Studies: No Increased Turnout From Early Voting

BY JIM KANE

 

In recent months, some controversy has risen concerning new laws and policies that have changed the rules of when and how voters can participate in elections.

Most notably, requirements for photo identification and the reduction in the number of in-person early voting days have caused some critics to raise the specter of voter suppression by Republican legislators.

The prevailing wisdom suggests that higher turnout benefits Democratic candidates since voters least likely to vote come from the lower socio-economic levels (blue color, the poor and recent immigrants).  If that’s true,  the changes could harm Democrats in a close election.

But the real question, however, should be whether these voting reforms actually increase or reduce turnout to begin with?

Or perhaps, they have no effect on turnout at all.

For example, if in-person early voting was shown to reduce turnout, then reducing the number of available days could possibly help Democratic candidates.

I know what most of you are thinking at this point. Kane has had one too many glasses of wine at lunch today.

As a confirmed and unrepentant skeptic, I decided to see what academic studies have to say about the issue.

I found two recent articles that were right on point.

Both studies use the same data from the Census Bureau’s Current Population Surveys (CPS) containing some 60,000 to 90,000 interviews in each of three presidential elections (2000, 2004 and 2008).  But each study uses a different methodology to come to the same conclusions.

Reforms Don’t Help Turnout

The first study was published in the academic journal State Politics & Policy Quarterly (March 2011) written by Roger Loracca and John Klemanski of Oakland University (Rochester, MI).  Using   a cost benefit model that gauges the burdens that state election and voting laws place on voters, these researchers measured the effects of early voting laws which they define as Permanent No-Excuse Absentee Voting, Nonpermanent No-Excuse Voting, and Early In-Person Voting. In addition, they also included states that allowed Election Day Registration or required Voter Identification.  With these independent and key controlling variables (age, education, gender, race, competition, etc.), they measured the calculated the effect on whether a person voted or not (the dependent variable).

Since this is a probability model (Logistic Regression), the model’s independent variables measure the probability of an individual voting in the election cycle, controlling for other variables.  As they expected, Permanent No-Excuse Absentee Voting, Nonpermanent No-Excuse Voting and Election Day Voting all increased the probability of voting (statistically significant).  As for Voter Identification, however, the results were mixed at best.

Among some groups, the Voter ID laws actually increased the probability of voting. But in most cases it had no impact at all.

The most surprising result, however, was the effect of Early In-Person Voting on turnout. Not only did this reform not increase the probability of voting but also it significantly reduced the probability of voting across all groups.

Now before we discuss why, let’s look at a different approach to the same question.

In another study published on the Social Science Research Network and sponsored by the Pew Charitable Trust entitled “Election Laws, Mobilization, and Turnout: The Unanticipated Consequences of Election Reform” (2012), four University of Wisconsin-Madison political scientists looked at the same issues of early voting reforms and their effect on turnout.

These researchers used two different measurement techniques to test the effect of early voting. The first measures the aggregate changes in turnout at the county level using a regression model (OLS). This model found (controlling for other key variables) that early voting reforms, absentee and in-person voting, reduced turnout. In contrast, same day registration and Election Day registration increased turnout.  This model, however, does not differentiate between absentee voting and early in-person voting.

In a separate individual-level probability model, the results were much the same with early voting reforms (early in-person voting separate from mail absentee voting) reducing the likelihood of voting while same day and Election Day registration increasing turnout. 

Both models showed that voter ID laws had no effect on turnout at all.  

As the authors write, these findings are counterintuitive.

These researchers suggest that early voting reforms, by spreading the election over several days or weeks, reduces the “stimulation effect” of election day, and, consequently, both nonvoters and marginal voters don’t respond by voting.

Secondly, early voters are likely voters.

These reforms make voting more convenient for them, but they would have voted anyway.

Finally, with 30% of the electorate voting early, the authors present evidence that presidential campaign advertising decreases as we move closer to Election Day thus further lessening interest by marginal voters.

In the Bahamas, Election Day is as much a social event as a political one.  I know because I travel there frequently. Businesses close down and people party all day.  There is no early voting; it’s all done on one day.

And what is the turnout?

Bahamian elections average over a 90% turnout rate among registered voters. In 1972, turnout was over a 100%, which led to reforms to prevent people from voting more than once.  What a good problem to have.

(One of South Florida’s premier pollsters and political strategists, James G. Kane got his start in campaigns while still in a Fort Lauderdale elementary school. He is a frequent commentator in the national media and  currently teaches graduate seminars at the University of Florida in survey research.)



12 Responses to “Studies: No Increased Turnout From Early Voting”

  1. Question says:

    Fascinating. How does Mr. Kane feel this will affect the upcoming election? Help Romney or Obama?

  2. Ha Ha Ha says:

    Mr. 47% has only a 20.6% chance of winning, according to Intrade – and that’s being generous. FiveThirtyEight has the odds at 17.3%.

    http://www.intrade.com/v4/misc/scoreboard/

    http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/

    This lame plutocrat’s odds of winning will soon be even lower than the insignificant tax rate he pays on his bloated $20 million annual income!

  3. voter says:

    I have voted in Florida for 25 years. Always had to show photo ID.
    not many places you can go these days without showing the same
    Get over it.
    believe me romney is the worst they could come up with but the alternative of 4 more years outweighs it

  4. Herman Turk says:

    The goal of this democracy should be to get as many people as possible to vote. requiring people to produce an ID can not serve to reach that goal, no matter what studies show.

  5. DeeDee says:

    Voter should note that they require a picture ID but do not require anyone to prove they are a citizen.
    I am sick of people like him equating driving or using an ID to get into various places with voting. Voting is a right enshrined in the Constitution. Driving and going into buildings, etc., is not a right.

  6. Thomas Torta says:

    If Early Voting and Using a Voter ID doesn’t change turnout, it goes to prove that Democrats are wrong. What a surprise.

  7. Chaz Stevens, Genius says:

    @ DeeDee.

    In Texas, you cannot use a college issued photo ID as proof to vote.

    Yet, a hunting license, with no photo, will work just fine.

  8. voter says:

    non-citizens who don’t want to show ID can vote absentee
    its ‘Miami style’

  9. Chaz Stevens, Genius says:

    I asked a very savvy friend of mine, a person of color, why absentee ballets were popular in the black community.

    To which I was told, “have you ever been murdered for voting?”

    Old habits die hard (no pun intended).

  10. Kevin says:

    Once again Jim Kane surveys the political science academic literature so I don’t have to! Thanks, Jim!!

    However, as you undoubtedly know, some of these new voter ID laws are far more restrictive that the ones used in 2000, 2004, and 2008 in these CPS-based studies, so we really can’t make conclusions about the NEW laws yet.

    Kevin.

  11. The Answer says:

    Jim: Perhaps it just rained during election week that year. Or on that election day. Perhaps there was a flu bug going around. Perhaps early voting matters less in some parts of the country than others. Who knows. The studies you cite are too flimsy to hang such a conclusion upon.

    Saying early voting generates fewer votes is sort of like saying less wind makes sailboats go faster. Few skeptics would take that bet.

    More likely, the Governor is reducing early voting in order to reduce the number of Blacks and Hispanics coming out to vote. Jim Greer himself said that was the Republican plan. We see it in other states. Clearly this is a patterned and goal oriented effort. So let’s stop trying to confuse the issue. It’s beneath you.

  12. Mr. Ash Isani says:

    America is at crossroads where our traditional Christian and biblical values and systems, including our freedom of religion and speech are being seized by ultra-liberal and vested interest groups. This causes imbalance and is not equality. Isn’t it Apocalypse?
    I have been fighting this lone battle since May 2009. I was fired from County govt. job because I did not support gay marriage. I voted against gay marriage in 2008 because it is against my religious faith, beliefs and values. I have never expressed any views, opinions or prejudice against gays and lesbians. I was quietly exercising my religious freedom. How did County know I voted against gay marriage? That is a 64 trillion dollar question. Big brother is watching. All prestigious employment lawyers (and more) in S Florida have refused to take my case under pressure from the mafia County. This is verifiable in letters from some lawyers. Couple of reporters in local newspapers and television were removed or reassigned after agreeing to investigate. Corrupt and immoral County has such a tremendous influence on the equally corrupt media and easily frightened lawyers. Every moment is precious.
    Please get involved, mobilized and energize others by calling all the elected officials, media and helping me to find a competent and willing attorney to represent me and get justice for me. In democracy strength lies in the numbers. Every moment is precious. Please visit http://www.change.org/ and enter key words ‘broward county fires’ in tab ‘find’. Hitting enter will take you to petition. Please spread the word to mobilize support and sign the petition. Let’s reclaim our America. God bless and thank you
    Ash Isani

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>