by Jim Marasco, The Daily Record, November 2016 As election time draws near, the topic of voter fraud usually becomes more publicized. However, during the 2016 presidential election, it seems especially pronounced. This begs the question, “Is voter fraud really an issue in this day and age?”

Defining it

A 2006 U.S. Election Commission report identifies voter fraud as a “voter who intentionally impersonates another registered voter and attempts to vote for that person.” It is also defined as illegal interference with the process of an election. The term is somewhat general, but the violations under state laws become more specific. Some of the violations that constitute voter and election fraud include:

• Forging signatures on petitions to get candidates on the ballot
• Absentee ballot fraud
• Paying or offering gifts for votes
• Fraudulent voter registration forms
• Registering to vote more than once
• Tampering with ballot container

The Motivation

When discussing voter fraud, there are two primary motivators: results and money. Money becomes a motivator if people/organizations are retained and incentivized to enlist unregistered voters. The most notorious case involved The Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) in 2008. Employees all over the U.S. working on their behalf were charged with various offenses including falsely registering voters, illegally paying canvassers to register voters and interference with election officials. By incentivizing pay based on the number of people that become registered, the incentive exists to falsify the results.

Attempting to influence the results of an election is the other primary reason voter/election fraud occurs. Incidents involving forging signatures on petitions to get candidates on the ballot, absentee ballot fraud and paying people for their votes have been documented at the local levels in various states around the U.S.

The Effects

If voter registration fraud does occur, it doesn’t necessarily lead to skewed election results, as evidenced if the motivation is strictly financial. To cast a vote in person, an individual needs to personally appear in a jurisdiction, provide government issued identification and cast a vote. The controls surrounding this process seem secure. However, the risk is greater when considering absentee or mail-in votes. Examples of how this could easily occur can include a household member requesting absentee ballots for family members who are out of town and cast votes on their behalf. More sophisticated schemes involve people registering and voting in multiple states.

Myth or Reality?

Depending on who you ask, the responses differ as to how large of a problem voter fraud represents. Smaller isolated cases may not receive priority at the state level and may not be fully investigated and prosecuted. Inadequate resources also cause voter fraud to go undetected. For example, people have been known to vote in multiple states because states don’t routinely cross-check with each other. While physically voting in one state, they can file absentee ballots in others.

Republicans have alleged that the current voter registrations contain nearly 2 million deceased individuals and that these individuals are less apt to vote for their candidates. While this information was confirmed in a Pew Research Study, the study goes on to say that there is no evidence that these “individuals” will actually cast a ballot. If anything, it points to the inadequacies of our current voter registration process. For example, some states started comparing absentee votes to the social security death index. This type of matching has produced instances where people listed as deceased were found to have voted. However, further investigations into these discrepancies have found instances where people died after casting their ballot, clerical errors in databases and other oversights prompting doubt as to the magnitude of this issue. It’s also impossible to predict which party would be advantaged by this type of activity.

The Impact

It would naïve to believe voter fraud does not occur. In 2012, a study at Arizona State University analyzed 2,068 cases of election fraud since 2000. However, the consensus of Democrats is that a national election won’t be materially impacted by any type of voter fraud. Whether it impacts a national election will probably be impossible to measure unless indisputable evidence emerges. But with the advances in technology and sophistication, it seems reasonable to believe that in the near future, these issues can easily be eliminated, dispelling the opinions of both camps. Hopefully, the conversation around this topic won’t discourage anyone from casting their legitimate right to vote.

James I. Marasco, CPA, CIA, CFE, is a partner at Stonebridge Business Partners.