Residual Voting, Voting Equipment, and Inequality in the 2016 U.S. General Election

See also: 2020 Papers

Abstract

In the hyperfederalized American electoral system, in which voting equipment can vary by county, a key question is whether this variation is related to inequalities in residual voting across demographic groups .A persistent concern regarding voting equipment is that some types are more reliable than others incorrectly recording the choices voters make via ballots. A related concern is that county election jurisdictions with fewer financial resources may have lower quality voting equipment, and these areas tend to be more populated by poor individuals and racial minorities. Two questions are assessed in this paper: (1) Are more racially diverse and lower income counties less likely to have quality voting equipment, and (2) does lower quality voting equipment in such counties lead to a higher rate of residual voting among these groups relative to non-Hispanic whites and the middle class and affluent. To evaluate these questions, this study merges American nationwide county-level data on polling place equipment from Verified Voting from 2016 with county-level vote count and turnout data from the Election Assistance Commission and the Leip’s Atlas of U.S. Elections. The polling place equipment examined includes paper ballots, optical scan ballots, and digital recording electronic (DRE) voting. Multivariate regression analyses, with residual voting as the dependent variable, and polling place equipment and county demographic variables as key independent variables, is used to assess the outcomes of interest. Ultimately, this study shows that the U.S. is a mixture of equality and inequality when it comes to election machines and residual voting across difference demographic groups.

Last updated on 04/04/2024