TY - JOUR
T1 - Waiting to Vote in the 2016 Presidential Election
T2 - Evidence from a Multi-county Study
AU - Stein, Robert M.
AU - Mann, Christopher
AU - Stewart, Charles
AU - Birenbaum, Zachary
AU - Fung, Anson
AU - Greenberg, Jed
AU - Kawsar, Farhan
AU - Alberda, Gayle
AU - Alvarez, R. Michael
AU - Atkeson, Lonna
AU - Beaulieu, Emily
AU - Birkhead, Nathaniel A.
AU - Boehmke, Frederick J.
AU - Boston, Joshua
AU - Burden, Barry C.
AU - Cantu, Francisco
AU - Cobb, Rachael
AU - Darmofal, David
AU - Ellington, Thomas C.
AU - Fine, Terri Susan
AU - Finocchiaro, Charles J.
AU - Gilbert, Michael D.
AU - Haynes, Victor
AU - Janssen, Brian
AU - Kimball, David
AU - Kromkowski, Charles
AU - Llaudet, Elena
AU - Mayer, Kenneth R.
AU - Miles, Matthew R.
AU - Miller, David
AU - Nielson, Lindsay
AU - Ouyang, Yu
AU - Panagopoulos, Costas
AU - Reeves, Andrew
AU - Seo, Min Hee
AU - Simmons, Haley
AU - Smidt, Corwin
AU - Stone, Farrah M.
AU - VanSickle-Ward, Rachel
AU - Victor, Jennifer Nicoll
AU - Wood, Abby
AU - Wronski, Julie
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2019 University of Utah.
PY - 2020/6/1
Y1 - 2020/6/1
N2 - This paper is the result of a nationwide study of polling place dynamics in the 2016 presidential election. Research teams, recruited from local colleges and universities and located in twenty-eight election jurisdictions across the United States, observed and timed voters as they entered the queue at their respective polling places and then voted. We report results about four specific polling place operations and practices: the length of the check-in line, the number of voters leaving the check-in line once they have joined it, the time for a voter to check in to vote (i.e., verify voter’s identification and obtain a ballot), and the time to complete a ballot. Long lines, waiting times, and times to vote are closely related to time of day (mornings are busiest for polling places). We found the recent adoption of photographic voter identification (ID) requirements to have a disparate effect on the time to check in among white and nonwhite polling places. In majority-white polling places, scanning a voter’s driver’s license speeds up the check-in process. In majority nonwhite polling locations, the effect of strict voter ID requirements increases time to check in, albeit modestly.
AB - This paper is the result of a nationwide study of polling place dynamics in the 2016 presidential election. Research teams, recruited from local colleges and universities and located in twenty-eight election jurisdictions across the United States, observed and timed voters as they entered the queue at their respective polling places and then voted. We report results about four specific polling place operations and practices: the length of the check-in line, the number of voters leaving the check-in line once they have joined it, the time for a voter to check in to vote (i.e., verify voter’s identification and obtain a ballot), and the time to complete a ballot. Long lines, waiting times, and times to vote are closely related to time of day (mornings are busiest for polling places). We found the recent adoption of photographic voter identification (ID) requirements to have a disparate effect on the time to check in among white and nonwhite polling places. In majority-white polling places, scanning a voter’s driver’s license speeds up the check-in process. In majority nonwhite polling locations, the effect of strict voter ID requirements increases time to check in, albeit modestly.
KW - election administration
KW - polling place operations
KW - voting behavior
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85063611469&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85063611469&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1177/1065912919832374
DO - 10.1177/1065912919832374
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85063611469
SN - 1065-9129
VL - 73
SP - 439
EP - 453
JO - Political Research Quarterly
JF - Political Research Quarterly
IS - 2
ER -