Is voter fraud a problem in the US?

NoSays it is contested

According to an overwhelming consensus of election security experts, academic studies, government investigations, and historical data, voter fraud in the United States is exceedingly rare and is not a systemic or widespread problem.

While isolated incidents of voter fraud do occur, multiple rigorous analyses have shown that they are far too infrequent to affect the outcome of any modern U.S. election.

What the Data and Studies Show

Numerous nonpartisan, academic, and even conservative-leaning investigations have analyzed voting data over decades, arriving at the same conclusion:

•The Heritage Foundation Database: The Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, maintains a database tracking proven cases of election fraud across the U.S.. A 2024 analysis of this database by the Brookings Institution showed that the actual occurrence of fraud is miniscule. For example, in the highly contested state of Pennsylvania, the database recorded just 39 cases of voter fraud over 30 years—a period during which more than 100 million votes were cast (a rate of roughly 0.0000388%). In Arizona, there were 36 cases out of more than 42 million votes cast over 25 years.

•Mail-In Ballot Fraud: While critics often target mail-in (absentee) voting, research consistently shows that fraud in this category is also exceptionally rare. A study by the Brookings Institution analyzing general elections from 2016 to 2022 estimated that there were only about four cases of mail-in fraud for every 10 million ballots cast (0.00004%).

•Noncitizen Voting: Voting in federal and state elections by noncitizens is illegal. Studies show it is virtually nonexistent. For instance, a Brennan Center for Justice study of 42 jurisdictions in the 2016 election found only 30 suspected cases of noncitizen voting out of 23.5 million votes cast (0.0001%). While administrative or software errors occasionally result in noncitizens being mistakenly added to voter rolls, audits show that almost none of these individuals actually attempt to cast a ballot, and the errors are typically corrected quickly by election officials.

•In-Person Impersonation: This is the rarest form of voter fraud. Because it requires a person to show up at a polling place pretending to be someone else—facing severe felony penalties (including fines, prison time, or deportation for noncitizens) for the payoff of just one vote—experts agree it is practically nonexistent.

Why the Public Debate Persists

Despite the lack of evidence supporting widespread fraud, voter fraud remains one of the most polarizing topics in American politics. The debate generally splits into two main viewpoints:

1. The Perspective Favoring Stricter Laws (Proponents of "Election Integrity")

Proponents of tighter voting laws—predominantly Republicans and conservative organizations—argue that even if fraud is rare, any single fraudulent vote dilutes the vote of a legal citizen. They assert that preventative measures are necessary to bolster public confidence in elections. They advocate for policies such as:

•Strict photo ID requirements at polling places.

•More frequent purging of inactive or outdated names from voter rolls (such as those who have died or moved).

•Eliminating or severely restricting "no-excuse" mail-in voting and ballot drop boxes.

From this perspective, making the system highly secure is the primary goal, even if it adds extra steps for voters.

2. The Perspective Favoring Expanded Access (Proponents of "Voting Rights")

Opponents of restrictive measures—predominantly Democrats and voting rights organizations—argue that because actual voter fraud is functionally "phantom" fraud, strict rules are unnecessary and counterproductive. They argue these laws are politically motivated and act as a form of voter suppression by creating hurdles that disproportionately affect certain demographics, including:

•Low-income voters who may lack the funds or time to obtain specific government IDs.

•Minority and young voters, who tend to move more frequently and may struggle with strict registration deadlines or address match requirements.

•Elderly or disabled voters who rely heavily on mail-in ballots.

From this perspective, the primary goal of election policy should be maximizing voter turnout and participation.

Summary

The scientific, academic, and legal consensus is clear: voter fraud is not a significant problem in terms of affecting U.S. election outcomes. The systems in place—including bipartisan polling monitors, post-election audits, signature-matching, and severe criminal penalties—are highly effective at preventing and catching illegal voting.

However, the debate persists because it touches on fundamental questions about the balance between securing the ballot and ensuring access for every eligible citizen.

Citations (7)

1wikipedia.orgEncyclopedias and referencequality 0.83
wikipedia.org
Backs: “According to an overwhelming consensus of election security experts, academic studies, government investigations, and historical data, voter fraud in the United States is exceedingly rare and is not a systemic or widespread problem.”
evidence, reference entry, points to no. Claim: Overwhelming expert consensus holds voter fraud in the US is exceedingly rare and not systemic or widespread.
2projectvote.orgNonprofits and think tanks
projectvote.org
Backs: “According to an overwhelming consensus of election security experts, academic studies, government investigations, and historical data, voter fraud in the United States is exceedingly rare and is not a systemic or widespread problem.”
evidence, article, points to no. Claim: Overwhelming expert consensus holds voter fraud in the US is exceedingly rare and not systemic or widespread.
3brennancenter.orgNonprofits and think tanks
brennancenter.org
Backs: “According to an overwhelming consensus of election security experts, academic studies, government investigations, and historical data, voter fraud in the United States is exceedingly rare and is not a systemic or widespread problem.”
evidence, article, points to no. Claim: Overwhelming expert consensus holds voter fraud in the US is exceedingly rare and not systemic or widespread.
4brookings.eduNonprofits and think tanks
brookings.edu
Backs: “While isolated incidents of voter fraud do occur, multiple rigorous analyses have shown that they are far too infrequent to affect the outcome of any modern U.S. election.”
evidence, article, points to no. Claim: Isolated voter fraud incidents occur but are too infrequent to affect the outcome of any modern US election.
5sciline.orgNonprofits and think tanks
sciline.org
Backs: “Mail-In Ballot Fraud: While critics often target mail-in (absentee) voting, research consistently shows that fraud in this category is also exceptionally rare. A study by the Brookings Institution analyzing general elections from 2016 to 2022 estimated that there were only about four cases of mail-in fraud for every…”
evidence, article, points to no. Claim: Research consistently shows mail-in ballot fraud is exceptionally rare.
6time.comNews and mediaquality 0.83
time.com
Backs: “Mail-In Ballot Fraud: While critics often target mail-in (absentee) voting, research consistently shows that fraud in this category is also exceptionally rare. A study by the Brookings Institution analyzing general elections from 2016 to 2022 estimated that there were only about four cases of mail-in fraud for every…”
evidence, article, points to no. Claim: Research consistently shows mail-in ballot fraud is exceptionally rare.
7stanford.eduAcademic
stanford.edu
Backs: “Despite the lack of evidence supporting widespread fraud, voter fraud remains one of the most polarizing topics in American politics. The debate generally splits into two main viewpoints:”
background, article, neutral. Claim: Despite lack of evidence of widespread fraud, voter fraud remains one of the most polarizing topics in American politics.