# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
2020 Presidential Election Calendar - 270toWin

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Key dates for the 2020 presidential election. Includes dates for state primary and caucus events, party conventions and presidential debates

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
When it comes to U.S. presidential elections, why do we pay so much attention to Iowa and New Hampshire?

The origin story of the Iowa caucuses is born out of the political upheaval of the late 1960s, while New Hampshire's place in the race to the White House is pretty straight-forward - it's mandated by state law. PBS NewsHour correspondent Lisa Desjardins digs into this question in our explainer video. Watch in the video player above.

READ MORE: Presidential caucuses are complicated. Why do some states use them?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
WATCH: Why the Iowa caucuses get to go first

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
When it comes to U.S. presidential elections, why do we pay so much attention to Iowa and New Hampshire? The origin story of the Iowa caucuses is born out of the political upheaval of the late 1960s, while New Hampshire's place in the race to the White House is pretty straight-forward - it's mandated by state law.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Lesson Plan_ Debating the Electoral College

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How the electoral college gerrymanders the presidential vote

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Former Vice President Joe Biden leads national poll after national poll of the Democratic nomination contest. But there's just one teensy problem for him: There is no national primary.

The actual presidential nomination process is lengthy, convoluted, and provides ample opportunities for the frontrunner to stumble. It has unique dynamics that make it far different from a typical election. It's part rollercoaster, part marathon.

And key to everything is the calendar.

Between February 3 and June 6, 57 separate primaries and caucuses will take place. Their outcomes will gradually assign candidates delegates necessary to win the nomination at the July national convention. The ordering and timing of contests is crucial - and it breaks down into two separate phases.

Phase one is the four early states in February, which have a paltry number of delegates but an extraordinary impact on the race's overall narrative. Phase two is the briefest but the most consequential: It spans March 1 to 17, in which more than half of all delegates will be locked down. And then phase three, if the nomination is still contested, will be a long, slow slog for the remaining delegates until early June (or until someone wins a majority).

As the contest goes on, it shifts from one that's fluid and unpredictable to one that's about cold, hard math. Because once a candidate gets a significant delegate lead, that lead can be quite difficult to dislodge - particularly due to Democratic rules that delegates must be allotted proportionally based on results.

And considering how important the calendar is, it may be surprising that no one dictated it from the top down. The DNC does protect the privileged position of the four early states, and it set an overall end date, but beyond that, it was really up to each state to decide when to hold its contest.

Overall, what's resulted is a messy and arguably even bizarre way to pick a nominee. It's a process that ends up privileging certain states over others, and that can be buffeted by sudden volatility, especially early on. But it's the system Democrats have. And it will determine who gets to run against Donald Trump in November.

Phase one: The early states (February 2020)

The voting in the Democratic nomination contest starts off quite slowly, with the month of February reserved for the four famous "early states."

Monday, February 3: Iowa caucuses

Tuesday, February 11: New Hampshire primary

Saturday, February 22: Nevada caucuses

Saturday, February 29: South Carolina primary

Now, these states have a paltry amount of the overall delegates - just 4 percent when you combine all of them. This makes it impossible for anyone to build up a significant lead in this phase, particularly because Democrats allot their delegates proportionally.

Yet because there are so few other contests happening, they can have enormous impact on perceptions of the overall race - solidifying (or damaging) a frontrunner's position, giving an underdog a surge of attention, or driving poorly performing contenders out of the race. Often, they effectively settle who the true top two or three candidates are.

Essentially, the political world looks at the early state results and the media coverage of those results, and takes them as cues about which contenders can actually win. Donations can surge or dry up, endorsements can flow in or vanish, and a candidate's national poll position can change quite suddenly - even though the margins of victories in these contests can be quite small.

For a frontrunner like Biden, this is a period of testing - it's very rare for a candidate to win every early contest (only Al Gore pulled it off in any contested race from recent decades). And for non-frontrunners, it's a period of opportunity to win as Barack Obama did in Iowa in 2008 or even just to perform surprisingly strongly, winning the "expectations game" as Bill Clinton did with a second-place New Hampshire finish in 1992.

There is, however, a catch: Early voting for some crucial Super Tuesday contests also begins in February - with, for instance, mail ballots going out to voters in California the same day as the Iowa caucuses. In previous years, early Super Tuesday voters who are undecided have waited to see what happens in these first four contests before casting their own ballots. But it's possible that a significant chunk of those votes will be banked already by the time the South Carolina primary rolls around, which would blunt that state's influence on future results.

Phase two: Super Tuesday and the 17-day scramble (March 1 to 17, 2020)

If February is mostly about perceptions and momentum, March brings a newfound focus on math - because, in just over two weeks, more than 60 percent of pledged delegates at stake in the entire contest will be locked down.

First, on March 3,is Super Tuesday itself. About 33 percent of total pledged delegates are at stake in contests held that day (though we should keep in mind, again, that there will be early voting in many of them).

The biggest Super Tuesday delegate hauls will be from California and Texas, but there will be other primaries in the South ( Virginia, North Carolina, Alabama, Arkansas, Tennessee, Oklahoma), New England ( Massachusetts, Maine, Vermont), the West ( Colorado, Utah), and the Midwest ( Minnesota), and caucuses in American Samoa.

So while it's possible for one candidate to essentially lock up the nomination by winning by large margins across the board, a regional split is also a distinct possibility. Democrats also have a rule that any candidate getting more than 15 percent of the vote (either statewide or in congressional districts) qualifies for delegates, meaning that at least two and perhaps more candidates will probably get some. (Candidates who fall short of that threshold, though, will likely be driven out of the race.)

Next, the remaining candidates will have little time to catch their breath - because the subsequent two Tuesdays after the super one are also major voting days.

On March 10, contests in Michigan, Washington, Missouri, Mississippi, Idaho, and North Dakota will take place. Voting in the Democrats Abroad primary (a vote among party members living overseas), which begins on Super Tuesday, will also conclude. About 47 percent of pledged delegates will have been locked in after that. (The Northern Mariana Islands will then hold a caucus on March 14.)

On March 17, Florida, Ohio, Illinois, and Arizona have primaries - pushing Democrats up to about 61 percent of pledged delegates allotted.

This means that if there is ambiguity in the Super Tuesday results - whether due to a vote split among several candidates, or due to infamously slow California vote-counting - those two not-quite-as-super Tuesdays could help settle it.

What's different in 2020? The main change is that California moved from an early June primary late in the process, up to Super Tuesday. That and other changes mean this is a somewhat more frontloaded calendar than Democrats had in 2016 (back then, about 50 percent of pledged delegates were allotted by mid-March, compared to about 61 percent this time).

Phase three: The three-month slog (March 18 to June 6, 2020)

The nomination could well be settled by mid-March due to candidate dropouts, as was the case for Democrats in 2000 and 2004. But if it is still contested (as it was in 2008 and 2016), the next phase will slow down quite a bit: There will be an almost three-month slog for the final 39 percent or so of pledged delegates.

Generally, election days going forward will feature either a few small contests or one small- or medium-sized contest. They'll also be spread out more.

For instance, there's Georgia on March 24, Puerto Rico on March 29, Louisiana, Alaska, Hawaii, and Wyoming, on April 4, and Wisconsin on April 7. That takes us up to 70 percent of pledged delegates allocated.

Then there's a three-week gap - until April 28, the single most important day remaining in terms of the delegate haul. New York, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Connecticut, Rhode Island, and Delaware all vote that day, in a sort of Northeastern or Mid-Atlantic primary. About 17 percent of total pledged delegates will be at stake then - meaning 87 percent will have been locked in by that point.

May brings just seven contests that combine for 7 percent of total delegates: Kansas and Guam on May 2, Indiana on May 5, Nebraska and West Virginia on May 12, and Kentucky and Oregon on May 19. That brings Democrats to the 94 percent mark.

Finally, June 2 is the final day of state primary voting, with New Jersey, New Mexico, Montana, South Dakota, and Washington, DC. And if the nomination is still contested after that, the last contest of all is the US Virgin Islands caucuses on June 6.

Finally, at long last, the nominee will officially be chosen at the Democratic convention, which will be held July 13-16, 2020, in Milwaukee. If one candidate has won a majority of pledged delegates at this point, this will be just a formality. However, if no candidate has gotten a majority of pledged delegates - well, then things wouldn't actually be settled yet, and Democrats would head into the contested convention scenario. But that's an explainer for another time.

But why are things this way?

So that's how the calendar works. But it's worth pausing on the sheer strangeness of this whole setup. It's an odd hodgepodge combining the old way nominees were chosen through most of American history (by party insider delegates at conventions), and modern reforms (primaries and caucuses intended to give actual voters a chance to weigh in).

In the 1970s, both Democrats and Republicans adopted reforms that ( accidentally) resulted in state primaries and caucuses becoming the main event in the nominating process. Traditionally states set their own dates for primaries and caucuses, and that continued to the case after the reforms were adopted. That's why there's a nomination battle spread out over months, not one national contest on a single day.

So if you're going to have a staggered system, someone is going to have to go first. And two small states, Iowa and New Hampshire, staked their claims very quickly - and have successfully gotten the DNC and RNC to defend their positions, by penalizing any other state that tries to jump in front. (After years of criticism that those first two states were overwhelmingly white, the DNC and RNC allowed Nevada and South Carolina to go third and fourth.)

Should a few states get special privileges, though? Defenders of the setup argue that it lets lesser-known candidates make their case in a smaller, more manageable setting (rather than getting swamped by the best-known, best-funded candidate nationally). The early states also perform the function of winnowing the field - narrowing down what can be a large and confusing set of options to a few contenders before most of the country votes.

But an enormous amount of hay can get made out of relatively small margins (sometimes a few thousand voters) in states that are small already, and often not representative of the country or the party as a whole. For Republicans in 2016, the difference between first and third place in the Iowa caucuses was about 4 percent (or 8,000 votes). Rather than providing useful information about intrinsic candidate strengths, it can all feel disturbingly arbitrary.

The rest of the calendar is odd and unbalanced as well, with so many of the delegates locked in early March, and the rest over several months.

Democrats have a rule that exacerbates this imbalance - they allot all delegates proportionally, with no winner-take-all contests permitted. The lack of winner-take-all prizes can make it more difficult for a Democratic candidate who's leading to technically reach the "magic number" of delegates until very late in the contest - as Hillary Clinton found in 2016. It also makes it more difficult for a trailing candidate to catch up, as Bernie Sanders found. But so long as hope remains alive, a bitter primary can continue, and prevent the likely nominee from pivoting to focus on the general election.

However, this year's calendar and rules have two important changes that could conceivably help shorten the primary. First is California's move to an earlier date. In 2008 and 2016, the Golden State's huge delegate haul was totally unallotted until June, making it mathematically difficult for anyone to clinch the nomination earlier. This time, California is voting on Super Tuesday, in early March.

The second thing is a rules change about superdelegates. In previous years, those delegates - party officials who could choose whom to support, rather than being yoked to primary or caucus results - were technically not locked in. The DNC changed its rules so that superdelegates can't affect the outcome of the first vote held at the July convention. This will also make it easier for a candidate to reach a clear "magic number" earlier in the primary season.

Of course, whether any candidate manages to do so will depend on how the race shapes up.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The strange and crucially important order of the Democratic primary states, explained

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Former Vice President Joe Biden leads national poll after national poll of the Democratic nomination contest. But there's just one teensy problem for him: There is no national primary. The actual presidential nomination process is lengthy, convoluted, and provides ample opportunities for the frontrunner to stumble.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
Pew Research Center - U.S. Politics & Policy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
About six-in-ten voters (59%) say the elections this November in the U.S. were run and administered well, including 35% who say they were run very well. About four-in-ten (41%) say the elections were not run well. In October, a similar share (62%) of registered voters said they thought the November elections across the country would be run and administered well, though the share expecting they would be run very well (15%) was lower than the share of voters who now say the elections were run well (35%).

A month before the election, registered voters who supported Biden were more likely than Trump supporters to say they thought the elections across the nation would be run well. The gap in evaluations after the election is now even wider. Just 21% of Trump voters now say the elections in the U.S. were run and administered well; by comparison, nearly all Biden voters (94%) say they were run well, including more than six-in-ten (64%) who say they were run very well.

Prior to the election, half of registered voters who backed Trump expected that, nationally, the elections would be run and administered well - fully 30 percentage points higher than the share of Trump voters who now say they were run well (21%). The pattern is reversed among those backing Biden: About seven-in-ten (72%) registered voters who supported Biden expected the elections to be run well when asked in October - 22 points lower than the share of Biden voters who now say this (94%).

An overwhelming majority of voters (90%) think the November elections in their community were run and administered well. An identical share thought this would be the case when asked in October. Just 10% say they were not run well - a view also unchanged from before the election.

Overall, voters give higher ratings to the way elections were administered in their community than they give to elections across the country: Nine-in-ten voters say the elections in their community were run and administered well, and 62% say these were run very well.

Still, Biden voters offer more positive ratings than Trump voters of their community's administration of elections. Nearly all Biden voters (98%) say the elections in their community were run and administered well, including 81% who say they were run very well. About eight-in-ten Trump voters (81%) say the elections were run and administered well in their community, with 42% saying they were administered very well.

Voters have more confidence in counts of votes cast at in person polling places than by mail or absentee

A majority of voters say that votes cast in this past presidential election in November were counted as voters intended, both those cast in person at polling places and those cast by absentee or mail-in ballots. However, confidence is higher in the counts of in-person votes than in votes cast by mail: About eight-in-ten voters (82%) say that they are confident that votes cast in person were counted as voters intended, while about six-in-ten (59%) say the same for votes cast by absentee or mail.

Overall, those who voted for Biden are much more likely than those who for voted Trump to have confidence that votes were counted as intended.

For votes cast in person at polling places, nearly all Biden voters (98%) say that they are confident that votes were counted as intended, compared with 64% of Trump voters. For votes cast by absentee or mail, 95% of Biden voters say they are confident in vote counts - just two-in-ten Trump voters (19%) say this.

Generally, voters' confidence in vote counts - both in person and absentee ballots - is higher among those with more educational attainment.

Overall, Black and Hispanic voters are more likely than White voters to have confidence in vote counts, both in person votes and absentee. Fully 94% of Black voters they are confident that votes cast in person were counted as intended; 87% of Hispanic voters and 79% of white voters say this. And while 87% of Black voters say absentee ballots were counted as voters intended, 70% of Hispanic voters say this, along with only about half of white voters (53%). In large part, these differences by race and ethnicity reflect underlying partisan differences. In fact, the overall pattern in these views is somewhat reversed among Biden voters: White Biden voters are more likely than Black and Hispanic Biden voters to say they are very confident votes were cast as intended (83% of White Biden voters, compared with 68% of Black Biden voters and 70% of Hispanic Biden voters say this about in person votes, with a similar pattern seen in views about mail-in ballots).

Trump voters' confidence in vote counts drops after the election, Biden voters' confidence rises

Biden voters' confidence that votes - both in person and absentee - were counted as voters intended is higher than it was that votes would be counted as intended in a survey conducted a month before Election Day. By contrast, Trump voters' confidence in vote counts is now lower than it was in the pre-election survey. This pattern is consistent with past elections, supporters of the winning candidate tend to express higher levels of confidence in vote counts than supporters of the losing candidate.

Currently, 98% of Biden voters say that they are confident in-person votes were counted as intended; 90% of Biden supporters had expressed confidence these votes would be counted as intended in the October survey. And Biden voters' confidence that mail ballots were counted as intended is considerably higher than it was in October: 95% now say they are confident these ballots were counted as intended; in October, 77% of Biden supporters were confident this would happen.

By contrast, Trump voters' confidence in the count of in person votes is 29 percentage points lower than Trump supporters' confidence in October (92% then, 63% now), while their confidence in the count of mail in ballots is 17 percentage points lower (36% then, 19% now).

Confidence one's ballot was accurately counted is higher among Biden voters than Trump voters

More than eight-in-ten voters (85%) are either very (59%) or somewhat (26%) confident that their vote was counted as they intended.

Those who voted for Biden are much more likely than those who cast their ballot for Trump to have confidence that their votes were counted accurately. Nearly all Biden voters (97%) say they are at least somewhat confident their vote was accurately counted, with 82% of Biden voters saying that they are very confident of this. By comparison, about seven-in-ten Trump voters say they are at least somewhat confident their vote was counted as intended, and just 35% say they are very confident of this.

Overall, Black voters (95%) are more likely than White (84%) and Hispanic (85%) voters to think their votes were accurately counted.

These views vary only modestly by age, with voters ages 65 and older somewhat more likely than other voters to say they are very confident their vote was accurately counted (65% vs. 57%).

Voters with higher levels of education are more confident that their vote was counted accurately: 91% of college graduates say they are confident their ballot was accurately counted, 82% of those with less education say the same.

Overall, in-person voters (83%) are somewhat less likely than mail in voters (88%) to say they are confident that their vote was counted accurately. However, this modest difference is attributable to Biden voters making up a larger share of mail-in voters and Trump voters making up a larger share of in person voters. Within supporters of each candidate there are no significant differences between in-person and mail voters in the confidence one's vote was accurately counted.
CORRECTION (November 20, 2020): Several NET confident numbers in the chart "College grads, Black voters most confident their vote was counted" were incorrect and have now been updated. This update did not affect the report's substantive findings.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
2. Voters' evaluations of the 2020 election process

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
About six-in-ten voters (59%) say the elections this November in the U.S. were run and administered well, including 35% who say they were run very well. About four-in-ten (41%) say the elections were not run well.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Opinion_ The mask slips, revealing the truth about the GOP voter suppression game

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How to Become the US President: A Step-by-Step Guide - 2016 Presidential Election - ProCon.org

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A Step-by-Step Guide on How to Become The President of the United States

# data[].attributes.body
Due Monday 2/25

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Just one-third of GOP voters say they trust 2024 elections will be fair_ poll

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Kinds of Elections:

1. General Elections - an election to fill public offices.

2. Primary Elections - an election prior to the general election in which voters select the candidates who will run on each party's ticket. Primaries are also used to choose convention delegates and party leaders, and may be open or closed.

a. Open Primary - an election that permits voters to choose on Election Day the party primary in which they wish to vote. They may vote for candidates of only one party. (A blanket or "free love" primary is a type of open primary. In the voting booth you mark a ballot that lists the candidates for nomination of all the parties, and thus you can help select the Democratic candidate for one office and the Republican candidate for another.)

b. Closed Primary - the selection of a party's candidates in an election limited to registered party members. Prevents members of other parties from "crossing over" to influence the nomination of an opposing party's candidate.

c. Runoff Primary - if no candidate gets a majority of the votes, a runoff is held to decide who should win.

d. Presidential Primary - a primary used to pick delegates to the presidential nominating conventions of the major parties.

Election Vocabulary

Electoral College - A group of persons called "electors," selected by the voters in each state, that officially elects the president and vice president. The number of electors in each states is equal to its number of representatives in both houses of Congress.

Initiative - An electoral procedure whereby citizens can propose legislation or constitutional amendments and refer the decision to a popular vote by obtaining the required number of signatures on a petition.

Machine - A hierarchically organized, centrally led state or local party organization that rewards members with material benefits (patronage).

Office-Block Ballot - A ballot listing all candidates for a given office under the name of that office; also called a "Massachusetts" ballot.

Party-Column Ballot - A ballot listing all candidates of a given party together under the name of that party; also called an "Indiana" ballot.

Split-Ticket Voting - Voting for candidates of different parties for various offices in the same election. For example, voting for a Republican for senator and a Democrat for president.

Straight-Ticket Voting - Voting candidates who are all of the same party. For example, voting for Republican candidates for senator, representative, and president.

Other Sources of Information:

Library of Congress Teaching materials for educating students on the electoral process.

United States Election Assistance Commission Resources for voters

Voting and Elections USA.gov's page on election processes

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Kinds of Elections: General Elections - an election to fill public offices. Primary Elections - an election prior to the general election in which voters select the candidates who will run on each party's ticket. Primaries are also used to choose convention delegates and party leaders, and may be open or closed.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
C-SPAN Deliberations_  Should the Order of Primaries and Caucuses be Changed (1)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
President Trump Responds on Pennsylvania’s 2020 Election (1)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The modern process for determining party nominees for president was established in the second half of the 20th century. Since this time, Iowa and New Hampshire have played a significant role in candidates' campaign strategies and selecting the eventual nominees from each party.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The 2020 Democratic presidential nominee will be selected by delegates to the Democratic National Convention, which will be held July 13-16, 2020, in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. The national nominating convention is the formal ceremony during which the party officially selects its nominee. The delegates are individuals chosen to represent their state, territory, or Democrats Abroad at the convention.

In 2020, there will be 4,750 delegates: 3,979 pledged delegates and 771 automatic delegates-more commonly known as superdelegates.

To win the Democratic nomination, a presidential candidate must receive support from a majority of the pledged delegates on the first ballot: 1,991 pledged delegates. If the convention is contested and goes to a second ballot or more, automatic delegates will be able to vote and a candidate must receive majority support from all delegates: more than 2,375 votes. Roughly two-thirds of the delegates will have been allocated by the end of March 2020.

This page provides an overview of the types of delegates to the convention and a summary of delegates by state. Election dates, delegate counts, delegate allocation rules are subject to change as each state finalizes its delegation selection process.

Pleged delegate count

Delegate selection and allocation

Delegates are individuals chosen to represent their state at their party's national nominating convention. They are typically party activists, local political leaders, or early supporters of a particular presidential candidate. They are either selected in primaries, caucuses, or local party conventions, or included because of their positions as elected representatives or members of the party leadership.

The number of delegates awarded to each state is determined by a formula that factors the state's popular vote for the Democratic nominee in the previous three elections, the state's electoral votes, and when the state's primary is held.

Each state has its own method for selecting delegates that may occur at the county, district, and/or state level. In some states, a voter directly votes for a presidential candidate in the presidential preference primary and delegates are separately chosen at party conventions. In other states, a voter indirectly votes for a presidential candidate by supporting a delegate or delegates committed to him or her.

Delegates are allocated proportionally based on the outcome of each state's primary contest. A candidate is typically only eligible to receive a share of the pledged delegates at stake if they win at least 15 percent of votes cast in a primary or caucus. That standard is referred to as the 15 percent threshold. In addition to pledged delegates, there are alternate delegates for each state, Washington, D.C., Puerto Rico, the U.S. territories, and Democrats Abroad. Alternates attend the convention but do not vote unless a pledged delegate was unable to attend.

Pledged vs. automatic delegates

Pledged delegates

Pledged delegates are elected during primaries, caucuses, or party conventions, and must express either a presidential candidate preference or an uncommitted preference as a condition of their election. Rule 13(J) of the Democratic National Committee defines a pledged delegate's responsibility:

"

Delegates elected to the national convention pledged to a presidential candidate shall in all good conscience reflect the sentiments of those who elected them.

"

There are three distinct types of pledged delegates:

Pledged district delegates are distributed and elected at the congressional or state legislative district level.

Pledged at-large delegates are distributed and elected statewide.

Pledged PLEO delegates are party leaders and elected officials. Pledged PLEO delegates are most often selected in a similar manner to at-large delegates.

Automatic delegates

Automatic delegates are unpledged delegates to the Democratic National Convention. Automatic delegates, who are often called superdelegates, are not required to pledge their support to any presidential candidate. Automatic delegates include members of the Democratic National Committee, Democratic members of Congress, Democratic governors, or distinguished party leaders, including former presidents and vice presidents. They are free to support any presidential candidate of their choosing.

Following the 2016 presidential election, the Unity Reform Commission was formed to revise the Democratic nominating process, including reducing the number and power of automatic delegates. At the conclusion of the party's national convention on August 25, 2018, officials voted to adopt a measure banning automatic delegates from voting on the first ballot at a contested national convention.

Overview of Democratic pledged and automatic delegates by state

The map below compares delegate counts by state. A lighter shade of blue indicates a smaller number of delegates while a darker shade indicates a larger number.

The following chart lists the election type, delegate type breakdown, and total delegates for each state and territory

Percentage of Democratic pledged delegates awarded over time

The following chart and table show the percentage of pledged delegates awarded over time following the primary or caucus of each state and territory. The percentage reflects the percentage of pledged delegates awarded at each date.

The Delegate Selection Rules for the 2020 Democratic National Convention include two provisions regarding the binding of delegates to the candidates they supported at the time of their selection.

"

No delegate at any level of the delegate selection process shall be mandated by law or Party rule to vote contrary to that person's presidential choice as expressed at the time the delegate is elected.

"

"

Delegates elected to the national convention pledged to a presidential candidate shall in all good conscience reflect the sentiments of those who elected them.

"

Beyond this, the Delegate Selection Rules do not directly address how a candidate's withdrawal from the race before the convention affects the delegates pledged to that candidate. However, in 13 states, statutes establish provisions for the release of delegates either upon a candidate's withdrawal or after a specific number of ballots have been taken at the national convention. The table below identifies these states. In the column titled "Candidate withdrawal or release provision," a "yes" indicates that the statute allows for the release of pledged delegates either upon a candidate's withdrawal or at the explicit direction of the candidate. In the column titled "Multiple ballot provision," a "yes" indicates that the statute allows for the release of a pledged delegate after a specific number of ballots have been taken at the convention (the number in parentheses indicates the ballot on which the delegates would be released). The full text of relevant statutes and their citations are also provided.

What happens to delegates allocated to candidates who withdraw?

State

Candidate withdrawal or release provision

Multiple ballot provision

Statute

Citation

Republican delegate rules

The 2020 Republican presidential nominee will be selected by delegates to the Republican National Convention, which will be held August 24-27, 2020, in Charlotte, North Carolina. The national nominating convention is the formal ceremony during which the party officially selects its nominee and adopts a party platform. The delegates are individuals chosen to represent their state or territory at the convention.

In 2020, there will be an estimated 2,551 delegates: 2,441 pledged delegates and 110 unpledged delegates.

To win the Republican nomination, a presidential candidate must receive support from a majority of delegates-an estimated 1,276 delegates. Approximately two-thirds of pledged delegates, who are bound to vote on at least the first ballot at the national convention based on the results of their states' primary or caucus, will have been allocated by the end of March 2020.

This page provides an overview of the types of delegates to the convention, their selection and allocation, and a summary of delegates by state.

Click here to learn more about 2016 Republican Party delegate rules by state.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Democratic delegate rules, 2020 - Ballotpedia

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The 2020 Democratic presidential nominee will be selected by delegates to the Democratic National Convention, which will be held July 13-16, 2020, in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. The national nominating convention is the formal ceremony during which the party officially selects its nominee. The delegates are individuals chosen to represent their state, territory, or Democrats Abroad at the convention.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
No modern presidential candidate has refused to concede

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The COVID-19 pandemic has contributed to an unprecedented wave of election litigation.

A FRONTLINE analysis of two databases tracking lawsuits found that more than 400 election-related cases have been filed in the U.S. in 2020 by political parties, campaign committees, activists and individual voters. The majority of cases have focused on voting by mail in the midst of COVID-19, voting in person during the pandemic, and the counting of a historic number of mail-in ballots, FRONTLINE found.

More than a third of the cases remain unresolved as early voting proceeds across the country, according to data from the Healthy Elections Project.

That's a record-breaking amount of litigation, according to Rick Hasen, a professor of election law at the University of California, Irvine. With more than two months left in the year, 2020 has already outpaced the 196 election lawsuits filed before and after the 2000 election, pitting then-President-to-be George W. Bush against former Vice President Al Gore. The 2020 race will "almost certainly" be the most litigated in American history, Hasen wrote in an email to FRONTLINE.

"I think litigation has affected peoples' behavior already," Michael McDonald, a professor of political science at the University of Florida who has tracked early voting data since 2008, told FRONTLINE. "They're concerned whether their vote will be counted."

Even as litigation has introduced uncertainty around voting procedures, record numbers of people have cast their ballots early, to ensure their votes count. More than 74 million early ballots had been cast by October 28, surpassing the 2016 election's previous high of 47 million early votes, according to McDonald.

In general, this year's lawsuits fall into two broad categories: Liberal groups have sought to loosen voting procedures, and conservatives have tried to tighten them. Cases range from mail-in and curbside voting to lack of safety measures at polling places. Other lawsuits tackle early voting, voter registration, photo ID and witness signature requirements, as well as voting rights for those with a felony conviction.
Read more: 2020 Election Could Hinge on Whose Votes Don't Count
According to Justin Riemer, chief legal counsel for the Republican National Committee, the RNC strategy is "trying to protect existing safeguards in the process to minimize confusion and chaos and to stop last-minute changes, which are simply not good for voters and for administering the election."

"It's really frustrating when we're out there defending the laws that are on the books," Riemer said. "That does not mean we're making it harder to vote." (In the excerpt from Whose Vote Counts, below, FRONTLINE talked to the Democratic and Republican National Committees about 2020 voter legislation.)

Sophia Lakin, deputy director of the American Civil Liberties Union's Voting Rights Project, sees it differently. She says Clark's line of thought follows something called the Purcell Principle, which states that courts should be reluctant to change voting laws close to an election. But Lakin told FRONTLINE hewing to that principle can block necessary changes to voting laws.

"It can't be used as a tool to just prevent voters from being able to vote," said Lakin, who has brought 25 cases to court this year, up from the ACLU's typical presidential-election-year caseload of 6 to 8. "Not all changes are equal or equally confusing or equally disenfranchising. It's being used in a way to be a bright line of rule, even when there was [or] is still time to fix some of these issues."

Several groups have created databases to track COVID-related election litigation, including the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University Law School and the Healthy Elections Project, a venture between Stanford University and Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

FRONTLINE delved into these databases to determine what types of lawsuits are most prevalent.

1. Voting by Mail During COVID-19

The majority of 2020 election-related lawsuits have sought to remove barriers to voting by mail, aiming to provide alternatives to in-person voting during the pandemic. More than 200 of the Healthy Elections Project's 418 tracked cases, and 183 of The Brennan Center's 265, fall into this category.

The ACLU's Voting Rights Project has pushed states, such as Missouri and Alabama, to provide universal vote-by-mail options. The ACLU has also filed lawsuits that would make fear of contracting COVID-19 an acceptable reason to request an absentee ballot in states such as in Kentucky.

"We also looked at the barriers of being able to vote by mail, such as witness requirements or signature requirements," said the ACLU's Lakin. Other examples of vote-by-mail lawsuits include challenges to states that require mail-in ballots to be notarized or accompanied by copies of photo identification.

In a typical general election, 12 states require notary or witness signatures on mail-in ballots, but due to the pandemic, six of these states - Minnesota, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, South Carolina and Virginia - have either loosened or suspended that requirement, according to the Brennan Center.

Elsewhere, litigation surrounding witness signatures is ongoing. On October 14, a federal judge ordered North Carolina to ensure that ballots have one witness signature, revising an earlier court memo loosening signature requirements. A higher court could still issue a decision in this case. (North Carolina originally required two witness signatures but adjusted to requiring just one earlier this year.)

Eight states require voters to submit copies of their legal photo IDs with ballot applications or ballots: Alabama, Arkansas, Kentucky, Maine, North Dakota, New Hampshire, South Dakota and Wisconsin - although pending lawsuits in four of these states and three others (North Carolina, Oklahoma, and Texas) could still mean laws change before polls close.

The remainder of vote-by-mail issues tackle distribution of absentee ballots, ballot applications, pre-paid postage, and drop-box and drop-off locations.
Read more: Here's Why Concerns About Absentee Ballot Fraud Are Overhyped
On the other side of the issue, conservatives have cited fears of voter fraud in lawsuits against the expansion of mail-in voting. In Pennsylvania, the Trump campaign sued to prohibit the use of ballot drop boxes, accusing the state of having "sacrificed the sanctity of in-person voting at the altar of unmonitored mail-in voting." But a federal judge rejected the claim, ruling there was little evidence that drop boxes would lead to voter fraud.

"We're seeing a number of incidences in which there are spurious and unsubstantiated allegations of fraud," said Myrna Perez director of the Brennan Center's Voting Rights and Elections Program. "A lot of it is trying to discredit an election before it's even happened."

2. In-Person Voting During COVID-19

Beyond the expansion of mail-in voting, election administrators are facing the challenges of making in-person voting safe during a resurgent pandemic that has killed 225,000 Americans to date. At least 33 states will require or strongly recommend that voters wear masks in polling places, ABC News reports, although enforcement during early voting has been limited.

Those safety concerns have also sparked a wave of litigation. The Healthy Elections Project has identified 69 cases that include concerns over in-person voting amid the COVID-19 pandemic, dating back to the primary season.

A group of Kentucky civil rights organizations sued the state in May over a new in-person voter ID requirement. The complaint noted the disproportionate harm the pandemic had caused to Black, elderly and disabled voters, and alleged that forcing those voters to go to a government office to obtain ID would put them at risk of illness or death. The suit was dropped after Kentucky abandoned the new rules in August.
Read more: With Election 2020 Underway, a Key Provision of the Voting Rights Act Languishes
COVID-19 has also sparked legal battles over curbside voting, a practice that allows voters to cast ballots from parking lots or sidewalks outside polling places. In Texas, a collection of advocacy groups sued to force a number of changes to in-person voting, including expanding curbside voting and tightening mask requirements in polling places. The coalition lost when a federal judge ruled their objections a "political question" that could not be challenged in court. In Arizona, a disabled voter has sued to expand curbside voting; that case is still pending. And in Alabama, a lawsuit forced the state to allow curbside voting, although officials have asked the U.S. Supreme Court to reverse that decision.

And when states have instituted COVID-19 precautions in polling places, not everyone has been pleased. A group of Minnesota voters, backed by Republican lawmakers, sued Gov. Tim Walz in August, arguing that his executive order requiring masks in public places conflicted with state law and would violate their right to vote by forcing them to wear masks in polling places. A federal judge rejected their claim in October, and an appeal is pending.

3. Still to Come: Accepting, Correcting and Counting Ballots

And then there are the issues surrounding how and when mail-in ballots will be accepted and counted. More than 70 cases in the Brennan Center database involve ballot deadlines and correcting minor but potentially disqualifying mistakes.

On October 28, the Supreme Court extended the deadlines for receiving absentee ballots to after election day in two key swing states: Pennsylvania and North Carolina. In Pennsylvania, election officials can receive ballots up to three days after election day and up to nine days in North Carolina. Democrats welcomed the decisions, while the Republican party argued against the extensions. In Pennsylvania, however, the case may not be over. Following the decision, Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas and Neil M. Gorsuch they may return to the decision.

Earlier in October, a federal judge allowed a similar extension in Minnesota to move forward. In Michigan, Indiana and Wisconsin, appeals courts ruled the other way, overturning extensions and requiring that absentee ballots arrive by the time polls close. On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected a final bid to extend the Wisconsin deadline in a 5-3 decision. (For more on Wisconsin and its implications for the general election, see FRONTLINE's latest documentary, Whose Vote Counts, streaming now.)

In Arizona and Texas, federal courts have allowed more time to correct minor ballot issues. In Arizona, a district court extended the deadline to correct unsigned ballot envelopes, from 7 p.m. on election night to five business days after election day. In Texas, an appeals court instructed the secretary of state either to notify voters whose ballots were rejected due to mismatched signatures or not to reject ballots for this issue. The secretary of state has appealed.

Moving forward, there's the potential for a whole other category of lawsuits. "What if an election office goes down the day before the election and is not able to execute their election day plans for people to vote?" asked the University of Florida's McDonald. "I don't think we're out of the woods yet on litigation."

And then there's the looming possibility of litigation arising after November 4, pending election results - along the lines of the recount lawsuits in 2016 and 2000. President Donald Trump has claimed he expects the 2020 election to be " rigged," with the Biden campaign preparing for legal challenges.

Justin Levitt, a Loyola University law professor, sees pre-election litigation as a "positive thing" that can resolve legal conflicts before they cause serious problems, he told FRONTLINE.

"It's the difference between asking for permission and begging for forgiveness," Levitt said. "You get the rules ahead of time."
October 29, 2020: This story was updated to reflect Supreme Court decisions regarding North Carolina and Pennsylvania.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
COVID-19 and the Most Litigated Presidential Election in Recent U.S. History: How the Lawsuits Break Down

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The COVID-19 pandemic has contributed to an unprecedented wave of election litigation. A FRONTLINE analysis of two databases tracking lawsuits found that more than 400 election-related cases have been filed in the U.S. in 2020 by political parties, campaign committees, activists and individual voters.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
With the presidential primary season in full swing, voters are going to the polls to pick their preferred candidates for the country's highest office. Some of these voters, however, must verify their identity and eligibility before they cast their ballot. These state rules, or "voter ID laws," are the subject of great controversy. Advocates of voter ID laws argue that it is essential to establish a voter's identity in order to prevent fraud. Opponents claim that photo ID requirements disenfranchise minorities and people without the means to obtain a photo ID, and that these laws address a problem that doesn't exist. This eLesson introduces students to the debate surrounding voter ID laws, enables them to learn more about voting laws in their own state, and challenges them to think deeply about bigger questions about the nature of voting, privacy, and the duties of citizenship.
Resources Activities

1. Explain to students what voter ID is and how it works, and highlight the common arguments for and against.

1. Common arguments in favor of voter ID include:

1. In general, it is a good idea to verify a voter's identity in order to ensure a one-vote-per-person system.

2. There are many cases in which people registered in multiple states vote multiple times.

3. There are many cases in which deceased registered voters cast a ballot-someone is fraudulently claiming to be the deceased voter.

4. Non-citizens vote in large numbers, though they do not possess the legal right to do so.

2. Common arguments against voter ID include:

1. Some people lack photo ID's and lack the ability to easily obtain one.

2. Voter ID requirements disproportionately disadvantage black and Latino voters.

3. These laws disadvantage minorities, the elderly, and students.

4. Voting fraud is so rare that it is unnecessary to require an ID.

2. Then, as homework the night before, or in-class, have students explore the interactive map and information guide provided by the National Conference of State Legislatures. Students should consider the following questions as they research.

1. What voter ID laws does their state currently have in place?

2. If their state requires a voter ID, what form of ID does it require? If no ID is required, must citizens provide a different proof of identity?
Among states that require an ID, there are two types, a "Strict State," or "Non-Strict State." Strict states require voters to show an ID, or else they must cast a provisional ballot (a ballot that may not be accepted as valid). Non-Strict states require voters to provide something other than an ID. For example, a person may have to sign a statement attesting to their identity and eligibility to vote.

3. Is their state's voter ID law being challenged in court? Was it challenged in the past? Was the law upheld or struck down?

3. Assigned as homework or in-class, have students read at least one article in favor of Voter ID's and one article against it. Four article choices are included in the resources section above.

1. Students should analyze each article's argument. On paper, ask them to briefly summarize the article's central argument in their own words. Next, they should write down (as bullet points) the evidence and sub-arguments the author uses to establish his or her position.

2. What kinds of evidence do these authors use? Some examples of different types of evidence include statistics, case law, and historical examples.

3. Which argument do students think is more convincing and why?

4. Organize a debate in class.

1. Take six slips of paper and write "PRO" on three slips, and "CON" on the other three. Have six student volunteers randomly draw slips. Match each student with an opposite student to debate.

2. Once students have drawn a side for or against Voter ID laws, give them five minutes to prepare a two-minute speech to the class in favor of their side.

3. At the end of their two-minute speech, allow their opponent to cross-examine the first speaker for one minute. During cross-examination, the second speaker is the only person who can ask questions. The questions should be designed to clarify the first speaker's arguments, and to ask questions which may show weakness in their opponent's argument.

4. After the one-minute cross-examination period has elapsed, the second speaker must give his or her two-minute speech in favor of their side. If inconsistencies in the first speaker's argument or reasoning were detected during cross-examination, the second speaker may highlight them.

5. After the second speaker has finished, he or she will be cross-examined for one minute by the first speaker. When this is complete, have students cast secret ballots on who they believe won the debate. Complete this cycle until all three debate rounds are complete. You may have a class discussion about what was learned from the debates.

Discussion Questions

1. Critics of voter ID laws point out that there is often a small fee associated with obtaining a government-issued photo ID card. Critics compare this to poll taxes, which were fees levied on African Americans as a precondition of exercising their right to vote. Do you agree with this comparison? In what ways are there parallels between both examples and how are they different? Are the contexts the same or different? What are ways in which state governments could circumvent fees for photo ID's?

2. Some countries make voting mandatory. Supporters of mandatory voting say it reduces fraud and increases participation, while critics say that uninformed voting creates more problems than universal voting. Do you think mandatory voting is a good idea? Is not voting sometimes justified?

3. Some people argue that states should standardize their ID cards as part of a national ID system, and that all Americans should possess one of these ID's. Critics of this idea contend that a central database of Americans' personal information would lead to surveillance and abuse. What do you think?

4. If your class has students eighteen years of age or older, what experiences have they had when voting? What forms of identification did they have to provide? Have any of the students been turned away from voting? Do they know friends or family members that have encountered difficulty voting?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Debating Voter ID Laws - Bill of Rights Institute

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
With the presidential primary season in full swing, voters are going to the polls to pick their preferred candidates for the country's highest office. Some of these voters, however, must verify their identity and eligibility before they cast their ballot. These state rules, or "voter ID laws," are the subject of great controversy.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Skip to main content

Exceptions to Voter Identification Requirements

Most states with strict voter identification requirements make some exceptions. These exceptions may include people who:

Have religious objections to being photographed (Indiana, Kansas, Mississippi, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Wisconsin)

Are indigent (Indiana, Tennessee)

"Have a reasonable impediment" to getting an ID (South Carolina)

Do not have an ID as a result of a recent natural disaster (Texas)

People who are victims of domestic abuse, sexual assault or stalking and have a "confidential listing" (Wisconsin)

Additionally, voter ID requirements generally apply to in-person voting, not to absentee ballots or mailed ballots.

All voters, regardless of the type of verification required by the states, are subject to perjury charges if they vote under false pretenses.

PLEASE NOTE: The information provided below and throughout this webpage should be used for general informational purposes and not as a legal reference. If you have questions regarding the voter ID requirements in your state, please contact your local election administrator.
The box allows you to conduct a full text search or type the state name.

Vote a provisional ballot or vote a regular ballot if s/he is identified by two election officials as an eligible voter on the poll list, and both election workers sign a sworn affidavit so stating.

If voting a provisional ballot, the voter has until 5:00PM on the Friday after the election to bring the required ID

An election official may waive the identification requirement if the election official knows the identity of the voter. A voter who cannot exhibit a required form of identification shall be allowed to vote a questioned ballot.

Valid Arizona driver's license

Valid Arizona non-driver identification

Tribal enrollment card or other form of tribal identification

Valid U.S. federal, state or local government issued identification

Utility bill dated within 90 days of the election

Bank or credit union statement dated within 90 days of the election

Valid Arizona vehicle registration

Indian census card

Property tax statement

Vehicle insurance card

Recorder's certificate

An elector who does not provide the required identification shall receive a provisional ballot. Provisional ballots are counted only if the elector provides identification to the county recorder by 5 p.m. on the fifth business day after a general election that includes an election for federal office, or by 5 p.m. on the third business day after any other election.

A voter shall verify registration by presenting a document or identification card that:

Documents and identification cards that comply with the requirements include without limitation:

A document or identification card may be presented in a digital format on an electronic device if it complies with other requirements and has been approved or issues by the U.S., the state of Arkansas or an accredited post-secondary educational institution.

§1-1-104(19.5) and 1-7-110
NOTE: Since the passage of HB 1303 in 2013, most CO voters now vote by mail. However, at least one location is open on Election Day for in-person voting, and the ID requirement spelled out here applies to those voters.

Colorado driver's license

Colorado Dept. of Revenue ID card

U.S. passport

Employee ID card with photo issued by the -U.S. government, Colorado state government, or political subdivision of Colorado

Pilot's license

U.S. military ID with photo

Copy of a current utility bill, bank statement, government check, paycheck, or other government document that shows the name and address of the elector

Medicare or Medicaid card

Certified copy of birth certificate

Certified documentation of naturalization

An eligible elector who is unable to produce identification may cast a provisional ballot.

The designated election official shall attempt to verify that an elector who cast a provisional ballot is eligible to vote. The designated election official or designee shall complete the preliminary verification of the elector's eligibility to vote before the ballot is counted. (§1-8.5-105)

Social Security card

Any other preprinted form of identification which shows the elector's name and either the elector's address, signature or photograph

Elector shall, on a form prescribed by the secretary of the state, write the elector's residential address and date of birth, print the elector's name and sign a statement under penalty of false statement that the elector is the elector whose name appears on the official checklist.

Photo ID

Utility bill

Paycheck

Any government document with voter's name and address

In the event the voter does not have proof of identity with them, he or she shall sign an affidavit of affirmation that he or she is the person listed on the election district record.

One of the following current and valid picture identifications:

Florida driver's license

Florida ID card issued by the Dept. of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles

U.S. passport

Debit or credit card

Military identification

Student identification

Retirement center identification

Neighborhood association ID

Public assistance identification

Veteran health identification card issued by the United States Department of Veterans Affairs

A license to carry a concealed weapon or firearm

Employee identification card issued by any branch, department, agency, or entity of the Federal Government, the state, a county, or a municipality.

If the picture identification does not contain the signature of the elector, an additional identification that provides the elector's signature shall be required.

A voter without one of the acceptable forms of photo identification can vote on a provisional ballot. He or she will have up to three days after the election to present appropriate photo identification at the county registrar's office in order for the provisional ballot to be counted.

Acceptable types of ID are not specified by law. Hawaii's office of elections provides this information: "Forms of acceptable identification include a valid photo ID (Drivers License, State ID, etc), a copy of a current utility bill, bank statement, paycheck, or other government issued document that shows your name and address."

If the voter has no identification, the voter will be asked to recite his/her date of birth and residence address to corroborate the information provided in the poll book.

A voter may complete an affidavit in lieu of the personal identification. The affidavit shall be on a form prescribed by the secretary of state and shall require the voter to provide the voter's name and address. The voter shall sign the affidavit. Any person who knowingly provides false, erroneous or inaccurate information on such affidavit shall be guilty of a felony.

Voters who are unable or decline to produce proof of identification may vote a provisional ballot. The ballot is counted only if (1) the voter returns to the election board by noon on the Monday after the election and: (A) produces proof of identification; or (B) executes an affidavit stating that the voter cannot obtain proof of identification, because the voter: (i) is indigent; or (ii) has a religious objection to being photographed; and (2) the voter has not been challenged or required to vote a provisional ballot for any other reason.

Note: The Secretary of State's Office is required to provide a voter identification card to all active registered voters who do not have one of the five forms of identification at the time of passage of the bill (HB 516 in 2017). Going forward, county auditors will be required to issue voter identification cards to newly registered voters who do not possess a valid form of ID, as prescribed by the Secretary of State's Office.

In 2018, voters will be asked for ID and anyone who does not have necessary ID will be asked to sign an oath verifying their identity, and will be allowed to cast a regular ballot.

In 2019, voters without the necessary ID will be offered a provisional ballot and can provide ID up until the time of the county canvass of votes (Monday after election day).

A person who is registered to vote but is unable to present a form of identification listed may present any of the following:

a. A current voter identification card that contains the voter identification number if the voter identification card is signed before the voter presents the card to the election official.

b. Other forms of identification sufficient to establish identity and residence dates, or describe terms of residency current to, within forty-five days prior to presentation:

(a) Residential lease.

(b) Property tax statement.

(c) Utility bill.

(d) Bank statement.

(e) Paycheck.

(f) Government check.

(g) Other government document.

A person who is registered to vote but is unable to present a form of identification listed above, may establish identity and residency in the precinct by written oath of a person who is also registered to vote in the precinct. The attesting registered voter's oath shall attest to the stated identity of the person wishing to vote and that the person is a current resident of the precinct. The oath must be signed by the attesting registered voter in the presence of the appropriate precinct election official. A registered voter who has signed two oaths on election day attesting to a person's identity and residency as provided in this subsection is prohibited from signing any further oaths as provided in this subsection on that day.

If a voter cannot meet any of the above options, the voter may cast a provisional ballot.

The following forms of identification are valid if they contain the name and photograph of the voter and have not expired. Expired documents are valid if the bearer is aged 65 or older.

A voter who is unable or refuses to provide current and valid identification may vote a provisional ballot.

To have his or her ballot counted, the voter must provide a valid form of identification to the county election officer in person or provide a copy by mail or electronic means before the meeting of the county board of canvassers.

Driver's license

Social Security card

When the officers of an election disagree as to the qualifications of a voter or if his right to vote is disputed by a challenger, the voter shall sign a written oath as to his qualifications before he is permitted to vote.

Louisiana driver's license

Louisiana special ID card

Military ID with photo

Other generally recognized picture identification

If the applicant does not have identification, s/he shall sign an affidavit to that effect before the commissioners, and the applicant shall provide further identification by presenting his current registration certificate, giving his date of birth or providing other information stated in the precinct register that is requested by the commissioners. However, an applicant that is allowed to vote without the picture identification required by this Paragraph is subject to challenge as provided in R.S. 18:565.

Michigan driver's license

Michigan personal identification card

A voter who does not possess either of the above may show any of the following, as long as they are current:

An individual who does not possess, or did not bring to the polls, photo ID, may sign an affidavit and vote a regular ballot.

Driver's license

Photo ID card issued by a branch, department, or entity of the State of Mississippi

United States passport

Government employee ID card

Firearms license

Student photo ID issued by an accredited Mississippi university, college or community/junior college

United States military ID

Tribal photo ID

Any other photo ID issued by any branch, department, agency or entity of the United States government or any state government

Mississippi Voter Identification Card

An individual without ID can cast an affidavit ballot which will be counted if the individual returns to the appropriate circuit clerk within five days after the election and shows government-issued photo ID.

Voters with a religious objection to being photographed may vote an affidavit ballot, which will be counted if the voter returns to the appropriate circuit clerk within five days after the election and executes an affidavit that the religious exemption applies.

Nonexpired Missouri driver's license;

Nonexpired or nonexpiring Missouri nondriver's license;

A nonexpired United States passport; or

Another photo ID issued by the United States or the state of Missouri which is either not expired or expired after the date of the most recent general election.

*If the driver or non-driver license has expired after the most recent general election, it is an acceptable form of voter ID.

If ID is not presented, the voter votes on a provisional ballot and must return that day before 7 p.m. to show ID. A provisional ballot is also counted if the signature on a voter's provisional ballot envelope is determined by a local election authority to match the signature on the voter's registration record.

Driver's license from New Hampshire or any other state, regardless of expiration date

Photo ID card issued by the NH director of motor vehicles

Voter ID card issued under R.S. 260:21

U.S. armed services photo ID card

U.S. passport, regardless of expiration date

Valid student ID card

Any other valid photo ID issued by federal, state, county or municipal government

Any other photo ID that is determined to be legitimate by the supervisors of the checklist, the moderator, or the town or city clerk, provided that if any person authorized to challenge a voter under RSA 659:27 objects to the use of such photo identification, the voter shall be required to execute a qualified voter affidavit as if no identification was presented.

Verification of the voter's identity by a moderator or supervisor of the checklist or clerk of a town, ward or city (not a ballot clerk). If any person authorized to challenge a voter does so under this provision, the voter shall be required to fill out a challenged voter affidavit before obtaining a ballot.

A person's identity may be verified by a moderator or supervisor of the checklist or the town or city clerk, but if any person authorized to challenge a voter under RSA 659:27 objects to such verification, the voter shall be required to execute a challenged voter affidavit.

If a voter does not have a valid photo identification, the ballot clerk shall inform the voter that he or she may execute a challenged voter affidavit. Unless the voter has a religious objection to having his or her photo taken, the moderator will take his or her photo and affix it to the affidavit.The voter may then cast a regular ballot.

By Jan. 10 in odd numbered years or within 90 days after any other election, the secretary of state is required to mail a nonforwardable letter to each voter who executed a challenged voter affidavit, notifying the person that a person who did not present valid photo identification voted using his or her name and address and instruct the person to return the letter within 90 days with a written confirmation that the person voted or to contact the attorney general immediately if he or she did not vote. Any such letters returned as undeliverable must be turned over to the attorney general, who shall investigate for voter fraud. Notice from any voter receiving such a letter that s/he did not vote is also forwarded to the attorney general for investigation. The secretary must also turn over to the attorney general a list of all voters who fail to respond to the letter to confirm that they voted.

North Carolina

§ 163A‑1145.1 NOTE: Implementation was to begin in 2020, though the law was struck down in 2021. An appeal is likely.

NOTE: Implementation was to begin in 2020, though the law was struck down in 2021. An appeal is likely.

Any of the following that is valid and unexpired, or has been expired for one year or less and contain a photo:

Any of the following, regardless of whether the ID contains an expiration or issuance date (with photo):

Military ID card

Veterans ID card

Any expired form of ID allowed in this subsection presented by a registered voter who is 65 or older, provided the ID was unexpired on the voter's 65th birthday

If a registered voter cannot produce the required ID, a provisional ballot is required. It is counted only if the voter brings an acceptable ID to the county board of elections no later than the day before the canvass. There are exceptions for a religious objection, a reasonable impediment, or natural disaster. In this case the voter has to fill out a Reasonable Impediment Declaration Form and affidavit. These are reviewed by the county board of elections and the provisional ballot is counted unless the county board has grounds to believe the affidavit is false. Reasonable impediments include: inability to obtain photo identification due to lack of transportation, disability or illness, lack of birth certificate or other underlying documents required, work schedule or family responsibilities; lost or stolen photo identification; photo identification applied for but not yet received by the registered voter voting in person; or other reasonable impediment. If the registered voter checks the "other reasonable impediment" box, a further brief written identification of the reasonable impediment shall be required, including the option to indicate that State or federal law prohibits listing the impediment.

Identification must provide:

Legal name

Current residential street address in North Dakota

Date of birth

A valid form of identification is:

Driver's license

ID card issues by the North Dakota department of transportation

ID issued by tribal government to a tribal member residing in the state

If an individual's valid form of ID does not include the required information or the information is not current, the identification must be supplemented by one of the following that provides the missing or outdated information:

If an individual is not able to show a valid form of identification but asserts qualifications as an elector in the precinct in which the individual desires to vote, the individual may mark a ballot that must be securely set aside in a sealed envelope designed by the secretary of state. After the ballot is set aside, the individual may show a valid form of identification to either a polling place election board member if the individual returns to the polling place before the polls close, or to an employee of the office of the election official responsible for the administration of the election before the meeting of the canvassing board occurring on the sixth day after the election. Each ballot set aside under this subsection must be presented to the members of the canvassing board for proper inclusion or exclusion from the tally.

The following forms of identification are valid for individuals living under special circumstances who do not possess a valid form of identification:

For an individual living in a long-term care facility, a long-term care certificate prescribed by the secretary of state and issued by a long-term care facility in this state;

For a uniformed service member or immediate family member temporarily stationed away from the individual's residence in this state, or a resident of the state temporarily living outside the country, a current military identification card or passport; and

For an individual living with a disability that prevents the individual from traveling away from the individual's home, the signature on an absentee or mail ballot application from another qualified elector who, by signing, certifies the applicant is a qualified elector.

Current and valid photo identification, defined as a document that shows the individual's name and current address, includes a photograph, includes an expiration date that has not passed, and was issued by the U.S. government or the state of Ohio

Current utility bill

Current bank statement

Current government check, paycheck or other government document

A voter who has but declines to provide identification may cast a provisional ballot upon providing a Social Security number or the last four digits of a Social Security number. A voter who has neither identification nor a Social Security number may execute an affidavit to that effect and vote a provisional ballot. A voter who declines to sign the affidavit may still vote a provisional ballot.

Voters who cast a provisional ballot because they did not provide acceptable proof of identity must appear in person at the board of elections to provide such proof within the 10 days immediately following Election Day. (see the Ohio secretary of state's FAQ on provisional voting)

"Proof of identity" shall mean a document that satisfies the following:

Shows a name that substantially conforms to the name in the precinct registry

Shows a photograph

Includes an expiration date that is after the date of the election

Was issued by the United States, state of Oklahoma, or a federally recognized Indian tribe or nation

A voter registration card issued by the appropriate county elections board may serve as proof of identity without meeting all of the above requirements.

A provisional ballot cast by a voter who declines or is unable to produce proof of identity shall only be considered verified and approved for counting if the voter's name, residence address, date of birth, and driver's license number or last four digits of Social Security number as provided on the affidavit match what is in the registration database.

A valid (unexpired or expired within the last 6 months) document showing a photo of the person to whom it was issued, including:

If the person claiming to be a registered and eligible voter is unable to provide proof of identity as required, the person shall be allowed to vote a provisional ballot pursuant to section 17-19-24.2. The local board shall determine the validity of the provisional ballot pursuant to section 17-19-24.3.

Summary of section 17-19-24.3: The local board shall examine each provisional ballot application to determine if the signature matches the signature on the voter's registration. If the signatures match, the provisional ballot shall count. If the signatures do not match, the ballot shall not count and shall be rejected as illegal.

Voters who have a reasonable impediment to obtaining photo ID may show a non-photo voter registration card in lieu of photo ID, sign an affidavit attesting to the impediment, and cast a provisional ballot.

From the State Election Commission's web site:

If you have a reasonable impediment to obtaining photo ID, you may vote a provisional ballot after showing your nonphoto voter registration card. A reasonable impediment is any valid reason, beyond your control, which created an obstacle to obtaining photo ID. Some examples include:

To vote under the reasonable impediment exception:

1. Present your current, nonphoto registration card at the polling place

2. Sign an affidavit stating why you could not obtain a photo ID

3. Cast a provisional ballot that will be counted unless the county election commission has reason to believe your affidavit is false.

If you do NOT have photo ID and do NOT have a reasonable impediment to obtaining one, or you simply forgot to bring it with you to the polls, you may still vote a provisional ballot. However, for your vote to be counted, you must provide one of the photo IDs to the county election commission prior to certification of the election (usually Thursday or Friday after the election).

If a voter is not able to present a form of personal identification as required, the voter may complete an affidavit in lieu of the personal identification. The affidavit shall require the voter to provide his or her name and address. The voter shall sign the affidavit under penalty of perjury.

If a voter is unable to present the proper evidence of identification, then the voter will be entitled to vote by provisional ballot in the manner detailed in the bill. The provisional ballot will only be counted if the voter provides the proper evidence of identification to the administrator of elections or the administrator's designee by the close of business on the second business day after the election.

However, "A voter who is indigent and unable to obtain proof of identification without payment of a fee or who has a religious objection to being photographed shall be required to execute an affidavit of identity on a form provided by the county election commission and then shall be allowed to vote." §2-7-112(f)

Election Code §63.001 et seq.

With the exception of the U.S. citizenship certificate, the identification must be current or have expired no more than four years before being presented for voter qualification at the polling place.

Voters who do not possess an acceptable form of photo ID and cannot obtain one of the forms of acceptable photo ID listed due to a reasonable impediment, may present a supporting form of ID and execute a Reasonable Impediment Declaration, noting the voter's reasonable impediment to obtaining an acceptable form of ID.

Supporting forms of ID that can be presented if the voter does not possess one of the forms of acceptable photo ID and cannot obtain one due to a reasonable impediment:

After presenting a supporting form of ID, the voter must execute a Reasonable Impediment Declaration.

If a voter possesses an acceptable form of photo ID but does not have it at the polling place, the voter will still be permitted to vote provisionally. The voter will have six (6) days to present an acceptable form of photo identification to the county voter registrar or the voter's ballot will be rejected.

Voters with a disability who do not have an acceptable form of photo ID may also apply with the county voter registrar for a permanent exemption.

Voters who have a consistent religious objection to being photographed and voters who do not present any form of acceptable photo identification as a result of certain natural disasters as declared by the President of the United States or the Texas Governor, may vote a provisional ballot, appear at the voter registrar's office within six (6) calendar days after election day, and sign an affidavit swearing to the religious objection or natural disaster, in order for your ballot to be counted.

OR

Two forms of ID that bear the name of the voter and provide evidence that the voter resides in the precinct

Except for first time voters covered by HAVA, any voter who does not show one of the forms of ID specified shall be allowed to vote a regular ballot after signing a statement under penalty of perjury verifying their identity. A voter who does not show ID or sign a statement shall be offered a provisional ballot.

Washington

§29A.40.160(7)

NOTE: Most Washington voters now vote by mail. However, county auditors are required to open at least one vote center where voters can cast a ballot in person, and the ID requirement spelled out here applies to those voters.

The county auditor shall require any person desiring to vote at a voting center to either sign a ballot declaration (generally in locations where ballots are scanned) or provide identification (generally in counties where voting is done electronically, although even in these counties the auditor can verify a voter's signature to a signature on record).

If identification is used it must be valid photo identification, such as:

West Virginia driver's license or ID car

Valid driver's license issued by another state

U.S. Passport

Valid employee identification card with photo issued by the U.S. Government or state of West Virginia

Valid student identification card issued by an institution of higher education in West Virginia or high school in West Virginia

Valid military identification card with photo issued by the United States

Valid concealed carry permit with a photograph

Valid Medicare or Social Security card

Valid birth certificate

Valid voter registration card issued by a county clerk in the State of West Virginia

Valid hunting or fishing license issued by the State of West Virginia

Valid identification card issued by the West Virginia Supplemental Nutrition Assistance program (SNAP)

Valid identification card issued by the West Virginia Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program (TANF)

Valid West Virginia Medicaid card

Valid bank or debit card

Valid utility bill issued within six months of the date of the election

Valid bank statement issued within six months of the date of the election

Valid health insurance card

OR

In lieu of providing a valid identifying document, a registered voter may be accompanied at the polling place by an adult known to the registered voter for at least six months. That adult may sign an affidavit on a form provided to clerks and poll workers by the Secretary of State, which states under oath or affirmation that the adult has known the registered voter for at least six months, and that in fact the registered voter is the same person who is present for the purpose of voting. For the affidavit to be considered valid, the adult shall present a valid identifying document with his or her name, address, and photograph.

A poll worker may allow a voter, whom the poll worker has known for at least six months, to vote without presenting a valid identifying document.

All of the above must include a photo and a name that conforms to the poll list.

If the ID presented is not proof of residence, the elector shall also present proof of residence.

An elector who appears to vote at a polling place and does not have statutory ID shall be offered the opportunity to vote a provisional ballot.

An elector who votes a provisional ballot may furnish statutory ID to the election inspectors before the polls close or to the municipal clerk no later than 4pm on the Friday following Election Day.

Wyoming driver's license

Tribal identification card issued by the governing body of the Eastern Shoshone tribe of Wyoming, the Northern Arapaho tribe of Wyoming or other federally recognized Indian tribe

A Wyoming identification card

A valid United States passport

A United States military card

A driver's license or identification card issued by another state or US territory

Student ID card with a photograph issued by the University of Wyoming, a Wyoming community college or a Wyoming public school

A valid Medicare insurance card (until December 31, 2029)

A valid Medicaid insurance card (until December 31, 2029)

An elector who appears to vote at a polling place and does not have statutory ID shall be offered the opportunity to vote a provisional ballot.

An elector who votes a provisional ballot must furnish statutory ID to the county clerk by the close of business on the day following the election.

DO NOT DELETE - NCSL Search Page Data

Related Resources

State and presidential primary dates for 2020 are listed by state and date. State and presidential primaries are used by political parties to determine which candidates for legislative seats, office of president and other offices will go on the general election ballot on November 3, 2020.

Polls have closed for the 2022 general election, where voters in 46 states decided on 6,279 state legislative races, 36 governors and 133 statewide ballot measures.

Information about digital political ads, legislative options for regulating them, and a table that includes all significant introduced and enacted legislation.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Skip to main content Most states with strict voter identification requirements make some exceptions.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Claiming state voting reforms are racist is ridiculous