Is voter fraud a problem in the US?

No, voter fraud is not a significant or widespread problem in the United States. It occurs at extremely low rates—typically measured in thousandths or hundred-thousandths of a percent of ballots cast—and is almost always isolated rather than systematic. Documented cases are rare relative to the hundreds of millions (or billions over decades) of votes cast, and there is no credible evidence that it has altered the outcomes of presidential elections or most major races. Safeguards, audits, bipartisan oversight, and prosecutions help detect and deter it.[1]

Scale and Rates from Data and Studies

Multiple analyses from government investigations, academic research, nonpartisan and partisan sources converge on this conclusion:

•The Heritage Foundation (a conservative organization) maintains a database of “proven instances” of election fraud (convictions, civil penalties, official findings, etc.). As of late 2025 updates, it lists roughly 1,500–1,620 cases dating back to the 1980s (or earlier in some inclusions). These span federal, state, local, primary, and general elections over decades involving billions of ballots. This equates to roughly 6–7 cases per 10 million ballots in federal general elections alone (around 0.00007% or lower when contextualized properly). Heritage itself describes it as a “sampling” that is not comprehensive.[2]

•Analyses of Heritage’s own data (e.g., by Brookings Institution) show minuscule rates in key states. In Arizona over ~25 years (~42.6 million ballots across dozens of elections): ~36 cases (0.0000845%). In Pennsylvania over ~30 years (>100 million votes): ~39 cases. Similar patterns hold elsewhere; no outcomes were altered by the documented ballot fraud in these reviews.[1]

•Brennan Center for Justice reviews of meticulously studied elections find fraud rates of 0.0003%–0.0025%. A 2014 analysis identified just 31 credible in-person voter impersonation cases out of more than 1 billion ballots cast (2000–2014). Impersonation is among the rarest forms—more likely to be struck by lightning than to successfully impersonate a voter at the polls. Noncitizen voting is also vanishingly rare in legitimate studies.[3]

•Other figures: A DOJ unit examining 2002–2004 federal elections found a fraud rate of ~0.00000013% with no evidence of in-person impersonation or concerted efforts to tilt outcomes. An Associated Press review of the 2020 election in six battleground states found fewer than 475 potential problematic votes—far below Joe Biden’s combined margins there (~311,000 votes)—with virtually all cases individual and no evidence of collusion or rigging.[4]

•Mail/absentee voting fraud is also very rare. Brookings analysis of recent general elections (using inclusive estimates) found an average rate of ~0.000043% (about 4 cases per 10 million mail ballots). Studies find no evidence that expanded mail voting meaningfully increases overall fraud risk.[5]

These rates come from sources across the spectrum, including those motivated to find fraud. Claims of millions of illegal votes (e.g., in 2016 or 2020) have repeatedly failed scrutiny in courts, audits, recounts, and investigations by officials of both parties, the DOJ, CISA, and others. Statistical arguments alleging widespread fraud have been debunked as flawed or nonsensical.[6]

Types of Fraud and Notable Cases

Common documented types include double voting, voting by ineligible people (e.g., felons in restricted states, non-residents, or rarely noncitizens), false registrations, vote-buying, and improper absentee ballot handling. In-person impersonation is the rarest. Many allegations turn out to be administrative errors, misunderstandings, or unsubstantiated.

Fraud can matter in extremely close local or low-turnout races. A prominent modern example is North Carolina’s 9th Congressional District in 2018: A Republican operative ran an illegal absentee ballot collection/harvesting scheme (involving hundreds of ballots in violation of state law). This tainted the close race (initial ~905-vote margin), leading the bipartisan state board to order a new election, which was held. Prosecutions followed. This was caught by the system and remains exceptional—not indicative of national patterns.[7]

Context, Safeguards, and Why It’s Rare

•Deterrence: Fraud is a serious crime (felony in many cases) with real penalties. Most people won’t risk jail for one extra vote.

•Safeguards: Voter registration checks, ID requirements (in many states), signature verification for mail ballots, provisional ballots, bipartisan poll workers/observers, chain-of-custody rules, post-election audits/risk-limiting audits, canvassing, and recounts. Election officials (often bipartisan or of mixed parties) and lawyers from both sides monitor counting.

•Prosecutions: The DOJ, FBI, and state authorities investigate and prosecute election crimes (voter/ballot fraud, intimidation, etc.) when evidence exists. Cases are publicized, which can create a misleading impression of scale.

•Isolated incidents happen with any large-scale human system (like errors in Social Security payments relative to total benefits), but they do not equal systemic failure.

Allegations of widespread fraud, while sometimes starting from real (but tiny) cases, have often been exaggerated or baseless. This can erode trust and lead to restrictive policies that make voting harder for eligible citizens without meaningfully reducing the already-low fraud rates. Election integrity efforts are best focused on real vulnerabilities (e.g., securing voter rolls, improving audits, protecting against foreign cyber interference—which official assessments have found did not compromise vote integrity in recent cycles) rather than myths.[3]

In short, U.S. elections are highly secure by design, with fraud real but rare and not a meaningful threat to overall results. Officials continue refining processes, and voters can have confidence in the system’s integrity based on the evidence.

Citations (7)

1brookings.eduNonprofits and think tanks
https://www.brookings.edu/articles/how-widespread-is-election-fraud-in-the-united-states-not-very/
Backs: “Safeguards, audits, bipartisan oversight, and prosecutions help detect and deter it.”
2truthbased.orgNonprofits and think tanks
https://www.truthbased.org/is-voter-fraud-a-real-problem
Backs: “Heritage itself describes it as a “sampling” that is not comprehensive.”
3brennancenter.orgNonprofits and think tanks
https://www.brennancenter.org/topics/voting-elections/vote-suppression/myth-voter-fraud
Backs: “Noncitizen voting is also vanishingly rare in legitimate studies.”
4apnews.comNews and mediaquality 1.00
https://apnews.com/article/election-2024-voter-fraud-trump-harris-a3b4c2db17217311770259193c115b80
Backs: “An Associated Press review of the 2020 election in six battleground states found fewer than 475 potential problematic votes—far below Joe Biden’s combined margins there (~311,000 votes)—with virtually all cases individual and no evidence of collusion or rigging.”
5brookings.eduNonprofits and think tanks
https://www.brookings.edu/articles/mail-voting-in-the-us-data-points-to-very-low-fraud-and-significant-benefits-to-voters/
Backs: “Studies find no evidence that expanded mail voting meaningfully increases overall fraud risk.”
6snopes.comNot yet classified
https://www.snopes.com/collections/no-systematic-voter-fraud-2020/
Backs: “Statistical arguments alleging widespread fraud have been debunked as flawed or nonsensical.”
7nytimes.comNews and mediaquality 0.86
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/30/us/mccrae-dowless-indictment.html
Backs: “This was caught by the system and remains exceptional—not indicative of national patterns.”