Podcast Summary: The New Yorker Radio Hour

Episode: Voter Fraud: A Threat to Democracy, or a Myth?

Air Date: November 7, 2017

Host: David Remnick
Guests: John Fund (National Review columnist), Lorraine Minnite (Political Scientist), Trey Petlin (Attorney), Jelani Cobb (New Yorker writer)

Main Theme

This episode examines the contentious debate around voter fraud in America: Is it a genuine threat to democracy or a largely fabricated myth with deeply partisan undertones? Host David Remnick explores individual cases, legal battles, and research findings, featuring perspectives from advocates for stricter voting laws, legal practitioners, and academic researchers.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Low Voter Turnout and the "Problem" of Too Many (or the Wrong) People Voting

• Context: Remnick introduces America’s historically low voter turnout, contrasting the country’s self-image as a democratic beacon with persistent apathy. He notes a recent political shift: some say the real issue is now “too many—or the wrong kind of—people voting.”
• Quote:

  "For generations, the truth of American democracy has been that we seem not to like it very much. ... In recent years, some in the political world have diagnosed a new problem. Too many people voting. Or maybe better put the wrong kind of people." —David Remnick [00:19]

2. The Case of Kris Kobach and the Gatkes: Real-World Voter Fraud Prosecutions

• Case Study:
  • Kris Kobach (Kansas' Secretary of State) championed strong anti-fraud laws, citing allegations of double voting.
  • The Gatkes, retirees and Republicans, were investigated for supposed double voting during a move; no actual fraud was found in Betty Gatke’s case; Steve Gatke pled to a minor misdemeanor due to confusion.
• Observations:
  • Most cases in Kansas involved registered Republicans, not undocumented immigrants.
  • Voter fraud prosecutions are exceedingly rare.
• Quote:

  "In my research… it was clear that voting crimes are extremely rare. Not only had I not had one, I hadn’t heard of one… I’ve done criminal defense for 23 years. It’s not charged. And the reason it’s not charged is because it doesn’t happen." —Trey Petlin [04:14]

3. The Conservative View: John Fund Argues for Stricter Protections

• Argument: Fund supports the notion that voter fraud exists, especially in close elections, but admits it occurs on both sides—sometimes for incentives as little as “a bottle of bourbon.”
• Difficulty in Proof: He claims impersonation voter fraud is hidden and hard to detect, likening it to insider trading or tax evasion: just because convictions are rare doesn't mean crime isn't happening.
• Quote:

  "If you go to the SEC and you ask them, 'How many cases of insider trading violations do you have?' ... They will tell you, 'We know there's a lot of them, but we know it's almost impossible to detect unless we have an informant.'" —John Fund [06:28]

• Skepticism of Studies: Fund dismisses studies finding near-zero fraud due to supposed undetectability.
• The Motor Voter Law Debate: Fund repeats a debunked claim that "eight of the 9/11 hijackers" were registered voters due to lax registration, but backtracks under questioning, admitting his number was wrong and based on a dated tip.
• Quote:

  "You accused me of reporting a falsehood. I would simply tell you some of them. It was not eight. It was a lower number." —John Fund [09:13]

4. Problems with Purging Voter Rolls & Bureaucratic Incompetence

• Remnick’s Point: Overaggressive efforts to clean up voter rolls can disenfranchise legitimate voters (e.g., NYC’s erroneous purge of 100,000 voters).
• Fund’s Response: He calls for more competent bureaucracy and poll worker training, but resists nationalized, federally monitored standards for elections, citing constitutional precedent.
• Quote:

  "We need to have better voter rolls. And we need to also train a whole new generation of pol..." —John Fund [10:20]

5. Should the Focus Be on Voter Fraud or Voter Suppression?

• Remnick pushes Fund to clarify whether isolated fraud is worth national focus when evidence is scant and when strict laws risk suppressing turnout; Fund deflects, saying “we can do both”—making it “easy to vote and hard to cheat.”
• Fund claims to have approached civil rights groups with proposals for universal voter ID cards, which he says were met with “very little interest.”
• Quote:

  "Let's convert the Social Security card into an ID card for voting purposes only, with a photograph on it. The cost would be minimal... Let's get them an id. I've had very little interest in this." —John Fund [11:21]

6. Academic Perspective: Lorraine Minnite and the (Lack of) Evidence for Voter Fraud

• Research Process: Minnite, author of "The Myth of Voter Fraud," conducted exhaustive research: surveys, interviews, public records, and expert testimony in court cases. She consistently found no systemic voter fraud even where voter ID laws were hotly debated.
• Quote:

  "I've looked for years and I have looked in multiple ways ... and no one else has come up with it." —Lorraine Minnite [16:49]

• Why Perpetuate the Myth?
  • Minnite asserts that fraud fears tap into race/class-based prejudices and form a pretext for stricter laws. These disproportionately affect poor and minority voters, groups associated with Democrats.
  • Quote:

    "It's tapping into attitudes that are really deep in American culture and racially charged and class-based ... Those stricter rules have disproportionate effects on people who are poor." —Lorraine Minnite [17:04]

• Historical Context: The myth of voter fraud is echoic of historic voter suppression tactics (poll taxes, literacy tests) but has shifted to new targets (Latinos, undocumented immigrants).
• Rationality of Fraud: Minnite notes that “voter fraud” is an irrational individual act: the costs (felony charge, deportation) far outweigh the negligible benefit of a single extra vote.
• Quote:

  "It's an almost irrational act, which is voting, and then to say ... I'm going to possibly face even a felony conviction ... to cast one more vote. What do you get for it?" —Lorraine Minnite [19:59]

7. Vote Buying and Historical Corruption: Past vs Present

• Vote buying (e.g., cash for votes in poor communities) has existed, but modern safeguards make this rarely effective or undetectable.
• Historic election manipulation (Tammany Hall, saloon politics) is not reflective of the current era; most evidence of widespread fraud is from a long-gone American past.

8. Myths about 9/11 Hijackers and 'Motor Voter' Law

• Both Fund and Minnite discuss, and debunk, the myth that 9/11 hijackers voted or were registered due to motor voter laws—a persistent political talking point, though unsupported by fact.
• Quote:

  "This idea that the 9/11 hijackers were registered to vote came in part because some of them had used fake driver's licenses... So they could be registered to vote. They are registered to vote was said on a couple of television shows in particular." —Lorraine Minnite [24:46]

9. Motivations Behind Fraud Claims and the Kobach Commission

• Minnite suggests that efforts to “clean voter rolls” and commission investigations (like Kris Kobach’s) are political strategies to demobilize opposition voters under the guise of integrity.
• She foresees “ongoing chaos” and “loss of public confidence” as the likely impact of such commissions.
• Quote:

  "I mean, I think it's about trying to create ongoing chaos on election day ... create an environment in which the public actually is losing confidence, not gaining confidence." —Lorraine Minnite [26:11]

Memorable Quotes & Moments

• On the Rarity of Voter Fraud:

  “Voting crimes are extremely rare…it doesn’t happen.” —Trey Petlin [04:14]

• On Investigating Hidden Crimes:

  “All crimes are meant to be concealed, right? … We have that challenge with all kinds of crimes and fraud and detecting them, and we have methods for doing that.” —Lorraine Minnite [14:20]

• On the Logic of Suppression:

  “We perpetuate the idea that there’s all this corruption and that justifies stricter rules about access. And those stricter rules have disproportionate effects on people who are poor.” —Lorraine Minnite [17:04]

• On Cost-Benefit of Fraudulent Voting:

  “To commit voter fraud…to say, 'I'm going to break a law…possibly face even a felony conviction…to cast one more vote?' What do you get for it?” —Lorraine Minnite [19:59]

• Confrontation Over 9/11 Hijacker Claim:

  “Now, that's a pretty explosive claim. It's also not true.” —David Remnick [08:54]
  “You accused me of reporting a falsehood…my source was someone inside the Justice Department…It was wrong. Certainly the number was wrong.” —John Fund [09:13, 09:37]

Notable Timestamps

• 00:19–01:14: Remnick sets up the episode, low voter turnout, and the new focus on “the wrong kind of people voting”
• 01:38–04:57: The Gatke case and the rarity of voter fraud, as told by Trey Petlin
• 05:38–13:40: Interview with John Fund—arguments for stricter laws, skepticism of data, the 9/11 claim, voter roll integrity, federal vs state oversight, and the philosophical conflict of fraud versus suppression
• 14:20–27:01: Lorraine Minnite and Jelani Cobb discuss the lack of evidence for fraud, roots of the myth, historic context, rationality, suppression strategies, and consequences of the Kobach Commission

Summary

This episode provides an in-depth, nuanced exploration of voter fraud in America, dissecting real cases, political rhetoric, and empirical research. The dialogue reveals that concrete instances of voter fraud are vanishingly rare, despite prominent accusations and legislative campaigns to counter them. Supporters of strict ID and registration requirements argue that undetectable fraud is still possible and dangerous; critics view these efforts as politically motivated suppression of marginalized voters, invoking historical echoes of exclusion. The conversation exposes partisan divides, challenges myths, and raises important questions about the true threats to American democracy: mythologized fraud or calculated voter suppression.