Democrats have been screaming for years that voter ID laws that require people to show photo identification before casting a ballot have a discriminatory effect on minorities. They’ve used this argument not just for political effect, but also in legal challenges to these laws – some of which they’ve been successful in blocking.
But a new study conducted by researchers from three Ivy League universities suggests that any correlation between minority turnout and voter ID laws is, as of now, unproven. Authored by academics from Stanford, Yale, and the University of Pennsylvania, the study could turn the tide of debate…if it isn’t buried by the Democrats before it can see the light of day, that is.
The study was essentially a peer review of an earlier study, which the authors contend came to a faulty conclusion.
“To study how voter identification laws affect participation in elections, Hajnal, Lajevardi and Nielson (2017) examines validated turnout data in five national surveys conducted between 2006 and 2014,” the authors wrote of the earlier study.
“The study concludes that strict ID laws cause a large turnout decline among minorities, especially Latinos. Here, we show that the results of this paper are a product of large data inaccuracies, that the evidence does not support the stated conclusion, and that model specifications produce highly variable results,” they continued.
The authors said that once those data errors were corrected, the correlation between voter ID laws and minority turnout vanished.
“Our findings underscore that no definitive relationship between strict voter ID laws and turnout can be established from the validated CCES data,” they wrote.
The researchers were careful to make the distinction between what their study did and did not prove. They said that voter ID laws may very well depress minority voting; their only claim is that the earlier study – much cited by the liberal press – did not prove that this was the case.
This “voter ID laws are racist” argument from the Democrats never made a lick of sense, and this just goes to show how thin the evidence is behind it. It’s another emotional claim that bears no resemblance to the facts, and it’s an attempt to loosen voting restrictions to the point that their useless, going-nowhere-in-life supporters can actually vote instead of just yelling at a computer screen through a cloud of bong smoke.
It may not be strictly democratic to say this, but if your life choices are so poor that you find it impossible to get a photo ID, then maybe it’s best that you don’t have a say in our elections.