Impetus for Rep. Tenney's Election Integrity Caucus contrary to several Political Science findings By Luke Perry
Rep. Claudia Tenney recently co-developed an Election Integrity Caucus in the House of Representatives. According to Tenney, the caucus intends to “educate and inform the American public about issues related to elections security and activity, drive commonsense policy solutions to restore faith in the democratic process, and improve the administration of elections.”
Distrust in democracy has risen, largely thanks to increased misinformation, political polarization, and media fragmentation. And local election administration is in need of repair in some places, particularly Oneida County. But domestic election security is not a problem.
Political Scientists have documented that “little to no voter fraud of any kind has occurred in recent U.S. elections.” In-person voting fraud is “almost non-existent.”
Over 99 percent of ballots cast are done so legitimately- no small feat in one of the largest countries in the world, who conducts more elections than any other. Most instances of voting irregularities are inadvertent errors by voters or election officials.
Photo from WKTV
During the 2020 election aftermath, Tenney expressed concern about dead people voting, which did not happen, and “really would’ve been torn” over whether or not to vote to certify the election of Joe Biden (if Tenney was in office at the time). Tenney recently expressed concern about people voting twice in defending the new caucus.
Intentionally voting more than once is prohibited in all 50 states and most consider it a felony. Federal law also prohibits intentionally voting twice in an election with punishment of up to $10,000 and up to five years in prison, or both.
A recent article in The American Political Science Review, the flagship peer-reviewed journal in Political Science, concluded that “double voting is not currently carried out in such a systemic way that it presents a threat to the integrity of American elections.” The authors emphasize how efforts to further election integrity often ignore how this involves tradeoffs with accessibility to voting.
Photo from city of Philadelphia
Tenney dismissed the idea that African-Americans are less likely to have government identification as “insulting,” citing their ability to engage society and get identification. Political Scientists have documented how people of color are less likely to have government identification, even when controlling for many other variables, though it is not clear that voter ID laws diminish non-white turnout.
All 50 states verify identity in voting. They differ in how they do this. New York uses social security numbers and drivers license numbers to verify the identity of voters. Photo identification is not required.
Political Scientists have documented how requiring photo ID or proof of citizenship to vote is partisan in nature. Every law requiring these has come from a Republican-controlled legislature.
Hundreds of voting reform bills are currently under consideration in state houses around the country.
Luke Perry (@PolSciLukePerry) is Professor of Political Science at Utica College
Read the NY-22 Minute for timely and comprehensive analysis of NY-22 politics
