The Electronic Ballot Box: A Rational Voting Model for Class, Age, and Racial Bias
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15763/issn.2374-7781.2007.28.0.19-35Abstract
This research creates a theoretical framework for understanding the effect of Internet voting on the electorate. Based on standard Downsian rational choice voting theory, we claim that Internet voting lowers the cost of voting for certain voting demographics based upon race, age, and income. We further contend that this electoral advantage may crystallize the growing turnout disparity between demographic groups. The theory is tested using Bayesian inferential methods with data from the Internet turnout in the 2000 Arizona Democratic Presidential Primary merged with demographic data obtained from the 2000 Census. Our findings lend support for the theory that the Internet provides an electoral bias towards white voters, younger voters, and to the more affluent.References
Aldrich, J.A. 1995. Why Parties? Chicago: University of Chicago Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226012773.001.0001
Aldrich, J.A. 1976. Some Problems in Testing Two Rational Models of Participation. American Journal of Political Science 20(4):713-733. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2110568
Alvarez, R. Michael., and J. Nagler. 2001. The Likely Consequences of Internet Voting for Political Representation. Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review 34(3):1115-1152.
Barry, B.M. 1970. Sociologists, Economists and Democracy. London: Collier-Macmillan.
Browning, G. 1996. Electronic Democracy: Using the Internet to Influence American Politics. Wilton: Pemberton Press.
Burnham, W.D. 1987. The Turnout Problem. Pp. 97-134 in Elections American Style, ed. A.J. Reichley. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
Conventions Boost Online Fundraising. 2000. Associated Press. 18 August.
Cowles, M.K., and P.C. Bradley. 1996. Markov Chain Monte Carlo Convergence Diagnostics: A Comparative Review. Journal of the American Statistical Association 91(434):883-904. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1996.10476956
Davis, R. 1999. The Web of Politics: The Internet's Impact on American Political Systems. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Downs, R.A. 1957. An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper and Row.
Fox, J. 1957. An R and S-plus Companion to Applied Regression. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Gelman, A., and D.L. Rubin. 1992. Inference from Iterative Simulation Using Multiple Sequences. Statistical Science 7(4):457-472. http://dx.doi.org/10.1214/ss/1177011136
Geweke, J. 1993. Bayesian Treatment of the Independent Student-t Linear Model. Journal of the Applied Econometrics 8(S):S19-40.
Gill, J. 2002. Bayesian Methods for the Social and Behavioral Sciences. Boca Raton, FL: Chapman and Hall/CRC.
Gill, J., and J. Gainous. 2002. Why Does Voting Get so Complicated? A Review of Theories for Analyzing Democratic Participation. Statistical Science 17(4):1-22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1214/ss/1049993199
Hobert, J.P., and G. Casella. 1996. The Effect of Improper Priors on Gibbs Sampling in Hierarchical Linear Mixed Models. Journal of the American Statistical Association 91(436):1461-1473. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1996.10476714
Jackman, S. 2000. Estimation and Inference via Bayesian Simulation: An Introduction to Markov Chain Monte Carlo. American Journal of Political Science 44(2):375-404. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2669318
Johnson, V.E. 1996. Studying Convergence of Markov Chain Monte Carlo Algorithms Using Coupled Sample Paths. Journal of the American Statistical Association 91(433):154-166. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1996.10476672
Lee, P. M. 1989. Bayesian Statistics: An Introduction. New York: Oxford University Press.
Leighley, J.E., and J. Nagler. 1992. Socioeconomic Bias in Turnout 1964-1988: The Voters Remain the Same. American Political Science Review 86(3):725-736. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1964134
Martinez, M., and D. Hill. 1999. Did Motor Voter Work? American Politics Quarterly 27(3):296-315. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1532673X99027003002
Nathan, S. 2000. More Investors Click to Cast Proxy Votes. USA Today, 27 March, 13B.
Pollard, W.E. 1986. Bayesian Statistics for Evaluation Research: An Introduction. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Press, S.J. 1989. Bayesian Statistics: Principles, Models, and Applications. New York: Wiley.
Riker, W.H., and P.C. Ordeshook. 1968. A Theory of the Calculus of Voting. American Political Science Review 62(1):25-42. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S000305540011562X http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1953324
Robert, C.P. 2001. The Bayesian Choice: A Decision Theoretic Motivation. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Robert, C.P. 1995. Convergence Control Methods for Markov Chain Monte Carlo Algorithms. Statistical Science 10(3):231-253. http://dx.doi.org/10.1214/ss/1177009937
Rosenstone, S., and J.M. Hansen. 1993. Mobilization, Participation, and Democracy in America. New York: Macmillan.
Salant, J.D. 2000. Bush Campaign Last in Internet Fundraising. Associated Press, 5 February.
Selnow, G.W. 1998. Electronic Whistle Stops: The Impact of the Internet on American Politics. Westport, CT.: Praeger Publishers. SeniorNet.org.http://www.seniornet.org/php.
Solop, F.I. 2001. Digital Democracy Comes of Age: Internet Voting and the 2000 Arizona Democratic Primary Election. Political Science and Politics 34(2):289-293. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S104909650100052X
Solop, F.I. 2000. Public Support for Internet Voting: Are We Falling Into a "Racial Ravine." Paper presented at The American Association of Public Opinion Research, Portland, Oregon.
Tolbert, C.J., and R.S. McNeal. 2003. Unraveling the Effects of the Internet on Political Participation? Political Research Quarterly 56(2):175-185. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3219896 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/106591290305600206
Tullock, G. 1967. Towards a Mathematics of Politics. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
United States Department of Commerce (DOC). 2000. Falling Through the Net: Toward Digital Inclusion.
U.S. Dept. of Commerce. Bureau of Census. Statistical Abstract of the United States. 2000. Washington DC: Government Printing Office, various.
Western, B., and S. Jackman. 1994. Bayesian Inference for Comparative Research. American Political Science Review 88(2):412-423. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2944713
Wolfinger, R.E., and S.J. Rosenstone. 1980. Who Votes? New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with American Review of Politics agree to the following terms:
The Author retains copyright in the Work, where the term “Work” shall include all digital objects that may result in subsequent electronic publication or distribution.
Upon acceptance of the Work, the author shall grant to the Publisher the right of first publication of the Work.
The Author shall grant to the Publisher and its agents the nonexclusive perpetual right and license to publish, archive, and make accessible the Work in whole or in part in all forms of media now or hereafter known under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License or its equivalent, which, for the avoidance of doubt, allows others to copy, distribute, and transmit the Work under the following conditions:
Attribution: other users must attribute the Work in the manner specified by the author as indicated on the journal Web site;
Non-Commercial: the materials may not be used for commercial purposes;
Share Alike: If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original.
with the understanding that the above condition can be waived with permission from the Author and that where the Work or any of its elements is in the public domain under applicable law, that status is in no way affected by the license.
The Author is able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the nonexclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the Work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), as long as there is provided in the document an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post online a pre-publication manuscript (but not the Publisher’s final formatted PDF version of the Work) in institutional repositories or on their Websites prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (see The Effect of Open Access). Any such posting made before acceptance and publication of the Work shall be updated upon publication to include a reference to the Publisher-assigned DOI (Digital Object Identifier) and a link to the online abstract for the final published Work in the Journal.
Upon Publisher’s request, the Author agrees to furnish promptly to Publisher, at the Author’s own expense, written evidence of the permissions, licenses, and consents for use of third-party material included within the Work, except as determined by Publisher to be covered by the principles of Fair Use.
The Author represents and warrants that:
the Work is the Author’s original work;
the Author has not transferred, and will not transfer, exclusive rights in the Work to any third party;
the Work is not pending review or under consideration by another publisher;
the Work has not previously been published;
the Work contains no misrepresentation or infringement of the Work or property of other authors or third parties; and
the Work contains no libel, invasion of privacy, or other unlawful matter.
The Author agrees to indemnify and hold Publisher harmless from Author’s breach of the representations and warranties contained in Paragraph 6 above, as well as any claim or proceeding relating to Publisher’s use and publication of any content contained in the Work, including third-party content.
