Voter Turnout in the United States of America 2012 Elections - Coursework Example

Winnie Nguyen Elizabeth Simas POLS 3312 Paper Topic Assignment April 22, 15 Voter Turnout in the United s of America electionsIntroduction Results from the 2012 polls reveal that the voterturnout is impacted by the age, income and gender. From the analysis(N =1,341) it was evident that citizens with incomes of over $75,000 have a higher turnout than those with lower income levels. Evidently, 1% of the richest citizens had almost 100% voter turnout. Other factors such as age, gender and race have an impact over the income consequently, effecting voter turnout. Therefore, the hypothesis this paper will analyze is that individuals with an income of over $75,000 will have a higher voter turnout levels than the individuals with incomes less than $75,000. Analyzing voter turnout after elections is important due to several factors. Political scientists and political talk show hosts analyze the voter turnout trends in different parts of the country to try and discern what the public should anticipate when the election results are announced. Secondly, the election observers from other countries also use the voter turnout figures to come up with recommendations for how to improve elections all over the world based on the way the elections have turned out to be in the United States of America. The voter turnout during the 2012 general elections in the United States of America was determined by a number of different factors at different levels. First, the rank of the office being voted for was a key issue. As such, many people turn out to vote for the presidential office than the other positions. This is because this is one of the best campaigned for and advertised for positions in U.S politics. The level of competitiveness in the positions being voted for is another reason why analyzing voter turnout is an important activity in examining elections. Moreover, in some states and counties, the competition is not as much as it is in others. Due to this, voter turnout in the 2012 elections varied from one state to the next due to the competitiveness of the position in question. Election competitiveness in Minnesota was higher than the electoral competitiveness in Hawaii and according to data released by the Center for Voting and Democracy, voter turnout in Minnesota was 76% compared to the 45% in Hawaii. State and local laws concerning voting and the election process plus the elections for higher offices in the same regions are just some of the other factors that also determine the voter turnout levels. There are states that are seen as being more competitive than the others and among 12 of these states in America, there was 66% voter turnout. This is in contrast with the fact that in all of the other 39 states in America, there was an average voter turnout of 57%. There are also different demographic factors that determine the extent and manner in which the voters will turn out to cast their vote on Election Day. In states that there are more young people than there are older people, the voter turnout is expected to be low. Statistics show that averagely, in the period between 1972 and 2012, Americans in the 18-29 age brackets have always turned out to vote less by 20% than the people who are above 30 years (Geys 640). Hypothesis and conceptual framework From the hypothesis, age and income have a significant impact on voter turnout because advances in age and income translates to more freedom of choice. The residential mobility also determine the extent to which the voters will turn out to cast their votes. The issue of voter mobilization is also important in understanding why some voters have not come out to vote even after registering as voters. The issue of voter education and mobilization is very important and directly compared to voter turnout because it is only if voters are sensitized that they will come out to vote. Voters who do not have enough money on the voting day will also not come to cast their votes. There is a big gap between the numbers of people in low-income levels who turned out to vote versus the number of voters from high-income levels who turned out to vote. In 2012, this gap between these two groups was 15%. This disparity in voter turnouts is because of factors like inability to move from residential areas to voting stations. Also, inadequate transport and communication channels in areas where low-income level people are found, and inadequate information and documentation about the voting process for the low income level people and areas. The gaps between the voter turnouts amongst the people of high income levels versus the voter turnout amongst the people of low income levels can be reduced through measures like same day registration and earlier registration and voting times to give people enough time to prepare and come vote. Elections must be accompanied by strong campaigns that require a lot of money to conduct. Furthermore, the decision to create the super PACs has even widened the gap between the rich and the poor. These means that campaigns can only be financed by 1% of the 1% most rich citizens thereby the rich have an impact on the outcome of the election. The GOP’s insistence of rolling back voting rights is also another factor hindering the low income group from turning up on the voting day. Income inequality plays a big role in suppressing the votes of the low income people. In fact, a report by the OECD indicates that that incomes bears a significant impact on voter turnout. The report further indicates that there is a 7% more likelihood of people in the top 20% earners to turn up for the polls against the same margin drop for people in the lower category. Voter turnout for the wealthy is almost 100% whereas for the poor it’s almost three-quarters. Additionally, education plays an important aspect because it is tied to income. The reasons for the difference in the turnout could be because the low income earners tend to think that they are disconnected from politics. Indeed, voter participation is the key to assessing political engagement. Conclusively, the low income earners feel disconnected because only one party has the capacity to influence politics. There seems to be no significant relationship between the level of literacy and voter turnout. However, it would be expected that states with higher literacy levels will have a higher voter turnout than those with low literacy levels because literacy comes with an added advantage. Normally, we tend to think that political literacy is equal to the formal education. In contrast, the two seem to be related but are as disjoint as can be. Political literacy is the ability of a voter to make informed decisions at the time of voting. Literature Review In two reports compiled by Nonprofit VOTE and the United States Election Assistance Commission titled AMERICA GOES TO THE POLLS, Voter Participation Gaps in the 2012 Presidential Election, and The 2012 Election Administration and Voting Survey respectively the different dynamics of the 2012 US general elections are compiled. These reports were specifically done to show among other things the voter turnout in the 2012 elections and the other figures from the research findings. The book first defines voter turnout as the number of people in the registered voters’ list who actually come out on polling day to cast their ballot during the election. The number of the citizens who cast their votes in the ballots are the ones who are used to determine the extent of voter turnout during the compilation of election results figures. Voter turnouts for midterm elections are differentiated from voter turnout of major elections. Midterm elections are defined as those elections where the presidential candidate position is not involved. The midterm elections are used to determine the candidates who go into the House of Representatives and a small section of the politicians in the senate of the United States if America (Geys, 650). The authors have used different tables to show the different levels of voter turnout from 1997 to 2012 general elections. These tables and other graphical representations point out the trends of voter turn outs over the years and determine this using different categorizations for example the voter turnout by age, by gender, by location and also voter turnout by level of office being vied for. The presidential election is usually the most important vote to be made and the voter turnout is high because many people would want to have some influence over who the next president is going to be. High stakes positions like the governors and the president have higher voter turn outs compared to the other positions like midterm positions. The midterm elections attracted a smaller turn out of voters compared to the presidential elections in both 2010 and 2012. In 2012, the general voter turnout was 60 percent. This, compared to the voter turnout for the midterm elections in 2010 of 41.7% is higher. Data Analyses In the analysis, the dependent variables income and voting are determined from the independent variables gender and ethnicity. I will use the income variable in my analysis. This variable in the table I have included below is named income levels. Income also generates another factor called mobility rates. It refers to the movement of the people in such of jobs and other income related issues. The residential mobility also determine the extent to which the voters will turn out to cast their votes. I will recode the income variable into two categories as those earning above $75,000 and those earning less than $75,000. The category of voters earning less than $75000 will be coded as “0” while the category of voters earning more than $75000 will be codes as “1”. The variables are ordered this way to make it easier to differentiate the two categories of the variable. These recoded variables are still labeled in the same way as they are in the data sources. The table 1 also supports the thesis because as seen, voters who have income higher than $75,000 turned out to vote close to 80%. This means that the voters who have an income of more than $75,000 come out to vote more just as the hypothesis states. The absentee rate is also very minimal. I decided to recode this variable because the two categories divided easily the large number of American voters into two categories that can then be used in understanding the relationship between voter turnout and income levels. The findings received from the research show the same figures. In 2012, the voter turnout for the number of people who had stayed in their current residential areas for more than five years was 76% while those who had only stayed in their residential areas for less than one year was 61%. For the purpose of decoding this report for tabular representation, the percentage of people who had stayed at their residential areas for more than five years will be used against those who had not. In the report compiled by the United States Election Assistance Commission titled The 2012 Election Administration and Voting Survey done in September 2013 also highlight the trends in which Americans cast their votes in 2012. This report indicates that there were approximately a total of 131.5 million Americans who participated in the vote compared to the total number of 194.2 million people who registered to vote (Green, McGrath and McAronow 46). The report further found out that there was an excess of 60% likelihood of the American people to vote for someone of their class and race. The report compiled from all of the 50 states in America and three territories plus the District of Columbia constituted the number of votes made through different platforms like the regular ballot system, the absentee ballot voting, the mail vote and the votes made before the Election Day. The alternative voting methods made it possible for voters in different areas to vote without having to report to the polling stations. This was seen in regions like Washington and Oregon. However, 56% of the people who cast their vote in the 2012 elections did this through the traditional way of voting. In the 2012 elections, there was a considerably high number of people who registered for the elections using the internet. There was 3.2 million applications for voting registration done online and this is higher than the 760,000 applications for internet registration received in 2008. The state that had the highest voter turnout based on the population of the people who voted was Minnesota while the state that had the lowest voter turnout based on the same variable was Mississippi (Geys 648) The number of voters who turned out in the 2012 elections can also be assessed using the ranking of the absentee rates in the elections. In this ranking method, Colorado had the highest absentee rate at 71.4%, Arizona had an absentee rate of 65.9%, Montana at 57.5% and Georgia at 48.8% voter absentee rate. The number of rejected votes was also significantly high. It has also been realized that the voter turnout levels can also be assessed through analyzing race of voters. In the 2012 elections, then number of eligible black voters was 66.6% compared to the number of eligible white voters which was 64.1%. Among the Latinos and the Asian communities, the percentage of eligible voters was ranked at 48% and 47.3% respectively. In this election, the number of black voters who turned out to vote was higher than the number of white people who turned out to vote. This can be attributed to the fact that there was a push for re-election of Obama into the office. Conclusion Voter turnout is one of the determining factors of U.S election outcomes. It remains to be the most important determinant to the output as the people come out to support their specific candidates. In the 2012 election, the number of women who turned out to vote was higher than the number of men who turned out to vote. This was in similar fashion to what had been seen in several previous elections. According to these reports, in the 2012 elections, 7.8% more women voted than the men who voted. At the same time, the number of older men is more than the number of older women who came out to vote. Studies have also shown that because the number of wealthier people who vote is more than the number of low-income people who turn out to vote, politicians have been noted to pay keen attention to the needs of their wealthier voters who are more fluent in public policy matters. The number of overseas votes and the comparison of the number of people in overseas locations who registered to vote versus those who did not turn out to vote were also analyzed. The voter turnout by ethnic representation can be summarized as – the white voters at 64%, the black population at 66%, the Hispanic population at 48% and the Asian population at 47%. The voter turnout is hugely dependent on the economic and the social factors that are prevalent at the time in question. The economic power of the voters also determines the extent to which they will want to go out and vote so as they change their situations. In addition, the wealthy could go out to vote so that they preserve the status quo that has made it possible for them to prosper. Table 1: Comparison of Income level above $75,000 against below $75,000 Income Levels (above 75,000) Income Levels (below 75,000) VOTED 80% (N = 70.3) 211 60% (N =60.0) 158 DID NOT VOTE 12% (N=30.2) 32 24% (N = 32.0) 63 TOTAL N = 1,341 Table 2: Logit Analysis of the Effects of income on voter turnout in 2012 Election Independent Variable Effects on voter turnout Income inequality -.204*** (.9) Gender .232*** (.5) Ethnicity .207*** (.4) Constant 2.912 P = 1; 1 = *-* Works Cited Ansolabehere, Stephen, Nathaniel Persily, and Charles Stewart III. "Regional differences in racial polarization in the 2012 presidential election: Implications for the constitutionality of section 5 of the voting rights act." Harv. L. Rev. F.126 (2012): 205. Bimber, Bruce, and Lauren Copeland. "Digital media and traditional political participation over time in the US." Journal of Information Technology & Politics10.2 (2013): 125-137. Flanigan, William H., et al. Political behavior of the American electorate. Cq Press, 2014. Green, Donald. P, McGrath, Mary C, Mc Aronow, Peter. “Field Experiments and the Study of Voter Turn Out.” 2013. Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties. Pdf Geys, Benny. “Explaining voter turnout: A review of aggregate-level research”. Electoral Studies 25 (2006) 637-663. Pdf Read More