Martha Kropf

Voided Ballots in the 1996 Presidential Election: A County-Level Analysis

This county-level study examines factors associated with the rate of voided presidential ballots in the 1996 elections. Evidence indicates that voided ballots are significantly more prevalent in counties with higher percentages of African Americans and Hispanics. The relationship between voided ballots and African Americans disappears, however, in counties using voting equipment that can be programmed to eliminate overvoting. The rate of voided ballots is lower in larger counties and in counties with a higher percentage of high school graduates. The rate of voided ballots declines as the number of presidential candidates on the ballot increases, but only up to a point, and then rises with further increases. Lever machines generate the lowest rates of voided ballots among types of voting equipment, with punch card systems generating the highest rates.

Eliciting Survey Cooperation Incentives, Self-Interest, and Norms of Cooperation

Given the weaker ties to community as noted by scholars such as Robert Putnam, survey researchers should not be surprised by a decline in survey participation over the past 10 years. This research analyzes the use of incentives coupled with introductory themes emphasizing cooperation and helpfulness—cooperative norms in American society—to understand their effects on survey response. This article analyzes two separate experiments (one phone and one mail) that provide evidence that norms of cooperation matter in the decision to participate in a survey, suggesting that this is particularly true at the refusal conversion stage. These results indicate that survey researchers may use such themes to their advantage, especially when conducting a nonresponse follow-up in a mail survey.

Viewers like You: Community Norms and Contributions to Public Broadcasting

The logic of collective action (Olson 1965) suggests that public broadcasting may be underprovided, because non-contributors are not excluded from receiving the benefits. Why do so many individuals voluntarily contribute to public television, even though they can obtain the benefits of public television without contributing? We explore the hypothesis that giving to public broadcasting is determined in part by the strength of “civicnorms” that limit the opportunistic behavior of individuals in large-numbers prisoners’ dilemma settings. We also explore a variety of other explanations for charitable giving and collective action, including group size, tax deductibility, crowd out, and selective incentives. Our findings provide evidence linking civic norms and giving to public broadcasting. Education and income have indirect effects through strengthening civic norms. We find some evidence that selective incentives increase the average size of contributions among those who contribute.

The Electoral Glass Ceiling: Gender, Viability, and the News in U.S. Senate Campaigns

Abstract Scholars such as Kahn and others have shown that the print news media have covered women candidates in ways likely to diminish their electoral viability. Those effects have yet to be verified in a non-experimentalsetting or extended to television. We offer non-experimental evidence of news-based effects for print news and television. We examine the effects of media coverage patterns by analyzing Senate races using the 1988-92 ANES Senate Election Study. Our results provide consistent support for the contention that news media coverage has disadvantaged women candidates in the eyes of voters. This work suggests a need for greater attention to research on broadcast news coverage of women candidates.

Roll-Off at the Top of the Ballot: International Undervoting in American Presidential Elections

Every four years, more than two percent of voters fail to cast a valid vote in the U.S. presidential contest. The 2000 election highlighted the fact that many intended votes are voided because of voter confusion associated with complicated ballot designs or voting equipment. Using survey data, this study provides estimates of the proportion of voided presidential ballots that do not represent errors but rather intentional undervotes. Voters who are older, poorer, and who do not identify with either major party are more likely to intentionally refrain from casting a presidential vote. Differences between African-American and white voting patterns are very minor, implying that racial disparities in the rate of voided votes cannot be attributed to a stronger tendency among African-American voters to intentionally skip the presidential contest.

Pursuing the Early Voter: Does the Early Bird Get the Worm?

ABSTRACT In the 2004 election, 30 states offered the option to vote before Election Day with no excuse (National Conference of State Legislators, 2004), up from 26 in 2002. For parties, interest groups, and campaigns that have begun early voting campaign efforts, have the efforts changed the composition of the electorate—or are early voters largely similar to Election Day voters? By examining two battleground states from the 2002 midterm election in which the partisan, interest group, and campaign efforts were highly competitive, we are able to analyze this question. Drawing upon a unique panel survey including early, absentee, and Election Day voters in the 2002 Arkansas and Missouri midterm elections, we are able to analyze demographic and attitudinal information about voters, as well as issue preference and vote certainty over time. We show that early voters and Election Day voters are largely similar. We also show that while there is weak evidence that issue preference of early voters may change over time, vote choice is firm. Thus, we conclude that early voting campaigns may have limited effectiveness in mobilizing new voters or persuading voters to change their minds.

The Federal Part of the Institution

When a typical US citizen considers “election monitors,” he or she might consider a team of US observers traveling to other countries, such as Kenya when it held its 2013 national election. In Kenya, according to the Carter Center, “[t]he country has a longstanding history of ethnic-fueled electoral violence, which culminated in postelection violence in 2007–2008 that left more than 1,000 people dead and over 600,000 internally displaced.”1 International election monitoring is provided by organizations worldwide in order “to support efforts to strengthen democratic processes and institutions and to support the conduct of elections that meet international standards, are peaceful, and have credible results.”2

Institutions and the Norms That Help Maintain Stability

Usually when there is an election, local and state newspapers also have an editorial encouraging citizens to vote. One does not always receive a tangible reward for voting, but reporter Tina Reed wrote in the Annapolis, Maryland newspaper, The Capital: “A ballot-full of businesses want to capitalize on election night by offering dirty martinis, Obama cookies and free bagels with your ‘I voted’ sticker.”1 Yes! Citizens could demonstrate patriotism by showing the ever-present “I voted” sticker and earning a dirty martini. Even the “Brat Man” wants to reward the voter with

Counting the Votes

1 off any menu item if the person voted in the primary.2 We don’t always get a reward like Wisconsin bratwurst when we do something of which others approve. But Americans do a lot to be accepted by others, especially those whose opinions they value—or maybe whoever will just give one a snack as a reward. Peer pressure appears to work for all kinds of social outcomes, good and bad.3

Implications of Institutionalism for Democracy

There are a number of instances where election scholars might simply say: “You just can’t make this stuff up.” Indeed, consider this real newspaper story about counting votes in a local election reported by Zachary K. Johnson in The Stockton (CA) Record: At the election office on Wednesday, two observers and two election workers tried to decipher the scrawl on one pink envelope. The numbers in the address were unclear; so were the letters in the voter’s name. Best guesses led them through a search of the voter rolls before his signature came up on a computer screen. “That’s Justin,” said staffer Jeff Dale, matching it up to the signature on the envelope. After a few more steps, including checking to see if it was the only time the person voted, the envelope landed in the box for envelopes to be opened and counted. “He went to the correct (polling) place. He didn’t return his absentee (ballot). We’re good to go,” elections supervisor Liz Orosco said before the group moved on to the next pink envelope.1