AllStances™: Is Voter Fraud or Voter Suppression a Bigger Issue?

Is voter suppression or election security and voter fraud the bigger issue in U.S. elections?

The left and right perspectives on election integrity show how both sides disagree majorly whether American voting laws suppress certain groups or are insecure and prone to fraud. From the January 6 Capitol riot to calls for increased accessibility and ease of voting, both sides are calling for electoral reform– but whether voting should become easier or harder is in dispute.

In every election, the strength of American democracy is on the minds of voters across the political spectrum. At present, rival parties are in dispute about what the biggest threats to elections are. Is it voter fraud? Voter suppression? Something else?

Explore all perspectives, stances, and arguments for voter rights and election security with AllStances™ by AllSides.

Election integrity is the main issue. The election process needs to be more secure to prevent fraud and accurately reflect the will of the American people. Many modern proposals will make elections less secure.

See arguments »

Voter suppression is the main issue. The election process needs to be more accessible to accurately reflect the will of the American people. Many modern proposals will expand and protect voter access.

See arguments »

Neither are major issues Both parties peddle election problems as a way to motivate their base.

See arguments »

Americans share a passion for the strength, perseverance, integrity, and continuity of the country’s republic. It is this passion that fuels such heated debate among Americans with differing opinions, and is a passion that elected officials are tapping into when they warn of threats to this system. Politicians recognize the will of the voter and their desire to be heard, and demonstrating a commitment to uphold the democratic process is attractive to the electorate. If Americans didn’t care about democracy, why would they seek to identify its flaws so much?

While few elections in the U.S. see any instances of voter fraud that could change the result, questions remain. Are the elections secure? Are the results valid? Are elected officials a true representation of the voters in their district? The heated disagreements that begin among Americans when these questions are raised implies that despite disagreeing on the answers, they view the questions as relevant. To believe in solutions and answers to these questions means believing democracy to be an institution worth preserving, worth continuing, and worth strengthening.

Explore dominant perspectives on the strength of American elections, from voter fraud to voter suppression. Are we missing a stance or perspective? Email us!

Stance 1: Election Insecurity is the Main Issue

CORE ARGUMENT: The election process needs to be more secure to prevent fraud and accurately reflect the will of the American people. Many modern proposals will make elections less secure.

The present electoral process is too vulnerable to clerical mistakes, resulting in ineligible people receiving information to vote, such as in Colorado, where 30,000 noncitizens received voter registration mailers due to a database glitch.
Mail-in ballots result in too many uncontrolled variables and points of possible fraud, and the process should only allow for them in special circumstances.
Proposed legislation like the John Lewis Freedom to Vote Act will be used to achieve partisan political gains rather than prevent racial discrimination; it will give the political allies of Democrats control over state election rules.
Voter suppression is largely a myth; while there were barriers in the 1960s, since the passage of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, there are no longer any barriers or practices that block black Americans (or anyone else) from registering and voting.
Democrats’ proposal to reenact previous standards that required states to receive approval from the Department of Justice (DOJ) before enacting any changes to voting procedures violates the principles of federalism; it unconstitutionally expands the federal government’s ability to reject common sense reforms enacted at the state level related to things like voter ID laws, absentee voting, maintenance of voter rolls, the location of polling places, and the hours of operation.
States must play the primary role in administering elections, not the federal government. Federalizing elections is unconstitutional.
Ballot harvesting should be banned, as it allows paid political operatives, candidates, and campaign staffers to go to voters’ homes to pick up and handle their absentee ballots. This puts them in a good position to alter or change those ballots, maybe not deliver them, or to coerce and pressure those voters to vote a certain way.
Automatic voter registration is unnecessary and intrusive. There’s no linear relationship between levels of voter registration and levels of voter participation. In addition, it is a significant First Amendment concern, as not registering to vote is an act of political speech. There are people who intentionally don’t register to vote, such as domestic violence victims and police officers.
Voter ID will secure elections, just like it secures other parts of everyday life. Without ID, you can't get on an airplane, get into college, drive, qualify for welfare, purchase alcohol, book a hotel room, or buy certain over-the-counter cold medicines or spray paint. ID is required to prevent criminal activity.
No-excuse absentee voting should be curtailed. The majority of voter fraud prosecutions involve absentee ballots that were illegally cast; the only voting fraud schemes with the potential to swing elections involved mail-in ballots, not impersonation at the polls. Absentee ballots sent in the mail rely on the US Postal Service; if they are lost in the mail or delivered late, they won’t count.

Stance 2: Voter Suppression is the Main Issue

CORE ARGUMENT: The election process needs to be more accessible to accurately reflect the will of the American people. Many modern proposals will expand and protect voter access.

Federal legislation such as the John Lewis Freedom to Vote Act must be passed to ensure voting accessibility, specifically for communities historically excluded from the electoral process.
Election integrity laws are thinly veiled attacks on voting accessibility, aimed at preventing minority communities from casting ballots and exercising their democratic rights and maintaining a white-dominated electorate.
Voting restrictions are not effective in securing the election process, and only serve to stroke fear of accidental violations for legitimate voters, leading to lower turnout.
American should remove barriers to democratic participation by implementing automatic voter registration to increase voter turnout and electoral engagement.
No-excuse absentee voting makes voting more accessible to particular demographics and reduces the cost of elections. Without this as an option, qualified voters may not be able to participate based upon a lack of transportation, geography, income status, physical disabilities, or family constraints.
Mail-in voting is a safe method, both for the electoral process and individual voters. It allows for increased privacy and increased accessibility without compromising the integrity of the process.
Suppression tactics such as gerrymandering result in disproportionate representation for certain groups and minority rule. Districts must be fairly drawn to accurately reflect electorates and maintain electoral participation.
The electoral process should be federalized to streamline the process and prevent interference and confusion regarding state voting laws.
There should be clear divisions between those running elections and those competing in them. This would prevent corruption and questions of election legitimacy, such as in Georgia in 2016 where Gubernatorial candidate Brian Kemp, then Georgia Secretary of State, was in charge of managing an election he was competing in, leading to doubt over the results.

Stance 3: Neither are Major Issues

CORE ARGUMENT: Both parties peddle election problems as a way to motivate their base.

There is no evidence of widespread, significant, voter fraud that matches the level of alarm raised by politicians.
Security experts involved in election security believe the process is secure.
Donald Trump used preexisting distrust in the electoral process, peddled by both parties in elections of the past few decades, in an attempt to undermine the legitimate results of the 2020 election.
Democratic leaders deserve blame for that preexisting doubt for voicing objections to the 2000 Presidential Election, the 2016 Presidential Election, and the 2018 Georgia Gubernatorial Election.
Casting doubt of the electoral process has become a dangerous trend in America that undermines faith in the democratic system. Democrats citing voter suppression and Republicans citing voter fraud are decaying trust in the process in an attempt to gain power for their party.
A vast majority of American voters trust the accuracy of election results.