IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/amposc/v47y2003i1p46-60.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How Does Voting Equipment Affect the Racial Gap in Voided Ballots?

Author

Listed:
  • Michael Tomz
  • Robert P. Van Houweling

Abstract

An accumulating body of research suggests that African Americans cast invalid ballots at a higher rate than whites. Our analysis of a unique precinct‐level dataset from South Carolina and Louisiana shows that the black‐white gap in voided ballots depends crucially on the voting equipment people use. In areas with punch cards or optically scanned ballots, the black‐white gap ranged from four to six percentage points. Lever and electronic machines, which prohibit overvoting and make undervoting more transparent and correctible, cut the discrepancy by a factor of ten. Judging from exit polls and opinion surveys, much of the remaining difference could be due to intentional undervoting, which African Americans profess to practice at a slightly higher rate than whites. In any case, the use of appropriate voting technologies can virtually eliminate the black‐white disparity in invalid ballots.

Suggested Citation

  • Michael Tomz & Robert P. Van Houweling, 2003. "How Does Voting Equipment Affect the Racial Gap in Voided Ballots?," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 47(1), pages 46-60, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:amposc:v:47:y:2003:i:1:p:46-60
    DOI: 10.1111/1540-5907.00004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-5907.00004
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1540-5907.00004?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Rodrigo Chang & Laura Castellanos & Esteban Penelas & Javier Torres, 2024. "Can Electronic Voting Shape Election Outcomes in Developing Countries? Evidence from Peru," Working Papers 203, Peruvian Economic Association.
    2. Kelly Shue & Erzo F. P. Luttmer, 2009. "Who Misvotes? The Effect of Differential Cognition Costs on Election Outcomes," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 1(1), pages 229-257, February.
    3. Joseph A. Coll, 2021. "Demographic Disparities Using Ranked-Choice Voting? Ranking Difficulty, Under-Voting, and the 2020 Democratic Primary," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 9(2), pages 293-305.
    4. Allers, M. & Kooreman, P., 2009. "More evidence on the effects of voting technology on election outcomes," Other publications TiSEM 76b3f561-a37f-4a29-bfd9-0, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    5. J. Andrew Harris & Catherine Kamindo & Peter van der Windt, 2020. "Electoral Administration in Fledgling Democracies:Experimental Evidence from Kenya," Working Papers 20200036, New York University Abu Dhabi, Department of Social Science, revised Jan 2020.
    6. John Lott, 2009. "Non-voted ballots, the cost of voting, and race," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 138(1), pages 171-197, January.
    7. Baodong Liu, 2007. "EI Extended Model and the Fear of Ecological Fallacy," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 36(1), pages 3-25, August.
    8. Matt Lamb & Steven Perry, 2020. "Knowing What You Don't Know: The Role of Information and Sophistication in Ballot Completion," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 101(3), pages 1132-1149, May.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:amposc:v:47:y:2003:i:1:p:46-60. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1540-5907 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.