North Dakota’s Unusual Election System: A Model for Voter Access or a Local Anomaly?
Table of Contents
Despite ongoing national debates over election integrity and access, one state stands apart: North Dakota. For over 70 years, the state has operated without voter registration, a system that allows any U.S. citizen, 18 years or older, who has resided in North Dakota for at least 30 days to cast a ballot. This approach, born from a spirit of prairie populism, is now being examined as restrictive voting laws proliferate across the country, fueled by unsubstantiated claims of widespread voter fraud.
The Rise of Voting Restrictions
The debate over voter access has intensified in recent years, particularly following the 2020 presidential election – which, according to assessments from the Trump administration’s own watchdogs, was the most secure in American history. Since then, at least 30 states have enacted over 100 restrictive voting laws, according to data compiled by New York University’s Brennan Center and the Democracy Policy Lab at UC Berkeley. These laws range from limiting polling places in Texas to making it more difficult for individuals with disabilities to vote by mail in Mississippi, and shortening the return window for mail ballots in North Carolina.
In California, efforts are underway to qualify a November ballot measure that would mandate government-issued identification for voting, a measure critics argue addresses a non-existent problem. “We have the lowest level of public trust and confidence in our elections that we have ever seen,” stated a San Diego Republican launching the effort, echoing a sentiment that ignores the lack of evidence supporting widespread fraud.
A Different Path: North Dakota’s System
Amidst this national trend, North Dakota offers a stark contrast. The state abolished voter registration in 1951, opting for a system based on residency and identification at the polls. Currently, voters are required to present a valid form of identification – such as a state-issued driver’s license, a tribal ID, or a long-term care certificate – with each vote.
“It works excellent,” affirmed Sandy McMerty, North Dakota’s deputy secretary of state. Political scientist Mark Jendrysik echoed this sentiment, noting that the system “lowers the record-keeping burdens and saves money.” Jendrysik, who teaches at the University of North Dakota in Grand Forks, explained that the decision to abandon voter registration stemmed from a time of robust two-party competition and a desire to make voting more accessible. “There was an idea we should make it easier to vote,” he said. “We should open up things.”
Turnout and Fraud: A North Dakota Reality Check
Despite the lack of registration requirements, North Dakota’s voter turnout in the last three elections has remained close to the national average, placing it firmly in the middle of the pack among states. More importantly, the state has seen virtually no instances of election fraud. A 2022 study by the state auditor’s office found it “exceptionally” unlikely that an election in North Dakota could be fraudulently influenced, a finding consistent with national trends.
Jendrysik, who has followed North Dakota politics for 26 years, stated he cannot recall a single case of election fraud being prosecuted during that time. This stands in stark contrast to the rhetoric surrounding voter fraud elsewhere in the country.
Can North Dakota’s Model Be Replicated?
While North Dakota’s system appears successful, replicating it elsewhere may prove challenging. The state’s small population – approximately 600,000 eligible voters – and close-knit communities contribute to its effectiveness. This is significantly different than states like California, which has over 30 million adult residents and numerous counties with populations exceeding half a million registered voters.
“It’s unique to this state,” Jendrysik emphasized, “and I think if they hadn’t done it decades ago, it would have never happened.” McMerty believes other states could emulate North Dakota’s example, but it would require rigorous data-sharing and coordination among state agencies, including daily updates to voter rolls based on driver’s license issuance, births, and deaths.
Ultimately, the impetus for other states to abandon voter registration remains limited, unless it can be demonstrably proven to significantly boost turnout. As the nation grapples with declining trust in elections and increasingly restrictive voting laws, North Dakota’s experience offers a compelling, if unconventional, case study. We should be doing all we can to get people to vote and invest in our beleaguered political system, rather than wasting time chasing shadows and phantoms or indulging the delusions of a sore-loser president.
