Strict Voter ID Laws' Impact Voting Behavior

In the run up to the 2012 Presidential Election, a few states have controversially tightened voting laws and regulations. Pennsylvania, something of a 'battleground state', is one example. It now requires all voters to present state-issued photo identification in order to vote, not just the usual proof of residency. Critics argue that this new provision is targeted and places an undue burden on specific citizens that will prevent them from voting—those of urban and lower socioeconomic backgrounds, who tend to vote Democratic. This article presents the story of Cheryl Ann Moore, a 54 year-old African American woman who has lived/voted in Philadelphia without any photo ID for years—but due to this new provision, she had to get a photo ID in order to vote come November.

With that, after four hours, Cheryl Ann Moore became the proud owner of a laminated Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Department of State for Voting Purposes Only ID card.  

“I feel good!” she said. She grinned, kissed the card, put it inside a compartment in her knockoff Louis Vuitton purse and zippered it shut.

The economic approach to voting behavior states that people vote only if their marginal benefit of voting is greater than or equal to the marginal costs associated with casting a ballot. As we see from Ms. Moore's experience, the marginal costs of getting this identification are quite high--in terms of time, energy, money, and missed work. Though for Ms. Moore the marginal benefit that she derives from voting must be incredibly high, if not infinite, since she willingly spent the entire day wading through long lines and red tape to get this new ID. Her tirelessly positive attitude at the end of the day just goes to show that her marginal benefits of voting did indeed outweigh the costs--though we can't necessarily pinpoint the precise nature of her benefit. Economic theorists like Johnson would predict that many voters have lower marginal benefits than Ms. Moore, and in this situation would forfeit their right to vote simply because the marginal costs have increased dramatically, likely well beyond their level of marginal benefit derived from voting. An individual voter realistically has little impact on the outcome of the election, and many would rather spend a day doing something other than waiting around the DMV for an ID card. The actual impact on the turnout of the affected Pennsylvania voters remains to be seen, but I personally hope that many people will be like Ms. Moore and highly value the priceless right to vote over whatever obstacles the state puts in the way. 
 
Note: I am including the time spent getting the ID under her marginal costs of voting—even if she hasn’t voted yet—because I assume for argument's sake that she will vote since she took the time to comply.