Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T02:57:00.241Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Electoral reforms and the representativeness of turnout

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 June 2020

Michael M. Bechtel Open the ORCID record for Michael M. Bechtel [Opens in a new window]  and
Lukas Schmid
Michael M. Bechtel*
Affiliation:
Washington University, Department of Political Science, St. Louis, MO63130-4899, United States Swiss Institute for International Economics and Applied Economic Research, St.Gallen, Switzerland
Lukas Schmid
Affiliation:
Swiss Institute for International Economics and Applied Economic Research, St.Gallen, Switzerland University of Lucerne, Faculty of Economics and Management, Switzerland
*
*Corresponding author. Email: mbechtel@wustl.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Voters tend to be richer, more conservative, and more educated than non-voters. While many electoral reforms promise to increase political participation, these policy instruments may have multidimensional and differential effects that can increase or decrease the representativeness of turnout. We develop an approach that allows us to estimate these effects and assess the impact of postal voting on representational inequality in Swiss referendums using individual-level ($N = 79,\; 000$) and aggregate-level data from 1981 to 2009. We find that postal voting mobilizes equally across a wide range of political and sociodemographic groups but more strongly activates high earners, those with medium education levels, and less politically interested individuals. Yet, those who vote are not less politically knowledgeable and the effects on the composition of turnout remain limited. Our results inform research on the consequences of electoral reforms meant to increase political participation in large electorates.

Keywords

Comparative political economypublic opinionpublic policyrepresentation and electoral systemsvoting behavior
Type
Original Article
Information
Political Science Research and Methods , Volume 9 , Issue 3 , July 2021 , pp. 485 - 499
Copyright
Copyright © The European Political Science Association 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bechtel, MM and Hainmueller, J (2011) How lasting is voter gratitude? An analysis of the short- and lon-term electoral returns to beneficial policy. American Journal of Political Science 55, 851–867.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bechtel, MM, Hangartner, D and Schmid, L (2018) Compulsory voting, habit formation, and political participation. Review of Economics and Statistics 100, 467–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berinsky, AJ (2005) The perverse consequences of electoral reform in the United States. American Politics Research 33, 471–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berinsky, AJ, Burns, N and Traugott, MW (2001) Who votes by mail? A dynamic model of the individual-level consequences of voting-by-mail systems. Public Opinion Quarterly 65, 178–197.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Biggers, DR and Hanmer, MJ (2015) Who makes voting convenient? Explaining the adoption of early and no-excuse absentee voting in the American States. State Politics and Policy Quarterly 15, 192–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bolling, R (1986) Money in politics. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 486, 76–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brady, HE and McNulty, JE (2011) Turning out to vote: the costs of finding and getting to the polling place. American Political Science Review 105, 115–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burden, B et al. (2014) Election laws, mobilization, and turnout: the unanticipated consequences of election reform. American Journal of Political Science 58, 95–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Butler, DM (2014) Representing the Advantaged: How Politicians Reinforce Inequality. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cassel, CA (2003) Overreporting and electoral participation research. American Politics Research 31, 81–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Citrin, J, Schickler, E and Sides, J (2003) What if everyone voted? simulating the impact of increased turnout in senate elections. American Journal of Political Science 47, 75–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Downs, A (1957) An economic theory of political action in a democracy. Journal of Political Economy 65, 135–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Enos, RD, Fowler, A and Vavreck, L (2014) Increasing inequality: the effect of GOTV mobilization on the composition of the electorate. Journal of Politics 76, 273–288. Unpublished Manuscript.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feddersen, TJ (2004) Rational choice theory and the paradox of not voting. The Journal of Economic Perspectives 18, 99–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
FORS (2012) Vox data: standardized post-referendum surveys. https://forsbase.unil.ch/project/study-public-overview/15436/0/.Google Scholar
Fowler, A (2013) Turnout matters: evidence from compulsory voting in Australie. Quarterly Journal of Political Science 8, 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fujiwara, T (2015) Voting technology, political responsiveness, and infant health: evidence from Brazil. Econometrica 83, 423–464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Funk, P (2010) Social incentives and voter turnout: evidence from the Swiss mail ballot system. Journal of the European Economic Association 8, 1077–1103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerber, AS, Green, DP and Larimer, CW (2008) Social pressure and voter turnout: evidence from a large-scale field experiment. American Political Science Review 102, 33–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerber, A, Huber, GA and Hill, SJ (2013) Identifying the effect of all-mail elections on turnout: staggered reform in the evergreen state. Political Science Research and Methods 1, 91–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gomez, BT, Hansford, TG and Krause, GA (2007) The Republicans should pray for rain: Weather, turnout, and voting in US presidential elections. Journal of Politics 69, 649–663.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gronke, P and Miller, P (2012) Voting by mail and turnout in oregon. revisiting southwell and burchett. American Politics Research 40, 976–997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Highton, B and Wolfinger, RE (2001) The political implications of higher turnout. British Journal of Political Science 31, 179–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hodler, R, Luechinger, S and Stutzer, A (2015) The effects of voting costs on the democratic process and public finances. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy 7, 141–171.Google Scholar
Leighley, JE and Nagler, J (2013) Who Votes Now? Demographics, Issues, Inequality, and Turnout in the United States. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lijphart, A (1997) Unequal participation: democracy's unresolved dilemma. American Political Science Review 91, 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luechinger, S, Rosinger, M and Stutzer, A (2007) The impact of postal voting on participation: evidence for Switzerland. Swiss Political Science Review 13, 167–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martinez, MD and Gill, J (2005) The effects of turnout on partisan outcomes in U.S. presidential elections 1960–2000. Journal of Politics 67, 1248–1274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McNulty, JE, Dowling, CM and Ariotti, MH (2009) Driving saints to sin: how increasing the difficulty of voting dissuades even the most motivated voters. Political Analyis 17, 435–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nevitte, N et al. (2009) Socioeconomic status and nonvoting: a cross-national comparative analysis. In The Comparative Study of Electoral Systems. Cambridge. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 88–105.Google Scholar
Panagopoulos, C (2008) The calculus of voting in compulsory voting systems. Political Behavior 30, 455–467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Riker, WH and Ordeshook, PC (1968) A theory of the calculus of voting. American Political Science Review 62, 25–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rubenson, D et al. (2007) Does low turnout matter? Evidence from the 2000 Canadian federal election. Electoral Studies 26, 589–597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schelker, M and Schneiter, M (2017) The elasticity of voter turnout: Investing 85 cents per voter to increase voter turnout by 4 percent. Electoral Studies 49, 65–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sinclair, B, Hall, TE and Alvarez, RM (2011) Flooding the vote: hurricane katrina and voter participation in New Orleans. American Politics Research 39, 921–965.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Southwell, P and Burchett, J (1997) Survey of vote-by-mail senate election in the state of oregon. PS: Political Science and Politics 30, 53–57.Google Scholar
Southwell, P and Burchett, J (2001) Does changing the rules change the players? The effect of all-mail elections on the composition of the electorate. Social Science Quarterly 81, 837–845.Google Scholar
Tucker, HJ, Vedlitz, A and DeNardo, J (1986) Does heavy turnout help democrats in presidential elections?. American Political Science Review 80, 1291–1304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verba, S, Schlozman, KL and Brady, HE (1995) Voice and Equality: Civic Voluntarism in American Politics. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zaller, JR (1992) The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: Link

Bechtel and Schmid Dataset

Dataset

https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/LWXXAM
Link
Supplementary material: PDF

Bechtel and Schmid supplementary material

Bechtel and Schmid supplementary material

Download Bechtel and Schmid supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 174.1 KB