![[PDF]](/pb-assets/Icons/adobe-pdf-icon.png){kind=icon}
Abstract
We examine how the growth in vote-by-mail and changes in voting technologies led to changes in the residual vote rate in California from 1990 to 2010. In California’s presidential elections, counties that abandoned punch cards in favor of optical scanning enjoyed a significant improvement in the residual vote rate. We also conduct the first analysis of the effects of the rise of vote-by-mail on residual votes. Regardless of the election, increased use of the mail to cast ballots is robustly associated with a significant rise in the residual vote rate.
Keywords voting technologies, vote-by-mail, residual votes
References
Section:
| Alvarez, R. Michael, Ansolabehere, Stephen, Stewart, Charles 2005. “Studying Elections: Data Quality and Pitfalls in Measuring of Effects of Voting Technologies.” Policy Studies Journal 33 (1): 15–24. Google Scholar, Crossref, ISI | |
| Alvarez, R. Michael, Hall, Thad E., Sinclair, Betsy. 2008. “Whose Absentee Votes are Returned and Counted: The Variety and Use of Absentee Ballots in California.” Electoral Studies 27 (4): 673–83. Google Scholar, Crossref, ISI | |
| Alvarez, R. Michael, Levin, Ines, Sinclair, J. Andrew. 2011. “Making Voting Easier: Convenience Voting in the 2008 Presidential Election.” Political Research Quarterly 65 (2): 248–62. Google Scholar, SAGE Journals, ISI | |
| Ansolabehere, Stephen. 2002. “Voting Machines, Race, and Equal Protection.” Election Law Journal 1 (1): 61–70. Google Scholar, Crossref | |
| Ansolabehere, Stephen, Stewart, Charles 2005. “Residual Votes Attributable to Technology.” Journal of Politics 67 (2): 365–89. Google Scholar, Crossref, ISI | |
| Arnold, Ed. 1999. “History of Voting Systems in California.” Prepared by Bill Jones, Secretary of State. Sacramento, CA. Google Scholar | |
| Asher, Herb, Schussler, Russell, Rosenfield, Peg. 1982. “The Effect of Voting Systems on Voter Participation.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association Milwaukee, April 28-May 1. Google Scholar | |
| Bergman, Elizabeth, Yates, Philip. 2009. “How Does Vote by Mail Affect Voters? A Natural Experiment Examining Individual-Level Turnout.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, IL, April 3. Google Scholar | |
| Boehmke, Frederick J. 2005. The Indirect Effect of Direct Legislation: How Institutions Shape Interest Group Systems. Columbus: The Ohio State University Press. Google Scholar | |
| Bowler, Shaun, Donovan, Todd, Happ, Trudi. 1992. “Ballot Propositions and Information Costs: Direct Democracy and the Fatigued Voter.” Western Political Quarterly 45 (2): 559–68. Google Scholar, SAGE Journals | |
| Cain, Bruce E., Noll, Roger. 2010. “Institutional Causes of California’s Budget Problem.” California Journal of Politics and Policy 2 (3): 1–37. Google Scholar, Crossref | |
| Caltech/MIT Voting Technology Project. 2001. “Voting: What Is/What Could Be.” Pasadena and Cambridge. http://vote.caltech.edu/content/voting-waht-what-could-be Google Scholar | |
| Gerber, Elisabeth R. 1999. The Populist Paradox: Interest Group Influence and the Promise of Direct Legislation. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Google Scholar | |
| Gerber, Elisabeth R., McCubbins, Mathew D., Kiewiet, D. Roderick. 2001. Stealing the Initiative: How State Government Responds to Direct Democracy. Upper Saddle: Prentice Hall. Google Scholar | |
| Gronke, Paul, Galanes-Rosenbaum, Eva, Miller, Peter A., Toffey, Daniel. 2008. “Convenience Voting.” Annual Review of Political Science 11:437–55. Google Scholar, Crossref, ISI | |
| Gronke, Paul, Stewart, Charles, Hicks, James. 2010. “Residual Voting in Florida.” Washington, DC: Pew Center on the States. Google Scholar | |
| Hajnal, Zoltan L., Gerber, Elisabeth R., Louch, Hugh. 2002. “Minorities and Direct Legislation: Evidence from California Ballot Proposition Elections.” Journal of Politics 64 (1): 154–77. Google Scholar, Crossref, ISI | |
| Kahn, Matthew E., Matsusaka, John G. 1997. “Demand for Environmental Goods: Evidence from Voting Patterns on California Initiatives.” Journal of Law & Economics 40 (1): 137–73. Google Scholar, Crossref, ISI | |
| Kimball, David C., Kropf, Martha. 2008. “Voting Technology, Ballot Measures, and Residual Votes.” American Politics Research 36 (4): 479–509. Google Scholar, SAGE Journals, ISI | |
| Kousser, Thad, Mullin, Megan. 2007. “Does Voting by Mail Increase Participation? Using Matching to Analyze a Natural Experiment.” Political Analysis 15 (4): 428–45. Google Scholar, Crossref, ISI | |
| Los Angeles Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk. 2010. “Voting Systems Assessment Project Report.” http://www.lavote.net/Voter/VSAP/PDFS/VSAP_Project_Report_070910_FINAL.pdf. Google Scholar | |
| Lott, John R. 2009. “Non-Voted Ballots, the Cost of Voting, and Race.” Public Choice 138 (1): 171–97. Google Scholar, Crossref, ISI | |
| Lupia, Arthur. 1994. “Shortcuts versus Encyclopedias: Information and Voting Behavior in California Insurance Reform Elections.” American Political Science Review 88 (1): 63–76. Google Scholar, Crossref, ISI | |
| Magleby, David B. 1984. Direct Legislation: Voting on Ballot Propositions in the United States. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press. Google Scholar | |
| Matsusaka, John G. 2004. For the Many or the Few: The Initiative Process, Public Policy, and American Democracy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar, Crossref | |
| Mueller, John E. 1969. “Voting on the Propositions: Ballot Patterns and Historical Trends in California.” American Political Science Review 63 (4): 1197–212. Google Scholar, Crossref, ISI | |
| Reilly, Shauna, Richey, Sean. 2011. “Ballot Question Readability and Roll-Off: The Impact of Language Complexity.” Political Research Quarterly 64 (1): 59–67. Google Scholar, SAGE Journals, ISI | |
| Sinclair, Robert C., Mark, Melvin M., Moore, Sean E., Lavis, Carrie A., Soldat, Alexander S. 2000. “Psychology: An Electoral Butterfly Effect.” Nature 408:665–6. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline, ISI | |
| Sinclair, D. E. “Betsy”, Alvarez, R. Michael. 2004. “Who Overvotes, Who Undervotes, Using Punchcards? Evidence from Los Angeles County.” Political Research Quarterly 57 (1): 15–25. Google Scholar, SAGE Journals, ISI | |
| Smith, Richard L. 2002. “A Statistical Assessment of Buchanan’s Vote in Palm Beach County.” Statistical Science 17 (4): 441–57. Google Scholar, Crossref, ISI | |
| Stewart, Charles. 2006. “Residual Vote in the 2004 Election.” Election Law Journal 5 (2): 158–69. Google Scholar, Crossref | |
| Stewart, Charles. 2010. “Losing Votes by Mail.” NYU Journal of Legislation and Public Policy 13 (3): 573–602. Google Scholar | |
| Stewart, Charles. 2011. “Voting Technology.” Annual Review of Political Science 14 (1): 353–78. Google Scholar, Crossref, ISI | |
| Thomas, Norman C. 1968. “Voting Machines and Voter Participation in Four Michigan Constitutional Revision Referenda.” Western Political Quarterly 21 (3): 409–19. Google Scholar, SAGE Journals | |
| Tomz, Michael, Van Houweling, R. 2003. “How Does Voting Equipment Affect the Racial Gap in Voided Ballots?” American Journal of Political Science 47 (1): 46–60. Google Scholar, Crossref, ISI | |
| Walker, Jack L. 1966. “Ballot Forms and Voter Fatigue: An Analysis of the Office Block and Party Column Ballots.” Midwest Journal of Political Science 10 (4): 448–63. Google Scholar, Crossref | |
| Wand, Jonathan N., Shotts, Kenneth W., Sekhon, Jasjeet S., Mebane, Walter R., Herron, Michael C., Brady, Henry E. 2001. “The Butterfly Did It: The Aberrant Vote for Buchanan in Palm Beach County, Florida.” American Political Science Review 95 (4): 793–810. Google Scholar, ISI |
