Waiting in Line to Vote Queuing theory helps organize thinking about - PDF document

6/27/2013 • Lines are costly • Lines are not universal Waiting in Line to Vote • Queuing theory helps organize thinking about improvements Charles Stewart III • Research on effective strategies is thin MIT For the Presidential Commission on Election Administration June 28, 2013 Long lines discourage voting Long lines discourage voting • Voting and Registration Supplement (VRS) of the • Voting and Registration Supplement (VRS) of the Current Population Survey Current Population Survey – 500k eligible voters failed to vote because of – 500k eligible voters failed to vote because of inconvenient hours or polling place locations, or lines inconvenient hours or polling place locations, or lines too long too long • Cooperative Congressional Election Study (CCES) • Cooperative Congressional Election Study (CCES) – 730k non ‐ voters due to long lines at the polls – 730k non ‐ voters due to long lines at the polls • Survey of the Performance of American Elections • Survey of the Performance of American Elections (SPAE) (SPAE) – 740k non ‐ voters cite lines as a major factor – 740k non ‐ voters cite lines as a major factor Long lines can reduce voter confidence Long lines can reduce voter confidence Q: How confident are you that your vote was counted as intended?* Q: How confident are you that votes in your county or town were counted as intended?* Election day voters Early voters Election day voters Early voters Waited 10 Waited an hour Waited 10 Waited an hour Waited 10 Waited an hour Waited 10 Waited an hour minutes or less or more minutes or less or more minutes or less or more minutes or less or more 68% 47% 69% 54% 56% 32% 57% 48% *% saying very confident *% saying very confident Source: SPAE 2012 Source: SPAE 2012 1

6/27/2013 Long lines can reduce voter confidence Long lines can reduce voter confidence Q: How confident are you that votes in your state were counted as intended?* Q: How confident are you that votes nationwide were counted as intended?* Election day voters Early voters Election day voters Early voters Waited 10 Waited an hour Waited 10 Waited an hour Waited 10 Waited an hour Waited 10 Waited an hour minutes or less or more minutes or less or more minutes or less or more minutes or less or more 46% 23% 43% 34% 24% 13% 23% 21% *% saying very confident *% saying very confident Source: SPAE 2012 Source: SPAE 2012 Lines impose monetary costs Long lines can reduce voter confidence Q: How confident are you that your vote was counted as intended?* 13.1 minutes average to vote Respondent did not wait at all to vote V Five states with shortest lines Five states with longest lines 105.2 million in ‐ person voters 63% 23% *% saying very confident Source: SPAE 2012 Lines impose monetary costs Lines impose monetary costs 13.1 minutes average to vote 13.1 minutes average to vote V V 105.2 million in ‐ person voters 105.2 million in ‐ person voters 23 million hours waiting 23 million hours waiting V $23.67 average hourly earnings 2

6/27/2013 Lines impose monetary costs Basic Facts 2008 2012 13.1 minutes average to vote Not at all 36.8% 37.3% V Less than 10 minutes 27.6% 31.8% 10 ‐ 30 minutes 19.0% 18.4% 105.2 million in ‐ person voters 31 ‐ 60 minutes 10.3% 8.6% 23 million hours waiting More than one hour 6.3% 3.9% V $23.67 average hourly earnings Average (min.) 16.7 13.3 $544 million N 18,836 30,124 Source: CCES, 2008 and 2012 Basic Facts Basic Facts 2008 2012 2008 2012 Not at all 36.8% 37.3% Not at all 36.8% 37.3% Less than 10 minutes 27.6% 31.8% Less than 10 minutes 27.6% 31.8% 10 ‐ 30 minutes 19.0% 18.4% 10 ‐ 30 minutes 19.0% 18.4% 31 ‐ 60 minutes 10.3% 8.6% 31 ‐ 60 minutes 10.3% 8.6% More than one hour 6.3% 3.9% More than one hour 6.3% 3.9% Average (min.) 16.7 13.3 Average (min.) 16.7 13.3 N 18,836 30,124 N 18,836 30,124 110 minutes 31% of total on average time waiting Source: CCES, 2008 and 2012 Source: CCES, 2008 and 2012 Geography of Waiting Geography of Waiting 40 Avg. minutes waiting to vote 30 20 10 0 VT SD ME DE NJ NM CT MA NV ID CO PA ND UT RI MO MT IL IN NC LA OK SC DC FL AK WY NE IA MN HI CA MS KY WI AZ AL OH NH KS WV TX NY AR TN GA MI VA MD Source: CCES and SPAE, 2012 Source: CCES and SPAE, 2012 3

6/27/2013 Variation within States Variation within Counties Source: Broward County SOE Web site Source: CCES and SPAE, 2012 Variation within Counties Variation within Counties 14 14 157 min min min. Source: Broward County Source: Broward County SOE Web site SOE Web site Variation within Counties State ‐ Level Persistence 50 40 M D FL 86 74 30 V A S C 58 20 M I 14 O K G A LA 157 min N C T N AR IN N Y IL M T T X min. W V 10 R I N H K S M O N D U T O H 2012 AL P A 8 W IC O AZ ID 65 N V K Y M S 7 M A C A C T H I 6 N J M N N M 48 44 IA 5 77 88 N ED E 4 M E W Y 26 S D 3 AK 61 2 51 V T 61 1 100 Source: Broward County 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 20 30 40 50 128 46 SOE Web site Source: CCES and SPAE, 2012 2008 4

6/27/2013 The Demography of Waiting The Demography of Waiting Race Avg. White 11.6 Black 23.3 Early voters = 18 minutes Hispanic 18.7 Asian 15.4 Election Day voters = 12 minutes Native American 13.3 Mixed 13.6 Other 13.3 Middle Eastern 11.7 Source: CCES, 2012 Source: CCES and SPAE, 2012 The Demography of Waiting Queuing Theory 10 9.5 9.5 8 7.1 7.7 Black - White gap in minutes 6 5.0 4.7 4 2 0.8 0.8 0 No controls State County ZIP code Controls Queuing Theory Queuing Theory Prescriptions • Reduce the number of voters coming to the polling place • Increase the number of service points • Reduce average transition times – . 5

6/27/2013 Queuing Theory Prescriptions Queuing Theory Prescriptions • Reduce the number of voters coming to the polling place • Reduce the number of voters coming to the polling place – Increase vote ‐ by ‐ mail – Increase vote ‐ by ‐ mail – Increase early in ‐ person voting – Increase early in ‐ person voting The empirical – Make Election Day a holiday – Make Election Day a holiday evidence • Increase the number of service points • Increase the number of service points suggests the – Increase the number of precincts – Increase the number of precincts opposite – Increase the number of poll workers – Increase the number of poll workers – Increase the number of machines – Increase the number of machines – Favor paper over DREs – Favor paper over DREs • Reduce average transaction times • Reduce average transaction times – Increase information to voters – Increase information to voters – Increase the functionality of electronic poll books – Increase the functionality of electronic poll books – Decrease the length of ballots – Decrease the length of ballots Queuing Theory Prescriptions Queuing Theory Prescriptions • Reduce the number of voters coming to the polling place • Reduce the number of voters coming to the polling place – Increase vote ‐ by ‐ mail – Increase vote ‐ by ‐ mail – Increase early in ‐ person voting – Increase early in ‐ person voting Mixed research – Make Election Day a holiday – Make Election Day a holiday The trend has evidence/ been the • Increase the number of service points • Increase the number of service points popular reform opposite – Increase the number of precincts – Increase the number of precincts – Increase the number of poll workers – Increase the number of poll workers – Increase the number of machines – Increase the number of machines – Favor paper over DREs – Favor paper over DREs • Reduce average transaction times • Reduce average transaction times – Increase information to voters – Increase information to voters – Increase the functionality of electronic poll books – Increase the functionality of electronic poll books – Decrease the length of ballots – Decrease the length of ballots Queuing Theory Prescriptions Queuing Theory Prescriptions • Reduce the number of voters coming to the polling place • Reduce the number of voters coming to the polling place – Increase vote ‐ by ‐ mail – Increase vote ‐ by ‐ mail – Increase early in ‐ person voting – Increase early in ‐ person voting – Make Election Day a holiday – Make Election Day a holiday Emerging • Increase the number of service points • Increase the number of service points literature on Appears to – Increase the number of precincts – Increase the number of precincts machine – Increase the number of poll workers – Increase the number of poll workers be happening allocation – Increase the number of machines – Increase the number of machines for other – Favor paper over DREs – Favor paper over DREs reasons • Reduce average transaction times • Reduce average transaction times – Increase information to voters – Increase information to voters – Increase the functionality of electronic poll books – Increase the functionality of electronic poll books – Decrease the length of ballots – Decrease the length of ballots 6