I appeared along with a number of poll workers, local election officials, advocates, and academics at a full day post-election meeting organized by the Election Assistance Commission.
You can watch the full day webcast here. Each segment is 90 minutes long and it’s pretty easy to pick and choose according to your interest.
There are 720,694 early in-person ballots processed by the State Board of Elections in NC as of this morning. We finally have enough leverage–and enough days–to compare the turnout rates and trajectory to previous elections.
Signs of a rising Democratic tide, at least in this one state, appear to be accurate. The gap between the 2008 rate and the 2012 rate widened for the first three days of early in person voting and has held steady since then. The GOP, by comparison, is not doing much better in 2012 than they did (as a proportion of identifiers) in 2008.
We’ll be updating these graphics every few days as early voting continues.
Michael McDonald and I have agreed on a hashtag: #earlyvote.
Set your twitter filters accordingly. Back to your regularly scheduled blog.
It’s early, but the first ballot return rates are coming in from North Carolina and some patterns are emerging.
- Of the 41,245 absentee ballot requests, 83% were from civilians, 8.7%were from the military, and 8% were from overseas voters.
- Civilian ballots that have been returned thus far have the highest acceptance rate (90.5% of the 1089 returned), compared to 87.4% of overseas ballots and 82.4% of military ballots.
- The main reasons for rejected ballots were cancellations, 6% of civilian and 10% of UOCAVA (there is no difference by status).
- However, already 6% of the military ballots have been returned as undeliverable, compared to only 1% of civilian ballots. This is based on an extremely small sample size–that 6% is based on just 10 returned ballots out of 165 total returned. Nonetheless, undeliverable military ballots have been a point of concern in the past.
More updates as I process this file. I think this is a great assignment for my Statistics class!
Data definitely ARE beautiful, as is correct grammatical usage.
If officials are skeptical of the merit of the residual vote rate, one source that illustrates its merits is the “Residual Voting in Florida” report coauthored by me and Charles Stewart. Look in particular at pg. 55-56, which I humbly suggest is a perfect illustration of Doug’s point.
Using data from Florida, we identify the two highest residual vote rate precincts in the state–two precincts that are wholly contained within elder care facilities. We further show that the rate in the two precincts is completely driven by high error rates on absentee ballots.
We can’t diagnose the disease in full. It may be that elderly citizens are making more errors because they can’t ask for help from poll workers when completing the ballot. It may be that the text is printed too small, causing difficulties for citizens with vision impairment. Or perhaps the ballot itself is confusing in unexpected ways.
But at least now we know where to look.
The takeaway chart is here:
Rick is one of the nation’s leading legal experts in election law, including campaign finance, voting technology, and voting rights. His new book, The Voting Wars, has already garnered a lot of press coverage. Rick is known to many through the Election Law blog, a daily update of election law news and commentary.
To top it off, Rick is a dear friend, and is unfailingly warm and collegial. This should be a fun and provocative event.
(Crossposted to Earlyvoting.net)
Thanks to James Hicks, my longtime programmer and soon to be successful litigator out of Boalt Hall, for updating earlyvoting.net!
Early voting story by Richard Wolf of the USA Today.
In the better late than never category, the EAC’s NVRA report and associated data has been released on the EAC website. No indication yet that the UOCAVA and Election Day reports are pending.