Election crime is nothing new. From Kansas ’s first territorial election in the 1800s to the 2018 race for North Carolina's 9th Congressional District , it has reared its ugly head time and again. Yet, left-wing politicians and pundits frequently claim election fraud does not exist, citing the fact that few people are prosecuted or convicted. That’s grossly misleading.

The Heritage Foundation’s Election Fraud Database documents 1,240 criminal convictions. But that is only a sampling of fraud in recent elections. There are many instances of fraud that are never investigated or prosecuted, much less that end with a conviction.

For the Left to measure fraud solely by the number of prosecutions and convictions deliberately downplays the problem. Anyone who has driven a car knows speeders don’t always get tickets . Even when they do, speeders are often hit with a slap on the wrist rather than charges that result in a conviction.

When it comes to complex offenses such as election crimes, countless decisions are made that may prevent a case from ever reaching a prosecutor’s desk, let alone a courtroom or trial. An investigation may linger, yielding stale information or lost witnesses. A prosecutor may decide not to prosecute a case and instead issue a “ warning letter .” A plea agreement can result in a conviction for a different offense or a probation or diversion program that yields no conviction . A judge can dismiss a case on a mere technicality. In other words, the purported lack of convictions doesn’t mean these crimes aren’t happening. It may be that these cases just never make it to a prosecutor or courtroom or end in something less than a conviction.

Prosecutors and time are limited resources. Even the most well-intentioned prosecutors face overcrowded courts , a need to prioritize the most dangerous or violent crimes, and understaffed offices . As a prosecutor myself, I juggled a varied caseload and frequent trials. The cases that often required my immediate attention and most of my time were those involving inmates in custody, child victims, and dangerous offenders. Prioritizing cases involving the most vulnerable victims or violent offenders is often the reality for both prosecutors and the courts.

What’s more, election crimes require law enforcement and prosecutors with expertise in election law and processes. Resource-strapped jurisdictions may be unable, or unwilling, to dedicate those resources to election offenses.

While voter fraud may not be so widespread that it could swing a national election, election crimes deserve thorough investigations and prosecutions. Florida addressed this need by creating the Office of Election Crimes and Security . A specialized unit with a command of election law, procedures, and evidence is a critical step to ensure competent and thorough investigations.

Unfortunately, efforts to equip law enforcement and prosecutors with the necessary additional specialized knowledge are not the norm. In some circumstances, the norm seems to be deliberately avoiding prosecuting election crimes. For example, in Pennsylvania , it is illegal to handle anyone else’s mail-in ballot. Yet when people were caught on camera doing just that, the prosecutor deemed it “unfair and unjust” to prosecute the “few” offenders who could be identified because “a much larger” number of offenders wearing masks couldn’t be identified. The notion that we shouldn’t prosecute any unless we prosecute all is ridiculous.

Then, there are prosecutors who plainly put their political agendas ahead of their duty. Soros-funded and activist "progressive" prosecutors routinely refuse to prosecute certain crimes as a matter of “policy.” San Francisco and Baltimore exemplify the effects of such “policies”: Without meaningful accountability, crime increases .

If such a prosecutor is willing to ignore burglaries, assaults, and rampant drug use, is it such a stretch to presume he will ignore election fraud cases, especially if prosecuting them undercuts his political agenda and the broader left-wing argument that fraud does not exist?

Though left-wing politicians and media would have us rely solely on the number of prosecutions or convictions to gauge the problem of election crime, it’s a flawed measure. Claiming these crimes do not occur by relying on inaccurate statistics is misinformation designed to prevent election integrity measures and weaken voting safeguards.

Election crimes must be taken seriously. States should follow Florida’s lead, devoting resources and attention to developing law enforcement agencies and prosecutors equipped to address this issue head-on. These crimes will continue as long as offenders can, and know they will, get away with it.

Jacqueline Doyer is the legal policy director for the Honest Elections Project.