Content area
Full Text
Previous research on vote by mail indicates that this electoral format has a mobilizing effect primarily in low-stimulus, special elections. This research tests a variant of this mobilizing hypothesis by considering whether vote by mail increases the number of votes cast in lower ballot contests or measures, thus reducing the amount of "voter fatigue." I analyze 15 general elections in the state of Oregon from 1980-2006. The results suggest that vote by mail has served to decrease the amount of roll-off voting for ballot measures that occur near the end of the ballot and to reduce the overall volatility in roll-off voting.
Proponents of vote by mail elections assume that this type of election results in greater voter participation. Similar to the arguments presented in support of the National Voter Registration Act (the"Motor Voter Bill"), supporters of vote by mail argue that providing for an expanded time frame for voting reduces the impact of such obstacles as illness, child care responsibilities, or inclement weather that often prevent individuals from voting on election day. '
Beyond this basic question of the impact of vote by mail elections on aggregate turnout, others have begun to probe the quality of the act of voting under this new electoral format. When voters have almost three weeks in which to vote after receiving a ballot, do they vote differently? Do they become less "fatigued" if the location and pace of the act of voting is transformed from a quick appearance at the polls to a more leisurely setting?
The term "voter fatigue" refers to the difference in the number of votes cast for higher-profile contests at the top of the ballot and the number of votes cast for races or measures further down the ballot. Voter fatigue, often referred to as "roll-off' - a decline in voting at the end of the ballot - was first noted by Burnham (1965) and Walker (1966). The usual explanation for this type of behavior is lengthy ballots or confusing voting equipment (Bowler, Donovan, and Happ 1992; Bullock and Dunn 1966; Darcy and Schneider 1989; Nichols and Strizek 1995; Shocket, Heighberger, and Brown, 1992; Vanderleeuw and Engstrom, 1987; Vanderleeuw and Utter, 1993). Demographic and attitudinal explanations of voter fatigue, such as education, knowledge,...