Ranked choice voting (RCV) has become increasingly popular in recent years, as more jurisdictions in the US adopt the voting system for local, state, and federal elections. Though previous studies have found potential benefits of RCV, some evidence suggests ranking multiple candidates instead of choosing one most preferred candidate may be difficult, with potential demographic disparities linked to age, gender, or racial or ethnic identity. Further, these difficulties have been assumed to cause individuals to improperly fill out RCV ballots, such as ranking too many or not enough candidates. This study seeks to answer three interrelated questions: 1) Which demographic groups find it difficult to rank candidates in RCV elections? 2) Who is more likely to cast under-voted ballots (not ranking all candidates)? 3) Is there a relationship between finding RCV voting difficult and the likelihood of casting an under-voted ballot? Using unique national survey data of 2020 Democratic primary candidate preferences, the results indicate most respondents find ranking candidates easy, but older, less interested, and more ideologically conservative individuals find it more difficult. In a hypothetical ranking of primary candidates, 12% of respondents under-voted (did not rank all options). Despite their perceived increased difficulty, older individuals were less likely to under-vote their ballot. No other demographic groups consistently experienced systematic differences in ranking difficulty or under-voting across a series of model specifications. These findings support previous evidence of older voters having increased difficulty, but challenge research assuming difficulty leads to under-voting, and that racial and ethnic groups are disadvantaged by RCV.
The aim of this study is to examine whether Americans have a latent attitude toward comprehensive electoral reform the determinants of this attitude. Methods: The article creates and validates an index of election reform attitudes; examines the independent and interactive roles of partisanship, political interest, electoral fortunes, and satisfaction with democracy on these attitudes. Results: While a majority of Americans favor comprehensive election reform, this desire is strongest among Democrats, independents, people who feel they regularly lose in elections, and individuals who are dissatisfied with democracy, with no independent effect of political interest. Multivariate results find the effect of partisanship is conditioned by whether the respondent feels they generally win or lose in elections and satisfaction with democracy. Partisanship also interacts with political interest. More interested Democrats (Republicans) are more (less) supportive of comprehensive reform. Independents who are electoral losers or dissatisfied with government strongly favor election reform and resemble Democrats, while independents who feel they regularly win or are more satisfied are more opposed and resemble Republicans. Conclusion: Two-thirds of Americans favor modernizing and updating U.S. election laws, but these attitudes are colored by partisanship, with evidence suggesting both elite messaging and expected electoral advantage as potential influences. Additionally, asymmetric partisan interactive effects are uncovered.
Young voters make up the largest portion of the electorate but vote at the lowest rates of any age group. While scholars have studied how culture affects youth political participation, few studies have analyzed how institutional barriers affect youth voting—even though these laws have been found to affect turnout of other disadvantaged groups. Considering younger citizens are more likely to be non-habitual voters with less political knowledge, efficacy, and resources, it is possible that these laws have magnified effects for youths. This could explain why new voters, facing new restrictions to voting, are participating at lower percentages than youths of earlier cohorts. Using the 2004–2016 Current Population Survey ( N = 360,000) and the Cost of Voting Index to test the effects of restrictive electoral environments on youth turnout, we find that restrictive environments disproportionately hurt young voters by decreasing the probability they turn out by 16 percentage points, compared with older voters.
The aim of this article is to assess the impact of Covid-19 safety measures on voter wait times during the 2020 U.S. election. Methods: Multinomial logistic regression models predicting voter wait times contingent on the presence of Covid safety measures: poll workers wearing face coverings, protective barriers separating voters and workers, voters and booths socially distanced, hand sanitizer, single-use ballot marking pens, and cleaning voting booths between voters, as well as an additive index of these measures. Results: Findings suggest Covid-safety measures significantly affected voter wait times. Effects vary by Covid safety feature, with face coverings, barriers, social distancing, and cleaning booths increasing voter wait times (typically around 10-30 min), single-use pens decreasing voter wait times, and hand sanitizer having no effect. Results are further confirmed using an additive index. Conclusion:Covid safety features likely increased voter wait times during the 2020 U.S. election, potentially accounting for a portion of the increased voter wait time, compared to previous elections.As the Coronavirus disease (2019) 1 pandemic carried into the 2020 U.S. November election, state and local election jurisdictions took tremendous steps toward increasing safe voter access. Many states increased absentee and mail voting access, while others outfitted their polling places with face masks, protective barriers, and socially distanced voting (National Governor's Association 2020; Sam, Eckman, and Shanton 2020). Though more Americans cast their ballot by mail or absentee voting methods in 2020 than any year before, just over 60 percent of those who voted did so in person at their local polling place through early 1 Also referred to as Covid-19 or simply Covid.
Ranked choice voting (RCV) has become increasing popular in the United States as more cities and states begin allowing voters to rank candidates in order of preference. This change in election system has been linked to increased campaign civility and mobilization, but with little evidence suggesting these benefits lead to increased voter turnout in the general population. This study argues that RCV elections may not increase overall voting but will increase youth voting. Considering young Americans, who have become increasingly pessimistic towards politics and are also heavily reliant on mobilization for participation, this study argues that increased campaign civility and mobilization may work to offset the negative feelings and lack of political engagement that plague young Americans. Using a matched study of individual level voter turnout for seven RCV and fourteen non-RCV local elections from 2013 and 2014, we find that there is no statistical difference in voting rates between RCV and plurality cities for the general public. Yet, in line with our hypotheses, younger voters are more likely to vote in RCV cities. Further, we find that increased contact in RCV elections accounts for a larger portion of the increased voter turnout compared to perceptions of campaign civility. Findings suggest RCV acts as a positive mobilizing force for youth voting through increasing campaign contact.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.