(C) Common Dreams
This story was originally published by Common Dreams and is unaltered.
. . . . . . . . . .
From Ballot Box to Mailbox: The Effect of Vote-by-Mail in Municipal Elections in Utah [1]
[]
Date: 2025-03
From Ballot Box to Mailbox: The Effect of Vote-by-Mail in Municipal Elections in Utah
Asia Lynne Reid | Dr. Michael Barber | Political Science Department
Background & Research Question: Data: Findings & Conclusions:
•
Vote-by-mail (VBM) does not significantly increase voter turnout in n ational elections
•
However, municipal elections have much lower turnout than national elections
•
Utah was an early adopter of vote-by-mail
•
Utah cities and counties adopted the policy over 10 years (2010-2020)
•
How does vote-by-mail impact voter turnout in Utah's municipal elections?
•
Does this effect differ from the effect in national elections?
•
Utah city election data from 2009-2021
•
Municipal elections are in odd years
•
DV: Voter turnout rate (# of votes/# registered voters)
•
Treatment Variable : Did the city use VBM in municipal election that year?
•
Control Variables:
•
Indicators for mayoral, city council, other elections
•
City and year fixed effects
•
VBM increased turnout by roughly 10 percentage points (p < 0.001)
•
Mayoral and ‘special’ elections also have a
significant positive effect on turnout
•
City council elections show no significant effect on turnout
•
While VBM may not appear to make a significant difference in federal elections, it is incredibly significant for municipal elections
•
In some cases, nearly doubling turnout
Percent of Utah cities that used universal vote-by-mail (VBM)
All cities were re quired by law to move to VBM by 2019
100%
2%
25% 70% 93%
10.2***
5.3*** 7.0***
-2.2
Figure A: Salt Lake City Figure B: Provo Figure C: Coalville Figure D: Kamas
10%
Turnout increased after using VBM in urban and rural Utah cities
38% 17% 36%
Impact of VBM on voter turnout in Utah odd-year elections
Control variables include the types of candidates on the ballot
–
special, mayoral, city council races. Regression model also includes city and year fixed effects. Turnout measured from 0-100.
VBM does not have larg e turnout effects in national elections
Previous research (Barber and Holbein, 2020) shows a 0-3 percentage point increase in voter turnout
E s t i m a t e d C h a n g e i n T u r n o u t
−0.09 −0.06 −0.03
0.00 0.03 0.06 0.09 U T W A B o t h U T W A B o t h U T W A B o t h U T W A B o t h All Voters Republicans Democrats Independents
2 0 1 2 2 0 1 4 2 0 1 6 2 0 1 8 2 0 2 0 2010
0
25 50
100 75 Estimated Change in Voter Turnout Rate -5
0 5 10
City Council Mayor Special Election VBM
P e r c e n t a g e o f C i t i e s U s i n g V o t e - b y - M a i l
VBM only impacts turnout by much smaller margins nationally than it does in non- federal elections. Additionally, research shows that no one party is significantly aided or hindered by VBM over another.
14% 21% 49% 9% 52%
[END]
---
[1] Url:
https://www.scribd.com/document/832262158/From-Ballot-Box-to-Mailbox-The-Effect-of-Vote-by-Mail-in-Municipal-Elections-in-Utah
Published and (C) by Common Dreams
Content appears here under this condition or license: Creative Commons CC BY-NC-ND 3.0..
via Magical.Fish Gopher News Feeds:
gopher://magical.fish/1/feeds/news/commondreams/
