U.S. states increasingly require identification to vote—an ostensible attempt to deter fraud that prompts complaints of selective disenfranchisement. Using a difference-in-differences design on a panel data set with 1.6 billion observations, 2008–2018, we find that the laws have no negative effect on registration or turnout, overall or for any group defined by race, gender, age, or party affiliation. These results hold through a large number of specifications. Our most demanding specification controls for state, year, and voter fixed effects, along with state and voter time-varying controls. Based on this specification, we obtain point estimates of −0.1 percentage points for effects both on overall registration and turnout (with 95% confidence intervals of [−2.3; 2.1 percentage points] and [−3.0; 2.8 percentage points], respectively), and +1.4 percentage points for the effect on the turnout of nonwhite voters relative to whites (with a 95% confidence interval of [−0.5; 3.2 percentage points]). The lack of negative impact on voter turnout cannot be attributed to voters’ reaction against the laws, measured by campaign contributions and self-reported political engagement. However, the likelihood that nonwhite voters were contacted by a campaign increases by 4.7 percentage points, suggesting that parties’ mobilization might have offset modest effects of the laws on the participation of ethnic minorities. Finally, strict ID requirements have no effect on fraud, actual or perceived. Overall, our findings suggest that efforts to improve elections may be better directed at other reforms.

中文翻译：

---

严格的身份法并不能阻止选民：来自美国全国性小组的证据，2008 年至 2018 年*

美国各州越来越需要身份证明才能投票——表面上是为了阻止欺诈行为，但却引发了对选择性剥夺公民权的投诉。在 2008-2018 年 16 亿个观测值的面板数据集上使用差异中的差异设计，我们发现法律对注册或投票率没有负面影响，无论是总体上还是对由种族、性别、年龄或党派关系。这些结果适用于大量规范。我们对州、年份和选民固定效应的最苛刻的规范控制，以及州和选民随时间变化的控制。基于此规范，我们获得了对总体注册和投票率影响的 -0.1 个百分点的点估计值（95% 置信区间分别为 [-2.3；2.1 个百分点] 和 [-3.0；2.8 个百分点]），和+1。相对于白人，对非白人选民投票率的影响为 4 个百分点（95% 置信区间为 [-0.5；3.2 个百分点]）。对选民投票率没有负面影响不能归因于选民对法律的反应，通过竞选捐款和自我报告的政治参与来衡量。然而，竞选活动接触到非白人选民的可能性增加了 4.7 个百分点，这表明政党的动员可能抵消了法律对少数民族参与的适度影响。最后，严格的身份证明要求对实际或感知的欺诈没有影响。总体而言，我们的研究结果表明，改善选举的努力可能更好地针对其他改革。