Polling place changes and political participation: evidence from North Carolina presidential elections, 2008–2016

Author(s):  
Joshua D. Clinton ◽  
Nick Eubank ◽  
Adriane Fresh ◽  
Michael E. Shepherd

Abstract How do changes in Election Day polling place locations affect voter turnout? We study the behavior of more than 2 million eligible voters across three closely-contested presidential elections (2008–2016) in the swing state of North Carolina. Leveraging within-voter variation in polling place location change over time, we demonstrate that polling place changes reduce Election Day voting on average statewide. However, this effect is almost completely offset by substitution into early voting, suggesting that voters, on average, respond to a change in their polling place by choosing to vote early. While there is heterogeneity in these effects by the distance of the polling place change and the race of the affected voter, the fully offsetting substitution into early voting still obtains. We theorize this is because voters whose polling places change location receive notification mailers, offsetting search costs and priming them to think about the election before election day, driving early voting.

Author(s):  
André Blais ◽  
Eva Anduiza

Participating in elections is an essential component of democracy: citizens in democratic political systems are expected to be able to vote and to choose their representatives. Through their vote, either directly in presidential elections or indirectly in parliamentary elections, citizens also select among competing government alternatives. Turnout is thus a central topic in politics. Although turnout is the most widespread form of political participation, many people do not vote. Moreover, turnout varies substantially over time and across types of elections within a country as well as across countries. Who votes and under what conditions people are more likely to turn out are central questions in this literature. Explanations for turnout variation have focused both on individual characteristics (such as age, education, or political attitudes) and contextual features (such as the effect of compulsory voting, electoral systems, or party competition). Far less research has been devoted to the consequences of electoral turnout.


2020 ◽  
pp. 51-68
Author(s):  
Michael Ritter

Chapter 4 evaluates the impact of convenience voting laws (in-person early voting, no-excuse absentee/mail voting, and same day registration) and election administration on individual-level voter turnout change from the 2010 to 2014 midterm elections and the 2008 to 2012 presidential elections using lagged panel models. Results show that non-voters are more likely to become voters when living in states with absentee/mail voting, in-person early voting, same day registration, and high-quality election administration, controlling for other factors. Same day registration is the most important of the three in both midterm and presidential elections, while early voting and absentee/mail voting have the largest effects in midterm elections.


Author(s):  
Traci R. Burch

This article considers the effect of prison, probation, and parole on neighborhood political participation in North Carolina. I analyze data from state boards of elections, departments of corrections, departments of public health, the Census Bureau, and market research firms for 2000 and 2008. Multivariate regressions reveal a complex relationship between criminal justice supervision and voter turnout. The evidence suggests that at the individual level and in the aggregate, the criminal justice system shapes neighborhood political participation.


2018 ◽  
Vol 41 (4) ◽  
pp. 841-869 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hannah L. Walker ◽  
Michael C. Herron ◽  
Daniel A. Smith

1999 ◽  
Vol 89 (3) ◽  
pp. 525-547 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ron Shachar ◽  
Barry Nalebuff

Using state-by-state voting data for U.S. presidential elections, we observe that voter turnout is a positive function of predicted closeness. To explain the strategic component of political participation, we develop a follow-the-leader model. Political leaders expend effort according to their chance of being pivotal, which depends on the expected closeness of the race (at both state and national levels) and how voters respond to their effort. Structural estimation supports this model. For example, a 1-percent increase in the predicted closeness at the state level stimulates leaders' efforts, which increases turnout by 0.34 percent. (JEL D72, C33, C72, H41)


2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian Garbarini ◽  
Hung-Bin Sheu ◽  
Dana Weber

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document