Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-02T22:50:24.917Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Reconciling Legal-Institutional and Behavioral Perspectives on Voter Turnout: Theory and Evidence from Pennsylvania, 1876–1948

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 January 2021

Jacob R. Neiheisel
Jacob R. Neiheisel*
Affiliation:
University at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, USA
*
Jacob R. Neiheisel, Department of Political Science, University at Buffalo, State University of New York, 422 Park Hall, North Campus, Buffalo, NY 14260, USA. Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Foundational studies in political science endeavored to explain the dynamics of voter turnout in America over time. Two theories, one focused on legal-institutional factors and the other on behavioral elements such as party mobilization strategies, were born from the need to account for temporal fluctuations in aggregate voter turnout. A comprehensive test of these competing theories has been hindered by the fact that reliable measures of the behavioral factors driving turnout have proven elusive. In this article, I develop and test an interactive theory of voter turnout that focuses on the impact of legal-institutional barriers to the franchise conditional on party organizational strength and mobilization efforts. To this end, I use data on the circulation of party-sponsored newspapers, coupled with information on the spread of voter registration requirements, to capture the effects of both behavioral and legal-institutional factors in Pennsylvania between 1876 and 1948. My results offer modest empirical support for an interactive theory of aggregate voter turnout. In isolation, however, the effects of behavioral factors are quite limited. On the contrary, legal-institutional variables exert a sizable impact on voter turnout in the state. Contrary to other recent work on the subject, careful analysis of the Pennsylvania case therefore provides a great deal of evidence in favor of legal-institutional accounts of the changes in aggregate voter turnout that were witnessed at the beginning of the twentieth century while demonstrating that behavioral factors, such as the decline of the partisan press, served to enhance the deleterious effects of legal reforms on turnout.

Keywords

American political developmentelection rulesmass mediaparties and electionspolitical participationpooled time series
Type
Research Article
Information
State Politics & Policy Quarterly , Volume 16 , Issue 4 , December 2016 , pp. 432 - 454
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s) 2016

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Albright, Spencer A. 1942. The American Ballot. Washington, DC: American Council on Public Affairs.Google Scholar
Alderfer, Harold Freed, and Luhrs, Fannette H.. 1948. Registration in Pennsylvania Elections, 1926-1946. State College: The Pennsylvania Municipal Publications Service.Google Scholar
Aldrich, John H. 2011. Why Parties? A Second Look. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allen, Philip Loring. 1906. “Ballot Laws and Their Workings.” Political Science Quarterly 21 (1): 38–58..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ansolabehere, Stephen, and Konisky, David M.. 2006. “The Introduction of Voter Registration and Its Effect on Turnout.” Political Analysis 14 (1): 83–100..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burden, Barry C., and Neiheisel, Jacob R.. 2013. “Election Administration and the Pure Effect of Voter Registration on Turnout.” Political Research Quarterly 66 (1): 77–90..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burnham, Walter Dean. 1965. “The Changing Shape of the American Political Universe.” American Political Science Review 59 (1): 7–28..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burnham, Walter Dean. 1970. Critical Elections and the Mainsprings of American Politics. New York: W.W. Norton.Google Scholar
Burnham, Walter Dean. 1974a. “Rejoinder to ‘Comments’ by Philip Converse and Jerrold Rusk.” American Political Science Review 68 (3): 1050–57..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burnham, Walter Dean. 1974b. “Theory and Voting Research: Some Reflections on Converse's ‘Change in the American Electorate.‘” American Political Science Review 68 (3): 1002–1023..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burnham, Walter Dean. 1986. “Those High Nineteenth-Century American Voting Turnouts: Fact or Fiction?” Journal of Interdisciplinary History 16 (4): 613–44..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carson, Jamie L., and Hood, M. V. III. 2014. “Candidates, Competition, and the Partisan Press: Congressional Elections in the Early Antebellum Era.” American Politics Research 42 (5): 760–83..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, Tom S., and Linzer, Drew A.. 2015. “Should I Use Fixed or Random Effects?” Political Science Research and Methods 3 (2): 399–408..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Converse, Philip E. 1972. “Change in the American Electorate.” Pp. 263–337. In The Human Meaning of Social Change, eds. Campbell, Angus and Converse, Philip E.. New York: Sage.Google Scholar
Converse, Philip E. 1974. “Comment on Burnham's ‘Theory and Voting Research.‘” American Political Science Review 68 (3): 1024–27..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cox, Gary W., and Morgan Kousser, J.. 1981. “Turnout and Rural Corruption: New York as a Test Case.” American Journal of Political Science 25 (4): 646–63..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dugan, William E., and Taggart, William A.. 1995. “The Changing Shape of the American Political Universe Revisited.” Journal of Politics 57 (2): 469–82..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engstrom, Erik J. 2012. “The Rise and Decline of Turnout in Congressional Elections: Electoral Institutions, Competition, and Strategic Mobilization.” American Journal of Political Science 56 (2): 373–86..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engstrom, Erik J., and Kernell, Samuel. 2005. “Manufactured Responsiveness: The Impact of State Electoral Laws on Unified Party Control of the Presidency and House of Representatives, 1840-1940.” American Journal of Political Science 49 (3): 531–49..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, Eldon Cobb. 1917. A History of the Australian Ballot System in the United States. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Franklin, Mark N. 2004. Voter Turnout and the Dynamics of Electoral Competition in Established Democracies since 1945. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gamm, Gerald. 1997. “Buried Treasure: Theory and Historical Data.” The Political Methodologist 8 (1): 8–11..Google Scholar
Gentzkow, Matthew, Shapiro, Jesse M., and Sinkinson, Michael. 2011. “The Effect of Newspaper Entry and Exit on Electoral Politics.” American Economic Review 101 (7): 2980–3018..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gomez, Brad T., and Hansford, Thomas G.. 2015. “Economic Retrospection and the Calculus of Voting.” Political Behavior 37 (2): 309–29..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanmer, Michael J. 2009. Discount Voting: Voter Registration Reforms and Their Effects. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harris, Joseph P. 1929. Registration of Voters in the United States. Washington, DC: Brookings.Google Scholar
Hill, Kim Quaile, and Leighley, Jan E.. 1993. “Party Ideology, Organization, and Competitiveness as Mobilizing Forces in Gubernatorial Elections.” American Journal of Political Science 37 (4): 1158–78..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jensen, Richard J. 1971. The Winning of the Midwest: Social and Political Conflict, 1888-1896. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Keyssar, Alexander. 2000. The Right to Vote: The Contested History of Democracy in the United States. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Kleppner, Paul. 1970. The Cross of Culture: A Social Analysis of Midwestern Politics, 1850-1900. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
Kleppner, Paul. 1982a. “Were Women to Blame? Female Suffrage and Voter Turnout.” Journal of Interdisciplinary History 12 (4): 621–43..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kleppner, Paul. 1982b. Who Voted? The Dynamics of Electoral Turnout. New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
Kleppner, Paul, and Baker, Stephen C.. 1980. “The Impact of Voter Registration Requirements on Electoral Turnout, 1900-1916.” Journal of Political and Military Sociology 8 (2): 205–26..Google Scholar
Laracey, Mel. 2008. “The Presidential Newspaper as an Engine of Early American Political Development: The Case of Thomas Jefferson and the Election of 1800.” Rhetoric & Public Affairs 11 (1): 7–46..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luddington, Arthur C. 1911. American Ballot Laws, 1888-1910. New York State Education Department, Bulletin No. 448. Albany: University of the State of New York.Google Scholar
Mayfield, Loomis. 1993. “Voting Fraud in Early Twentieth-Century Pittsburgh.” Journal of Interdisciplinary History 24 (1): 59–84..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayhew, David R. 1986. Placing Parties in American Politics: Organization, Electoral Settings, and Government Activity in the Twentieth Century. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meinke, Scott R. 2008. “Institutional Change and the Electoral Connection in the Senate: Revisiting the Effects of Direct Election.” Political Research Quarterly 61 (3): 445–57..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merriam, Charles E., and Gosnell, Harold F.. 1924. Non-voting: Causes and Methods of Control. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Neiheisel, Jacob R., and Burden, Barry C.. 2012. “The Impact of Election Day Registration on Voter Turnout and Election Outcomes.” American Politics Research 40 (4): 636–64..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nicholson, Stephen P., and Miller, Ross A.. 1997. “Prior Beliefs and Voter Turnout in the 1986 and 1988 Congressional Elections.” Political Research Quarterly 50 (1): 199–213..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nicholson-Crotty, Sean, and Meier, Kenneth J.. 2002. “Size Doesn't Matter: In Defense of Single-State Studies.” State Politics & Policy Quarterly 2 (4): 411–22..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oliver, J. Eric. 1996. “The Effects of Eligibility Restrictions and Party Activity on Absentee Voting and Overall Turnout.” American Journal of Political Science 40 (2): 498–513..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perez, Vanessa M. 2013. “The Effect of Voter Registration and Political Competition on Turnout in America: 1880–1916.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, IL, April 11–14.Google Scholar
Perez, Vanessa M. 2014. “The Effects of Voter Registration and Declining Political Party Competition on Turnout in the United States of America, 1880–1916.” Ph.D. diss., Columbia University.Google Scholar
Petrova, Maria. 2011. “Newspapers and Parties: How Advertising Revenues Created an Independent Press.” American Political Science Review 105 (4): 790–808..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Piven, Frances Fox, and Cloward, Richard A.. 1988. Why Americans Don't Vote. New York: Pantheon Books.Google Scholar
Pomper, Gerald M. 1990. “Party Organization and Electoral Success.” Polity 23 (2): 187–206..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenstone, Steven J., and Hansen, John Mark. 1993. Mobilization, Participation, and Democracy in America. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Rubin, Richard L. 1981. Press, Party, and Presidency. New York: W.W. Norton.Google Scholar
Rusk, Jerrold G. 1974. “Comment: The American Electoral Universe: Speculation and Evidence.” American Political Science Review 68 (3): 1028–49..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shoji, Kaori. 2013. “When Do Party Leaders Democratize? Analyzing Three Reforms of Voter Registration and Candidate Selection.” Ph.D. diss., Columbia University.Google Scholar
Sorauf, Frank J. 1963. Party and Representation: Legislative Politics in Pennsylvania. New York: Atherton Press.Google Scholar
Springer, Melanie Jean. 2012. “State Electoral Institutions and Voter Turnout in Presidential Elections. 1920-2000.” State Politics & Policy Quarterly 12 (3): 252–83..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Springer, Melanie Jean. 2014. How the States Shaped the Nation: American Electoral Institutions and Voter Turnout, 1920-2000. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stein, Robert M., Owens, Chris, and Leighley, Jan. 2003. “Electoral Reform, Party Mobilization, and Voter Turnout.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, IL, April 3–6.Google Scholar
Stein, Robert M., and Vonnahme, Greg. 2011. “Voting at Non-precinct Polling Places: A Review and Research Agenda.” Election Law Journal 10 (3): 307–11..Google Scholar
The Washington Post. 2012. “Obama Campaign Working to Counter New Voter ID Laws.” May 18. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2012/05/18/gIQAABVeZU_story.html (accessed November 9, 2015).Google Scholar
Valelly, Richard M. 1995. “National Parties and Racial Disfranchisement.” Pp. 188–216. In Classifying by Race, ed. Peterson, Paul E.. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Valelly, Richard M. 2004. The Two Reconstructions: The Struggle for Black Enfranchisement. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walker, Jack L. 1966. “Ballot Forms and Voter Fatigue: An Analysis of the Office Block and Party Column Ballots.” Midwest Journal of Political Science 10 (4): 448–62..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ware, Alan. 2000. “Anti-partyism and Party Control of Political Reform in the United States: The Case of the Australian Ballot.” British Journal of Political Science 30:1–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ware, Alan. 2002. The American Direct Primary: Party Institutionalization and Transformation in the North. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: PDF

Neiheisel supplementary material

Appendix

Download Neiheisel supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 3.6 KB