Voter turnout
[3] More importantly than changes in specific election outcomes,[4] voter turnout has seismic long-term implications on the abilities of democracies to function.
For example, regulatory capture tends to afflict low-turnout democracies more,[5] blocking popular democratic reforms like streamlining elections.
Similarly, in Nordic countries, all citizens and residents are included in the official population register, which is simultaneously a tax list, voter registration, and membership in the universal health system.
[12] For example, in Australia, voter registration and attendance at a polling booth have been mandatory since the 1920s, with the 2016 federal election having turnout figures of 91% for the House of Representatives and 91.9% for the Senate.
Individual votes for the federal legislature are thus less likely to have a significant effect on the complex web of systems, which probably explains some of the low average turnouts in that more complicated democracy.
Compared to countries with plurality electoral systems, voter turnout improves and the population is more involved in the political process[25][26][27] in ~70% of cases.
[28] The exceptions to the rule can include cases where a plurality system has an unusually high number of competitive districts, for example, before it transitions to a proportional one.
This has the advantage of being easy to measure and readily accessible, though overlooks those who are unwilling or unable to register due to barriers such as a complex registration or re-registration process.
Some political scientists have argued that these measures do not properly account for the large number of legal permanent residents (green card holders),[36] undocumented immigrants, disenfranchised felons and persons who are considered 'mentally incompetent' in the United States.
[42][43][44] However, a 2001 article in the American Political Science Review, Michael McDonald and Samuel Popkin argued, that at least in the United States, voter turnout since 1972 has not actually declined when calculated for those eligible to vote, what they term the voting-eligible population.
[46] Some argue that technological developments in society such as "automobilization," suburban living, and "an explosive proliferation of home entertainment devices" have contributed to a loss of community, which in turn has weakened participation in civic life.
[50] Geographic mobility has increased over the last few decades, bringing barriers to voting in a district where one is a recent arrival, including knowing little about the local candidates and issues.
[54] Another proposed measure to increase voter turnout is a move to a proportional representation system for countries that currently use first-past-the-post in elections.
Elections require considerable involvement by the population, and it takes some time to develop the cultural habit of voting, and the associated understanding of and confidence in the electoral process.
Turnout tends to be higher in nations where political allegiance is closely linked to class, ethnic, linguistic, or religious loyalties.
In the United States, Barack Obama utilized Facebook to his benefit during his first run for presidency and jumpstarted the use of social media in political campaigns.
[67] Rosenstone and Hansen contend that there is a decline in turnout in the United States and that it is the product of a change in campaigning strategies as a result of the so-called new media.
[76] Studies using game theory, which takes into account the ability of voters to interact, have also found that the expected turnout for any large election should be zero.
For a person to vote, these factors must outweigh C. Experimental political science has found that even when P is likely greater than zero, this term has no effect on voter turnout.
Enos and Fowler (2014) conducted a field experiment that exploits the rare opportunity of a tied election for major political office.
Informing citizens that the special election to break the tie will be close (meaning a high P term) has little mobilizing effect on voter turnout.
Recently, several scholars have considered the possibility that B includes not only a personal interest in the outcome, but also a concern for the welfare of others in the society (or at least other members of one's favorite group or party).
[81][82] In particular, experiments in which subject altruism was measured using a dictator game showed that concern for the well-being of others is a major factor in predicting turnout[83] and political participation.
[87] Studies have found that improving children's social skills[88][89] and enrolling them in high-quality early-childhood educational programs[90] increases their turnout as adults.
[citation needed] Occupation has little effect on turnout, with the notable exception of higher voting rates among government employees in many countries.
A 2020 NBER paper, examining evidence from Swiss referendums, found that an awareness by the electorate that an election would be close increased turnout.
[99] Controlling for canton and vote fixed effects, the study determined "that greater cantonal newspaper coverage of close polls significantly increases voter turnout"[99] One 2017 study in the Journal of Politics found that, in the United States, incarceration had no significant impact on turnout in elections: ex-felons did not become less likely to vote after their time in prison.
[101] A 2016 study in the American Journal of Political Science found that preregistration – allowing young citizens to register before being eligible to vote – increased turnout by 2 to 8 percentage points.
[124] A 2018 study in the American Political Science Review found that the parents to newly enfranchised voters "become 2.8 percentage points more likely to vote.
"[129] According to a 2018 study, get-out-the-vote groups in the United States who emphasize ballot secrecy along with reminders to vote increase turnout by about 1 percentage point among recently registered nonvoters.
