“Voting at elections is one of the most important rights of the subject, and in a republic ought to stand foremost in the estimation of the law.” Alexander Hamilton, 1782
Any democracy is based on the direct manifestation of the people’s will, which is effected via various elections. The structure of presidential elections in the USA is rather complicated and indirect. In the presidential elections in the United States the number of citizens who participate in the election of the electors has no legal value, so there is no formal method of calculating the turnout. In particular localities, the procedure of actual registration (the citizens must first declare their wish to participate in the elections), and the methods and qualifications of voters may vary from state to state. Nevertheless, a lot of attention is paid to the turnout figures by experts and academics (political scientists, sociologists etc.), as well as by the media. Depending on their goals, they can use three basic methods of counting the turnout – by the total number of people in the country who have reached the voting age (currently 18 years); by the number of citizens having the right to vote; by the number of registered voters. At the same time the acquired data may also be a matter of dispute.
Historically, the first method is mostly used, which is criticized, for example, for not accounting for the increased number of residents without citizenship. According to 2012 turnout report (bipartisanpolicy.org), the figure that year was at 57.5%. Overall, since 1828, the average turnout in the presidential election was about 64%, but in the XX century, the average decreased to about 58%. In the postwar history especially active turnout was in 1952 (won by Dwight D. Eisenhower) and in 1960 (won by John F. Kennedy) – slightly more than 63%. In the elections of 2008, when Barack Obama was elected for his first term, the recorded turnout was about 58%.
There are three general factors that shape the turnout (made up of people who have motivation to vote and are qualified for voting): “(1) a person’s socio-economic status and attitudes about politics, (2) the political environment in which elections take place, and whether an election is contested among at least two political candidates, and finally (3) the state electoral laws that shape the political process (Ginsberg, et. al. 2014: 216)”.
The level of education and the level of income in general define the socio-economic status. It is statistically confirmed and is common sense that those with higher demands and greater involvement in the economy of the country would more likely have a proactive position, which is to vote. The important factor for this part of the population is evident competitiveness, which means there are two or more candidates with more or less equal chances of winning (Ginsberg, et. al. 2014: 219).
Racial factor is tied to the status. For example, while Latinos and African Americans are less likely to take part in the elections, this distinction vanishes with certain level of income and education (Ginsberg, et. al. 2014: 218). Strong affiliation with one of the parties is also a sign of high probability to vote (Ginsberg, et. al. 2014: 218).
We know that in the 2008 some 80 million eligible Americans did not partake. The projected figure for 2012 was 90 million. Almost all opinion polls conducted in the US before 2012 elections indicate that the coming presidential race was to be characterized by its unpredictability, as candidates, they said, were "head to head". The outcome of the struggle in such conditions can be solved by participation or absence of small groups of voters. The media have used the opinion polls results to heat up the electorate and play on the “competitiveness” of the election. It is important to note that in the United States in order to vote, citizens need to be included on the electoral lists, so the Democrats and Republicans are putting great effort into forming favorable lists.
With regard to the election headquarters of Barack Obama, he had spent millions of dollars on organization of advance registration of voters. President’s team were actively working in the poor urban and rural areas, inhabited mainly by representatives of those sections of the American population who, by their political views are traditionally closer to the Democrats than to Republicans. This is also one of important mobilization tactics.
In turn, the Republicans have chosen a different strategy, which was to provide for the introduction of strict rules and criteria for the participation of US citizens in the elections. In this way they sought to create additional barriers for voters sympathetic to Democrats in the "wavering" states. One of the measures was the mandatory presentation by the voter of government ID card with a photograph, which is often a problem for the electorate of the Democratic Party: representatives of poor communities and racial minorities. Moreover, such a requirement does not extend to the entire country, but only on the wavering states where the governors are supporters of the Republican Party (Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida), and this could significantly affect the overall turnout.
Such actions of the Republicans were challenged by the White House in the courts, but not everywhere and not always was it successful. For example, in Pennsylvania, the administration of President Barack Obama lost such a lawsuit and in the case with the state of Ohio they have decided to seek authorization for early voting by mail for all voters. (Currently, this right is in effect for the military, and the majority of them are traditionally considered as Republican electorate.) This idea of the Democrats provides assistance to those voters who, for various reasons, can not come to the polling stations on the voting day, and includes a preliminary phone calls or visits by the activists of campaign headquarters to their homes. All this is not accidental – the historical pattern suggests that the higher the turnout, the more likely it is for the candidate from the Democratic Party to win.
As for the Republicans, they are trying to respond legislatively to create additional barriers to the electorate of the Democratic Party in the "wavering" states, and not without reason, are hoping to succeed with this strategy. Electronic voting is one of the realities of modern elections but it has been a matter of wide debates lately. Outdated software and a low number of machines is making the process difficult and not all follow through on their initial intention to vote. The can be another unfair regulation method implemented by the Republicans, as, according to a Brennan Center report, “Black and Latino voters had to wait the longest to vote and had fewer machines to vote on”.
As we see, turnout is important but it must be observed that state laws do not compromise the results. It is important to monitor the process on different levels, taking into account that republican majority that is locally in power in many states and constitutes a certain stratus of the electorate, may be working towards limiting the number of voters inclined to vote for the Democrats. On the other hand, oversimplification of the admission to suffrage is also a possible instrument of manipulating the results. Thus, the famous checks and balances principle is important and should be considered universally.
Works cited
Ginsberg, Benjamin, Lowi, Theodore J., Weir Margaret, et all. We the People: An Introduction to American Politics (Ninth Essentials Edition). 2012. Web. PDF
“2012 Voter Turnout Report”. Retrieved at http://bipartisanpolicy.org/library/2012-voter-turnout/
Famighetti, Christopher “Election Day Long Lines: Resource Allocation”. Retrieved at https://www.brennancenter.org/publication/election-day-long-lines-resource-allocation
