| |
|
Working
Papers
Please do not cite or quote without
permission.
| Portable
Voter Registration: Turnout Effects of Post-Registration Deadline
Registration Provisions. 2007. Michael P. McDonald. |
Prepared
for the 2007 Midwest Political Science Association Conference |
| Abstract:
Voting
scholars often classify registration procedures into registration
deadlines and Election Day registration.
State procedures are more complex, with most permitting
Election Day registration for certain voters, particularly
registered voters moving within a state.
Here, I review the richness of state registration
procedures and examine these procedure’s effects with an
analysis of the 2004 Current Population Survey.
I find that statewide registration portability –
permitting registrants who move to transfer their registration and
vote at their new polling place – increases turnout rates among
recent movers by 2.4 percentage points. |
The
True Electorate. 2006.
Michael P. McDonald. |
Forthcoming
Pubic Opinion Quarterly. Presented
at the 2006 American Association of Public Opinion Researchers
conference. Previous version presented at the 2006 Western
Political Science Association conference. |
| Abstract:
I cross-validate the demographic composition of the 2004
general election electorate available from voter registration
files, the media consortium’s exit poll, the Current Population
Survey within selected states. I find voter files and CPS are in
general agreement, but the NEP reports an electorate that is
younger and composed of more minorities. All three sources confirm
a pronounced pro-woman turnout gap. I find more persons register
with a political party than self-identify on the NEP, with fewer
people identifying themselves as Democrat than as Republican. I
find in-person voters are significantly younger than early voters.
Finally, a comparison of a poll of early voters conducted by the
NEP in selected states and the voter files reveals divergent and
interesting patterns of partisan identification. |
| Voter
Perceptions of Electoral Competition 2007. Michael P. McDonald |
Prepared
for "2008 and Beyond: The Future of Election and Ethics
Reform in the States" conference held in Columbus, Ohio.
January 16-17, 2007. |
| Abstract:
A 2006 pre-election survey on electoral competition
reveals a public that wants competitive elections and, in contrast
to pundits and academics who find otherwise, believes they have
what they want. Respondents most often report wanting a mix of
Democrats and Republicans to represent them at different levels of
government, something that would most likely occur when election
are competitive. Over half of the respondents believed that their
House election would be close, even when one candidate won a
landslide or only one major party candidate contested the
election. These findings challenge academics and pundits alike to
explain how the public decides when and whom to vote for, however,
those that want to reform the electoral system to inject more
competition will be most challenged to sell their case to a public
that shares their desire, but sees no problem. |
|