { "source": "LIV", "id": "Voting rights", "name": "Voting rights" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Civil rights legislation", "name": "Civil rights legislation" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Elections", "name": "Elections" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Voting", "name": "Voting" } ] } ], "topics": [ "American Law", "Constitutional Questions", "Economic Policy" ] }