The “costs” of voting: The effects of vote‐by‐mail on election administration finance in Colorado

Abstract

In this article,I ask whether the adoption of vote-bymail (VBM) has resulted in the promised cost reductions. Additionally, I examine the overall determinants of election administration expenditures after the implementation of VBM. Methods: Using Colorado as a case study, I use county level expenditures to determine the effects of institutional change on election administration finance, as well as other institutional and socio-demographic determinants on costs.Results: I find that adopting all-VBM elections significantly reduced expenditures. Additionally, I find that after VBM was implemented, the primary institutional determinants of expenditures are the proportion of mail-in ballots received, as well as the number of poll-workers, and early voting sites. Finally, I find that socio-demographic characteristics are predictive of expenditures for election administration. Counties with higher income spent less per voter in federal elections. Counties with higher proportions of Latinx voting-aged populations spent less per voter, even when controlling for turnout. Conclusion:The results strongly indicate that moving to all-VBM elections can help cash-strapped counties save money. However, conversion to VBM may not guarantee that expenditures will be spent equitably.

The Public Funding of Election Administration: Evidence from a British General Election

“…For example, each polling station seemed to attract around £362 of funding in the Total MRA regression. With postal voters, this evidence corroborates Edwards’ (2019) point that greater levels of convenience voting help drive costs, but contradicts Lamb’s (2021) finding from Colorado that vote by mail might reduce costs. A negative relationship between constituencies which held combined elections and both Total MRA and MRA per elector suggests that there may be economies to be made in administering different elections concurrently, even if other research suggests that doing so can decrease the quality of election administration (Clark, 2017).…”

“…In terms of production costs, Hill (2012) indicates that absentee ballots are important in determining costs, while Lamb (2021) specifically looks at vote-by-mail, arguing that all mail elections have significant cost savings. A British equivalent would be the number of postal votes in the constituency.…”

“… 1. Although, see Lamb (2021) on vote-by-mail costs, where he finds that moving to all-mail elections in Colorado significantly reduced costs. …”

Negativity bias in welfare policy feedback effects on mass publics

“…In practice, socioeconomically disadvantaged groups tend to be underrepresented in politics and often experience losses regarding government support to their needs (Giger et al., 2012; Hertel‐Fernandez, 2018; Lamb, 2021; McDonagh, 2010). Thus, the potential negativity bias in policy feedback effects, which we describe in this study, may further dampen their passion for political participation and social change.…”

Race and democratic decline in the United States: How minority population growth affects election administration

“…The number of poll workers also affects turnout. Fewer poll workers lead to longer wait times for voters to be checked in and cast ballots (Stein et al 2020), potentially leading to voters reneging (Lamb 2021) or abstaining the following year (Pettigrew 2021). These factors-difficulty in finding polling places and increased wait times-influence the overall voting experience, with those who had greater difficulties locating their voting place or faced longer wait times evaluating the voting process more negatively (King 2017(King , 2019Stein and Vonnahme 2012).…”