UC Berkeley Working Papers

Title Bruce Keith's almanac : patterns of voting in California

Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/8gc4r530

Author Keith, Bruce

Publication Date 1988

eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California BRUCE KEITH'S ALMANAC PATTERNS OF VOTING IN CALIFORNIA

Bruce Keith Election Analyst Associated with the Institute of Governmental Studies

INITITUTE OF GOVERNMENTAL STUDIES LIBRARY SEP 18 UNIVERSITY OF CAUFO!

Working Paper 88-26

•iSs:'

INSTITUTE OF GOVERNMENTAL STUDIES UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, BERKELEY BRUCE KEITH'S ALMANAC PATTERNS OF VOTING IN CALIFORNIA

Bruce Keith Election Analyst Associated with the Institute of Governmental Studies

Working Paper 88-26

October 1988 Institute of Governmental Studies University of California Berkeley, CA 94720

Working Papers published by the Institute of Governmental Studies provide quick dissemination of draft reports and papers, preliminary analyses, and papers with a limited audience. The objective is to assist authors in refining their ideas by circulating research results and to stimulate discussion about public policy. Working Papers are reproduced unedited directly from the author's pages. CONTENTS

1. San Joaquin County Voters' Record In 1964-1984 Period Best Of California Counties As Political Barometer For Outcome Of California's 1988 Presidential Race.

2. Los Angeles And Humboldt Counties Back All Presidential Winners Since Favoring Warren G. Harding In 1920.

3. Contra Costa County Voters Compile Record Of "Most Representative" Of California In U. S. Senatorial Elections Of 1964-1986 Period; Sacramento County Voters "Most Representative" Since 1976.

4. Voters In Monterey County Compile Top Record In Choosing Winning U. S. Senatorial Candidates.

5. Voters In San Bernardino, San Joaquin, San Mateo, And Sonoma Counties Pick The Most Winners In All Races Since 1956 For President, Governor, And U. S. Senator.

6. Unmarked Ballots For Major Elective Offices Of U. S. Senator, President, And Governor A Prevailing Practice For Thousands Of California Voters Since 1976.

7. "Declined-to-State" Registrants Growing At Faster Rate Than Eitlier Democrats Or Republicans Since 1976; Have The Numbers To Be Deciding Factor In 1988's Close Elections.

8. "One-Party System" Alive And Well In Elections For Major Offices In Over A Quarter Of California's Counties.

9. More California Democrats Call The Republican Stronghold Of San Diego County "Home" Than They Do Any Other County, Except Los Angeles.

10. San Franciscan Registrants Make Up Larger Percentage Of "No Shows" At General Election Time In The 1970-1986 Period Than Any Other California County's Registrants. 11. Los Angeles County's Dominance Of State Voter Registrant Perceijitages Broken Further In 1972-1988 Period, As Southern Counties Compile Major Gains.

12. Democratic Political Leaders Strive For 30 Percent Registrant Cushion For Democratic Incumbent Assembly, Congressional Members In Reapportioiiment.

-IGS- San Joaquin County Voters' Record In 1964-1984 Period Best Of California Counties

As Political Barometer For Outcome Of California's 1988 Presidential Race

San Joaquin County voters were the "most representative" of the state of

California of all California counties in voting for the President o^ the United

States during the six elections of the 1964-1984 period.

Not only did the San Joaquin County residents maintain the smallest percentage

range from the two-party total of the state vote for the winning carcdidate for

President during this time period, but they compiled the second smallest average percentage difference from the state figures in those six elections. In addition, they placed in the top 20 counties closest to the state voting recoird in five of

the six Presidential elections.

These are some of the several findings made in recent research by the University of California, Berkeley's Institute of Governmental Studies (IGS)

from data originally certified in the California Secretary of State

"Reports of Registration" and "Statements of Vote." Election analyst

Dr. Bruce E. Keith, associated with IGS in its voter research proje(::jts of

the past two decades and co-author of the book, "California Votes, 1960-1972,"

has been investigating and reviewing past and present registration irecords,

election results, and voter participation in California's 58 counties. These

research efforts are directed toward providing information potentially helpful

or interesting to the California voter in the approaching 1988 General Election,

In being the "most representative," a county would have the smallest percent-

age departure from the state, although not necessarily having alvays voted for the state winner. In this instance, however, San Joaquin County venters were on

the side of the six winning California candidates. Being "most representative"

is frequently a fleeting honor. Prior to the 1984 Presidential election, Sonoma

County voters ranked first among the counties, having both the smallest percentage

range difference and the smallest average percentage difference from the state Keith: Most Rep For President page two record for the previous four elections. A very much higher level of support among Sonoma County voters in 1984 for the Mondale candidacy than was present at the state level removed them from contention in this upcoming 1988 election. San Joaquin County ballot casters posted the smallest range of only 2.6 per

cent from the state figure in the six Presidential Elections held since 1964. Monterey County voters compiled the next smallest range of 2.8 percent. All other counties had ranges of 3.5 or more percent differences. The following table displays these percentage differences from California's two-party vote for the Presidency for the eight leading counties in the General Elections since 1964j

Santa Mari- Contra San Mont San Los Tuo + Clara posa Costa Year Joaquin erey Benito Angeles lumneo CO +4.1 -1.8 +4. 3 1964 + 2.6 + 1.5 -1.7 +4.1 +3.2 -4.1 +2.7 1968 -1.2 -2.7 +0.4 +0.8 -0.8 +3.8 -1.8 + 1.6 1972 -1.3 -2.1 -3.5 + 0.4

-0.4 + 1.9 +0.3 1976 -2.6 -1.7 -1.2 +1.9 + 2.4 -2.3 + 1.7 -2.5 + 2.2 1980 -1.4 -2.500 + 0.1 + 3.9 +2.5 -4.2 + 3.2 1984 -2.1 +0.4CM -3.4 +3.0 -0.8 +

4.2 4.3 Range: 2.6 2.8 3.5 3.9 4.1 4.1

In averaging the "closeness" to the state record achieved by California

counties in the Presidential elections since 1964, San Joaquin voters' average percentage difference was a low 1.87 percent, tieing with Tuolumne County resid

ents. Both counties were slightly behind San Benito's ballot casters whose

average difference from the state division of the two-party vote was the smallest with only 1.68 percent. In the period of the last 24 years, these are the

counties with the smallest average percentage differences from the two-party vote

in these Presidential elections: Keith: Most Rep For President page three

Counties With Smallest Average Percentage Differences

Average Difference County From State Percentage (percent)

San Benito 1.68 San Joaquin 1.87 Tuolumne 1.87 Los Angeles 1.95

Monterey 2.03 Sonoma 2.27 Lake 2.32 Siskiyou 2.35

San Joaquin County voters also placed in the top 20 counties closest to the

state division of the vote in five of the six Presidential elections since 1964.

Five other counties also placed in five of the elections/ and three counties

placed in four of the races. These are the nine counties who placed most freq

uently in the top 20 counties in those elections:

County 1964 1968 1972 1976 1980 1984

San Joaquin 18th .7th 12th 8 th 12th Tuolumne 5th* 7th 20th 13 th 6th Sonoma 16th 9th 2nd 9th 15th

Los Angeles 13th 5th* 4th 18th* 16th Contra Costa 17th* 14th 4th 12th 18th Monterey 17th* 17th 15th 18th* 2nd

San Benito 11th 2nd nth 1st Lake 15th 8th 2nd 13th Mariposa 14th 15th 18th* 18th*

Note: * = tie

Being "most representative" of California's voting habits for any particular

period is a title most difficult for a county's voters to attain and almost imposs

ible to retain from General Election to General Election. In the 1964-1984 period

of Presidential elections/ 47 of the 58 counties placed in the top 20 counties Keith: Most Rep For President page four at least once. Twenty-one of the counties were among the top 20 in three — or one-half — of the Presidential elections. Consistency is illusive and honors for this title become a contest, not among the few, but among the many. It is frequently the case that exuberance over any one candidate in any one election may be all that is needed to derail any aspirations that a county's supporters may harbor for attainment of the distinction of being the "most representative" county. Nevertheless, for the 1988 Presidential Election, San Joaquin voters may claim the title!

-ICS- Los Angeles And Humboldt Counties Back All Presidential Winners

Since Favoring Warren G. Harding In 1920

Voters in Los Angeles and Humboldt Counties have picked the national winner of every Presidential General Election since 1920. Looking at the historical results of these past 17 elections, it can be proclaimed that "As Los Angeles and Humboldt Counties go, so goes the nation!"

The largest number of voters of these two California counties have backed the national winning candidate for President since the General Election of 1920, when they favored Warren G. Harding, the Republican candidate and the nation's

29th President-to-be. For 17 consecutive Presidential elections, the voters of these two counties have chosen the candidate who won the nation's highest office

— nine of whom were Democrats and eight of whom were Republicans.

Ventura, Siskiyou, and El Dorado Counties' voters have compiled only slightly less impressive national winning Presidential records since 1920. Ventura County selected only one loser, while Siskiyou and El Dorado counties gave two losers more of their votes.

These are some of the several findings-made in recent research by the

University of California, Berkeley's Institute of Governmental Studies (IGS) from data originally certified in the California Secretary of State's

"Reports of Registration" and "Statements of Vote." Election analyst

These research efforts are directed toward providing information potentially helpful or interesting to the California voter in the approaching 1988

General Election. Keith: Selecting National Presidential Winners page two

With two exceptions since 1916, California has always voted for the nation's

Presidential winner. In 1960, California gave more of its votes to native son

Richard M. Nixon than it did to John F. Kennedy, and in 1976, the Golden State's electoral votes went to Republican Gerald R. Ford rather than to presidential winner Jimmie Carter. In 1916, however, Los Angeles and Humboldt Counties' voters backed the loser. Republican Charles Evans Hughes, who became the Chief Justice of the U. S. Supreme Court in 1930. California ended up in the camp of the 1916 national winner. Democratic candidate Woodrow Wilson, who accumulated a margin of approximately 3,400 votes over Hughes.

In 1920, Californians voted for a political party slate of 13 electors

(based on 11 representatives and 2 senators) for President and Vice President of the United States, rather than casting a ballot directly for a party's presidential candidate. In 1988, California will have 47 votes in the Electoral

College — more than three and one-half times as many as 68 years ago.

Both counties, however, have barely squeaked by with less than a one-percent margin for the presidential winner on, at least, two occasions. In fact, since

1920, Los Angeles County has backed the national presidential winner three differ ent times by less than a one-percent margin. The smallest victory percentage that

Los Angeles County gave a presidential winner was Harry S. Truman in 1948, when he received 50.3 percent of the two-party vote and a ballot margin of 8,458 over

Republican Thomas E. Dewey of 1,729,082 votes cast by that county. Other close elections were 1960, when John Kennedy received 50.4 percent of the Los Angeles vote, and 1968, when Richard Nixon got 50.9 percent.

Humboldt County had some close calls, too. In 1968, it gave Richard Nixon

50.4 percent of the two-party vote, and a ballot margin of only 243 over Hubert

H. Humphrey of 36,214 votes cast. The 1948 election was close with Humboldt

County giving Harry S. Truman a 50.6 percent winning total. Keith: Selecting National Presidential Winners page three

Ventura County voters' one variance from a winning record came in 1976f when they favored state-winner Gerald R. Ford over Georgian Jimmie Carter, Siskiyou and El Dorado Counties' voters backed only two national losers since 1920.

Siskiyou voters, like Ventura, selected Ford over Carter, while casting more of their votes in 1924 for loser Progressive candidate Robert M. LaFollette than for

Republican incumbent Calvin Coolidge. Democrat John W. Davis finished third.

El Dorado voters have consistently chosen national winners since 1932, but gave more of their votes in 1924 to LaFollette than to winner Coolidge, and, in 1928, to Democrat Alfred E. Smith than to Republican Herbert C. Hoover.

A comparison of the voters of Los Angeles and Humboldt Counties with those in many other California counties demonstrates that large numbers of the voters of these two counties in the past four decades have exhibited a willingness to vote for a candidate of either party for the executive offices of President and

Governor, regardless of those voters' registered party affiliation. Both counties have had Democratic majorities of the two-party registration since 1944, and a

Democratic majoritiy of over 60 percent of the two-party registration since 1958.

Yet when the ballots have been counted over the past four decades for the offices of President and Governor, each county has favored both Democratic and Republican candidates.

Since 1954, for example, both Los Angeles and Humboldt Counties' voters cast more of their ballots for the eight winners (five Republicans, three Democrats) in the Presidential contests, and for eight (four Republicans, four Democrats) of the nine winners in the gubernatorial races. Only in the 1982 Governor's election, did both counties favor the loser — the Mayor of the City of Los Angeles, Demo crat Tom Bradley, over winner George Deukmejian. This avoidance of rigid party constraints by the voters when making their choice has enabled Los Angeles and

Humboldt Counties to consistently select Presidential winners since 1920.

-IGS- Contra Costa County Voters Compile Record Of "Most Representative" Of

California In U. S. Senatorial Elections Of 1964-1986 Period;

Sacramento County Voters "Most Representative" Since 1976

Contra Costa County voters edged out Mendocino County and Lake County voters to compile a voting record of being the "most representative" of the State of

California of any California county in voting for U. S. Senator during the eight elections of the 1964-1986 period. However, Sacramento County ballot casters have been the "most representative" of any California county in voting for U. S. Senator in the most recent four elections since 1976.

These counties more consistently voted the closest to the percentage divi sion of the two-party total of the state vote for the winning candidate for U. S.

Senator for their particular time period. They had the smallest percentage departure from the state, although not always voting for the winner, as in 1964.

These are some of the several findings made in recent research by the

University of California, Berkeley's Institute of Governmental Studies (IGS) from data originally certified in the California Secretary of State's

"Reports of Registration" and "Statements of Vote." Election analyst

Dr. Bruce E. Keith, associated with IGS in its voter research projects of the past two decades and co-author of the book, "California Votes, 1960-1972," has been investigating and reviewing past and present registration records, election results, and voter participation in California's 58 counties. These research efforts are directed toward providing information potentially helpful or interesting to the California voter in the approaching 1988 General Election.

Contra Costa County voters tied for first with Mendocino County voters in posting the smallest range of 5.0 percent from the state figure in the eight elections held since 1964, but led all counties in compiling the smallest average difference of only 2.03 percent from the state figures. Mendocino

County citizens, with an average difference of 2.86 percent, placed seventh among Keith: Most Rep Senator page tvo the counties. Lake County residents were third with a range of 5.5 percent from the state division of the two-party total, and came in sixth with an average diff erence of 2.71 percent. Sacramento County voters, with a 7.5 percent difference, ranked 12th in range, and 13th with their average difference of 3.38 percent.

The following table displays the percentage differences from California's two- party vote for U. S. Senator for the eight leading counties in the General Elec tions of the last 24 years:

Contra Mendo- Lake Hont- Sonoma Los Santa San Year Costa cino erey Angeles Barbara Joaquin

1964 + 1.9 +4.6 -2.5 0.0 +0.3 -1.3 -2.7 +0.4 1968 +2.5 + 1.5 -4.6 -2.2 -1.8 -0.3 -6.2 -0.5 1970 + 1.3 +0.8 -5.5 0.0 -3.2 +0.3 -3.4 -3.3 1974 +5.0 +5.0 +0.7 -2.2 +4.3 -1.1 -1.1 +0.5

1976 +0.1 +2.7 +0.4 -5.1 + 2.0 +3.4 +0.9 -2.5 1980 +3.7 +3.3 -3.2 + 5.6 +5.7 -0.2 +2.0 -2.4 1982 -0.8 -1.5 -3.5 -2.8 -1.0 +5.7 -3.4 -3.9 1986 +0.9 +3.5 -1.3 -0.3 +4.8 + 5.2 -3.8 -6.4

Range: 5.0 5.0 5.5 5.6 5.7 5.7 6.2 6.4

In averaging the "closeness" to the state achieved by California counties since 1964, Contra Costa County's average percentage difference was only 2.03, followed by Los Angeles County with 2.19 percent. In the period of the last 24 years, these are the counties with the smallest average percentage differences from the two-party total in these U. S. Senatorial elections:

Average Difference County From State Percentage (percent)

Contra Costa 2.03 Los Angeles 2.19 Monterey 2.28 Napa 2.46

San Joaquin 2.49 Lake 2.71 Mendocino 2.86 Sonoma 2.89 Keith: Most Rep Senator page three

In the four Senatorial elections since 1976, however, Sacramento County voters stood first among the counties, having both the smallest percentage range (2.1) and the smallest average percentage difference (1.33) from the two-party total of the

state vote. Sierra County voters ranked second with a 3.2 percentage difference

in range, and third with an average difference of 1.73 percent. For the longer

period since 1964, Sierra County residents came in 24th in range and 18th with

their average difference.

Contra Costa County voters placed second for this period since 1976 with an

average difference of only 1.38 percent, but were fifth with a range of 3.7 percent.

Lake County ballot casters with a range of 3.5 percent tied for third with the

Mendocino County voters, and ranked fourth with their average difference of 2.10

percent. Mendocino County voters were eighth with their average difference of 2.75

percent.

The following table presents the percentage differences from California's

two-party vote for Senator for the eight leading counties in the General Elections

of 1976-1986:

Sacram Sierra Lake Mendo Contra Santa Stanis Mont Year ento cino Costa Barbara laus erey

1976 -1.1 +2.6 +0.4 +2.7 +0.1 +0.9 +1.3 -5.1 1980 + 1.4 -0.1 -3.2 +3.3 +3.7 +2.0 +0.6 +5.6 1982 +2.1 -1.0 -3.5 -1.5 -0.8 -3.4 -3.5 -2.8 1986 +0.7 -3.2 -1.3 +3.5 +0.9 -3.8 -5.1 -0.3

Range: 2.1 3.2 3.5 3.5 3.7 3.8 5.1 5.6

In averaging the "closeness" to the state achieved by California counties in

the 1976-1986 Senatorial elections, Sacramento County voters won the honors as

"most representative" with Contra Costa County attaining second place. These data

display the leaders in average closeness to the state two-party percentage totals Keith: Most Rep Senator page four

in the 1976-1986 General Elections for U. S. Senator:

Average Difference County From State Percentage (percent)

Sacramento 1.33 Contra Costa 1.38 Sierra 1.73 Lake 2.10

Santa Barbara 2.53 Santa Clara 2.53 Stanislaus 2.63 Mendocino 2.75

A single election can greatly increase a county's percentage range or average percentage difference from the state division of the two-party vote total. Prior to the 1986 Senatorial election, voters in San Joaquin County had ranked "most representative" of California for the period of 1962-1982 (the previous Senatorial election). However, in 1986, San Joaquin voters cast 6.4 percent more Republican ballots for candidate Ed Zschau than the state percentage, and fell seven places among the counties in range and four places in average difference.

For a county's ballot casters to divide their votes for the two major candi dates in a manner similar to the poll-going citizens of the entire state is most difficult — particularly when that county's number of voters is not a large per centage of the entire state. Variance in voter turnout, composition of each county's electorate, voter perception of the major parties' Senatorial candidates, and the nature of the propositions on the ballot contribute heavily to these irregularities. "Most representative" honors for California counties in voting for U. S. Senator can often be fleeting.

-IGS- Voters in Monterey County Compile Top Record In Choosing

Winning U. S. Senatorial Candidates

Monterey County voters have backed 25 of the 26 winning candidates for

U. S. Senator in the November General Elections since California's first popular election of U. S. Senators was held in 1914. In addition, Monterey County voters hold the current state record, beginning in 1940, of selecting 17 consecutive winners in the U. S. Senatorial races. Voters in no other California county have matched the records of this county in the U. S. Senate elections for the present period since the adoption of the 17th Amendment to the U. S. Constitution in 1913, requiring popular election. Before 1914, U. S. Senators were chosen by the state legislatures.

These are some of the several findings made in recent research by the

University of California, Berkeley's Institute of Governmental Studies (IGS) from data originally certified in the California Secretary of State's

"Reports of Registration" and "Statements of Vote." Election analyst

These research efforts are directed toward providing information potentially helpful or interesting to the California voter in the approaching 1988

General Election.

El Dorado County voters have the second best record in selecting 24 of the

26 winning U. S. Senators, while voters in Modoc, Los Angeles, and Sacramento

Counties are tied for the third best record of choosing 23 of the winners.

Monterey County voters' lone lapse in picking the winner occurred in 1938, when that county gave Republican Philip Bancroft 1,982 more votes than it did to Keith; Monterey County - Winning Senators page two state-winner Sheridan Downey, who was the candidate for the Democratic,

Progressive, and Townsend political parties. Downey's win marked the first time since popular election of U. S. Senators began in California in 1914 that a

Democratic candidate had won the Senatorial race by a majority vote. Monterey

County voters remained in the winner's column by less than 400 votes, however, in two elections. In 1968, they gave winner Democrat Alan Cranston only 332 more votes than his Republican opponent Max Rafferty, and, in 1932, Democratic winner William G. McAdoo's margin was limited to 382 votes over Republican

Tallant Tubbs.

El Dorado County voters, however, with their choice of a total of 24 winners, hold the all-time California record of a successful streak of 23 consecutive winning selections for U. S. Senator from 1914 through 1976, before they voted for the losing candidate at the time of the 1980 General Election. In 1980, they gave state-winner Cranston 40 less votes than they did loser Republican Paul Gann.

In 1986, they again favored a Cranston opponent. Republican Ed Zschau, by more than 5,000 votes.

Prior to 1980, there had been four elections in which El Dorado County voters selected the winner by a margin of less than 500 votes. Closest of these occurred in 1916, when they gave state-winner Hiram W. Johnson (Progressive,

Republican) a very slim 13 more votes than Democrat George S. Patton. In 1920, they gave state-winner Republican Samuel M. Shortridge a winning margin of only

103 votes.

Voters in Modoc, Los Angeles, and Sacramento Counties have each given the winning Senator the lead in 23 of the 26 contests. Modoc County voters have backed all winners in the U. S. Senatorial races except those of 1916, 1980, and

1986. In 1916, state-winner Progressive-Republican Johnson failed to get Modoc Keith; Monterey County — Winning Senators page three

County voter approval, losing by 83 votes to Democrat Patton. In 1980, Democrat

Cranston received 64 less votes than his opponent. Republican Gann, and in 1986, Cranston lost by 313 votes to Republican Zschau. Modoc County voters had close calls in 1938 and 1946. In 1938, they gave winner Downey only 25 more votes than loser Bancroft, while, in 1946, Republican winner William F. Knowland received only 104 more votes than runner-up Democrat Will Rogers, Jr. Los Angeles County voters backed the loser in the 1914, 1976, and 1982 elections. In California's first Senatorial popular election, Los Angeles gave state-winner Democrat James D. Phelan 20,421 fewer votes than the state's second- place winner. Progressive candidate Francis J. Heney, and 5,879 fewer votes than the third-place candidate. Republican Joseph R. Knowland. In 1976 and 1982, Los Angeles voters favored losers Democrats John Tunney and Edmund G. Brown, Jr. over Republican winners, S. I. Hayakawa and Pete Wilson, respectively. The losing candidate received more votes than the state winner in Sacramento County in 1920, 1956, and 1964. In 1920, inctimbent and state-loser Democrat

Phelan received 627 more votes than did state-winner Shortridge, while Sacram ento County voters were giving Prohibition Party candidate James S. Edwards 1,202 votes, and 570 votes to Socialist Pary candidate Elvina S. Beals. In 1956,

loser Democrat Richard Richards polled 185 more votes than did Republican Thomas

H. Kuchel, and, in 1964, Democrat Pierre Salinger received more votes than did

state-winner Republican George Murphy.

Voters in Monterey County have an opportunity to solidify further their

records of choosing the champion in the U. S. Senate race in the November

General Election. Will the combined judgment of this county's voters once again

be equal to the task of selecting the winner?

-IGS- Voters In San Bernardino, San Joaquin, San Mateo, and Sonoma Counties Pick The

Most Winners In All Races Since 1956 For President, Governor, and U. S. Senator

Picking the California winners these last 30 years in the General Elections

for President, Governor, and U. S. Senator seems to have come naturally for the voters in four California counties. In the 1956-1986 period, San Bernardino, San

Joaquin, San Mateo, and Sonoma Counties selected the winning candidates in 25 of

the 27 elections — deviating only twice in 30 years from their winning ways to

lead all of the other counties.

San Bernardino and San Joaquin Counties had shared the leadership in picking

the winners of the last 30 years up until the 1986 General Election, when both

favored Republican Ed Zschau over winner Democrat Allan Cranston in the U. S.

Senatorial election. San Mateo and Sonoma Counties gave Cranston more of their votes to add to their numbers of winning choices, and tie the previous leaders.

These are some of the several findings made in recent research by the

University of California, Berkeley's Institute of Governmental Studies (IGS)

from data originally certified in the California Secretary of State's

"Reports of Registration" and "Statements of Vote." Election analyst

Dr. Bruce E. Keith, associated with IGS in its voter research projects of

the past two decades and co-author of the book, "California Votes, 1960-1972,"

has been investigating and reviewing past and present registration records,

election results, and voter participation in California's 58 counties. These

research efforts are directed toward providing information potentially helpful

or interesting to the California voter in the approaching 1988 General Election.

Only once before in this 30-year period — in the 1968 Senatorial election,

when Cranston defeated Republican Max Rafferty — did San Bernardino County voters

fail to choose the successful candidate. San Joaquin voters backed loser Repub

lican Houston I. Flournoy for Governor over Democrat Edmund G. Brown, Jr. in 1974. Keith: Picking Triple Winners page two

San Mateo County voters preferred Democrat Tom Bradley in his 1982 race for

Governor over winner Republican George Deukmejian, and, in the 1968 Presidential

election, chose Democrat Hubert H. Humphrey over Republican Richard M. Nixon.

Voters in Sonoma County likewise favored Bradley in the 1982 gubernatorial elec

tion, but, in 1962, gave more of their votes to Nixon in his race for Governor

than they did to winner incumbent Democrat Edmund G. Brown, Sr.

Four counties voted for the winning candidate in 24 of the 27 elections

held since 1956 for the three major offices. Those counties and the elections at

which they voted for the losers are shown in the table below:

County 1986 1982 1978 1976 1974 1968 1964 Sen Gov Gov Pres Gov Pres Sen

Colusa XXX

San Luis Obispo X XX

Tehama X XX

Santa Clara X XX

The 1976 Presidential race involved Republican Gerald Ford and Democrat Jimmie

Carter, while the 1964 Senatorial contest featured Republican George Murphy and

Democrat Pierre Salinger.

Since 1976, Contra Costa County has picked 10 straight winners, the best

current record for the number of consecutive winners. Tied for the second-place

spot are the voters of Lessen, Solano, and Sacramento Counties, who have picked

each of the eight winners since 1978. The 1986 Senatorial election destroyed the

chances of 42 of the 58 counties, who voted for loser Republican Ed Zschau.

During this 1956-1986 period, San Joaguin, Colusa, and Modoc Counties each

posted 16 consecutive winning choices. The six counties with records of longest

consecutive winning selections and the period in which they compiled their

records are shown below: Keith: Picking Triple Winners page three

County Number of Consecutive Period Winning Selections

San Joaquin 16 1956-1974 Colusa 16 1956-1974 Modoc 16 1956-1974

Sonoma 15 1964-1980 San Bernardino 14 1968-1984 Los Angeles 12 1962-1974

In addition/ voters of San Bernardino County posted an additional record of 10 consecutive winning selections in 1956-1966/ and San Mateo County voters success fully picked 10 consecutive winners in the periods of 1956-1966 and of 1970-1980, Predicting counties whose voters will chose winning candidates in a specific upcoming General Election is hazardous. That Contra Costa County voters with only ten consecutive selections presently lead all other counties/ having avoided choosing a losing candidate since favoring Republican Flournoy for Governor in

1974/ demonstrates the difficulty. Nevertheless/ those few counties with the leading records over the 30-year period have a better-than-average opportunity to repeat their winning ways this November.

-IGS- Unmarked Ballots For Major Elective Offices Of U. S. Senator, President, And

Governor A Prevailing Practice For Thousands Of California Voters Since 1976

Californians going to the polls at General Election time since 1976 left behind almost three million unmarked selections in the ten contests for U. S. Senator, President, and Governor — a total of 2,916,168 nondecisions. During this period since 1976, four of those ten races were decided by a smaller margin than the unmarked ballots for that office. "Drop-off" is the term most commonly applied to this casting of an incomplete ballot, the failure to vote for any candidate for an office or the withholding of a vote for a particular ballot proposition. Since 1976, poll-going citizens of

San Francisco and Alameda Counties have done this more frequently and with greater

intensity than do those of any of the other 56 counties.

These are some of the several findings made in recent research by the University of California, Berkeley's Institute of Governmental Studies (IGS)

from data originally certified in the California Secretary of State's "Reports of Registration" and "Statements of Vote." Election analyst Dr. Bruce E. Keith, associated with IGS in its voter research projects of the past two decades and co-author of the book, "California Votes, 1960-1972,"

has been investigating and reviewing past and present registration records,

election results, and voter participation in California's 58 counties. These

research efforts are directed toward providing information potentially helpful or interesting to the California voter in the approaching 1988 General Election.

In General Elections since 1976, the two elections having the largest number

of unmarked ballots for a major office were both races for U. S. Senator. Pres idential races provided the next largest number, while contests for Governor found

the smallest number of voters not completing their ballots. Those ten election

races since 1976, which produced almost three million unmarked ballots, are shown

in the following table: Keith: Drop-Off page two

Unmarked Ballots For The 1976-1986 General Elections

Year Office Number Of Unmarked Percentage Ballots For That Office Of Drop-Off

1976 U. S. Senator 664/934 8.18 President 270/085 3.32 1978 Governor 210/937 2.96 1980 U. S. Senator 450/120 5.13 President 189/638 2.16

1982 U. S. Senator 258/864 3.21 Governor 187/979 2.34 1984 President 291/334 2.97 1986 U. S. Senator 218/620 2.88 Governor 173/657 2.28

Total of unmarked ballots: 2/916/168

The phenomenon of the winner's victory margin in a General Election being

smaller than the number of unmarked ballots for a particular major office has

occurred seven times in California/ most recently in the 1986 U* S. Senatorial

race between Democrat Alan Cranston and Republican Ed Zschau. A total of

218/620 ballots were unmarked by those going to the polls in that race/ which

Cranston won by a margin of only 104/868.

The number of unmarked ballots exceeding the winner's margin took place for

the first time in California in the U. S. Senatorial race in 1944. Since then,

it has occurred in the 1948/ 1960/ and 1976 Presidential contests/ in the 1976

and 1986 Senatorial elections/ and in the 1982 Governor's race. The following

table presents the seven races when the victor's margin was less than the number

of incompleted ballots:

Year Office Winner Winner's Unmarked Ballots Margin For That Office

1948 President Harry S. Truman 17/865 65/477 1960 President Richard M. Nixon 35/623 86/013 1982 Governor George Deukmejian 93/345 187/979 1986 U- S. Senator Alan Cranston 104/868 218/620 1976 President Gerald R. Ford 139/960 270/085 1944 U. S. Senator Sheridan Downey 151/602 263/209 1976 U. S. Senator S. I. Hayakawa 246/111 664/934 Keith: Drop-Off page three

Poll goers in certain California counties tend to leave unmarked selections

in more candidate races and to a greater percentage in those elections. In

rating the top 20 counties with the highest percentages of unmarked selections

for each major office race, San Francisco County was the only one to place in the top 20 in all races since 1976, while Alameda County placed in all but one of the contests. In addition, San Francisco placed in the top 10 counties in eight of the ballot competitions. Imperial and Los Angeles Counties placed in the top 20 counties in eight of the races with Imperial being in the top 10 counties in five of those contests. This table displays those results in the 10 elections since

1976:

State Standings For Top 20 Counties For Highest Percentage Of Unmarked Ballots

County 1976 1976 1978 1980 1980 1982 1982 1984 1986 1986 Sen Pres Gov Sen Pres Gov Sen Pres Gov Sen

San Francisco 5 th 6 th 1st 13th 3rd 4 th 11th 14th 1st 7 th Alameda 7 th 5th 5 th 8 th 6th 17th 20th 3rd 10th Los Angeles 1st 11th 20th 14th 16th 17th 2nd 8 th Imperial 11th 7 th 18th 1st 3rd 4th 3rd 20th Fresno 12th 7 th 20th 12th 9 th 4th nth Tulare 9th 20th 13th 22th 19th 6 th 19th

Low voter turnout tends to be associated with "drop-off." Registrants of San

Francisco, Alameda, and Fresno Counties also led the registrants of all other

California counties since 1970 in the percentage of those who register to vote, and then choose not to go to the polls

In many instances, a large number of unmarked ballots was usually a sign

that the general voting public perceived the race as one-sided, and that the presence or absence of one individual's vote could not possibly affect the outcome. Lack of specific knowledge of, or voter enthusiasm for, both major Keith: Drop-Off page four party candidates have been other explanations^ Further^ the nature of a local ity's political culture appears to enhance or discourage this practice.

Californians registered to vote can expect to be exhorted with ever increas ing intensity in the remaining days before the upcoming November General Election, not only to go to the polls, but to make certain that one actually marks one's ballot for the specific offices. Even so, the phenomenon of the unmarked ballot can be expected to continue in California elections. "Drop-off" is becoming almost as big a factor as "getting out the vote" in determining election outcomes.

-ICS- "Declined-to-State" Registrants Growing At Faster Rate Than Either Democrats

Or Republicans Since 1976; Have The Numbers To Be Deciding Factor

In 1988*s Close Elections

The fastest growing group of California registrants in the last 12 years since the Presidential Election of 1976 has been those who have registered under

the label of "declined-to-state" (D/S). In fact, the rate of growth of these D/S

registrants since 1976 exceeds by more than five times the growth rate of the Demo

crats, and is more than one and two-thirds the growth rate of the Republicans. At

the time of the 1988 Primary Election, they numbered 1,107,515, and comprised 8.8 percent of all California registrants. Their present numbers, as shown below, represent 64.0 percent more individuals who classified themselves as "declined-to-

state" than had been the case at election time in 1976.

Group 1976 General 1988 Primary Rate Of Change Election Election (percent)

11.4 Democrats 5,725,718 6,380,397 Republicans 3,468,439 4,782,248 37.9 Declined-to-state 675,209 1,107,515 64.0

25.6 All: 9,980.488 12,537,207

These are some of the several findings made in recent research by the University of California, Berkeley's Institute of Governmental Studies (IGS)

from data originally certified in the California Secretary of State's

"Reports of Registration" and "Statements of Vote." Election analyst

Dr. Bruce E. Keith, associated with IGS in its voter research projects of the past two decades and co-author of the book, "California Votes, 1960-1972,

has been investigating and reviewing past and present registration records,

election results, and voter participation in California's 58 counties. These

research efforts are directed toward providing information potentially helpful or interesting to the California voter in the approaching 1988 General Election, Keith: Declined-to-state page two

Between the General Elections of 1968 and 1984, the number of D/S regis trants steadily increased. Since 1984, however, their numbers have settled between 1.1 and 1.2 million registrants, while their percentages have solidified at slightly under nine percent of California's total registrants. Since the Presidential Election of 1976 up until the June 1988 Primary Election, their per centage share of the total registrants has increased 129 percent. These statis

tics illustrate their increasing numbers and their percentage of total registrants:

Year/Election D/S Total Percent of Total Registrants

1968 General 233,589 2.7 1972 General 615,817 5*9 1976 General 675.209 6.8

1980 General 1,070,852 9-4 1984 General 1,192,723 9.1 1988 Primary 1,107,515 8.8

California's D/S registrants for the 1988 Primary Election outnumbered all "third

party" and miscellaneous registrants combined by more than four to one.

In the last Presidential Election of 1984, the resulting voter turnout was

74.9 percent — approximately three of every four registrants went to the polls.

If only 60 percent or three of five of May 1988's D/S registrants go to the polls

this November and vote, they would be casting 664,509 ballots — ballots that

could very well be the decisive ones in either the upcoming election for D. S.

Senator or for California's electoral vote for the Presidency. Since 1968, five

U. S. Senatorial elections (1968, 1970, 1976, 1982, and 1986) and two Presidential

races (1968 and 1976) have been won by margins much smaller than 60 percent of

the 1988 Primary D/S registrants.

Five counties — led by Los Angeles County — have more than one-half of all

of California's D/S registrants. Nine of the 10 California counties with the most Keith: Declined-to-state page three

D/S registrants are among the 10 counties with the largest overall registrant totals. These are the D/S registrant totals for the top California counties at the time of the 1988 Primary Election:

County Number of D/S

Los Angeles 261^760 San Diego 125/065 Orange 87/682 Santa Clara 73/491 Alameda 63/848

San Francisco 49/454 Sacramento 39/911 San Bernardino 39/753 Contra Costa 37/142 San Mateo 32/459

In 15 of the 58 counties/ at least one of 10 registrants was a "D/S" at the

time of the 1988 Primary Election. Ten of these 15 counties have more than

115/000 registrants representing California's several political parties and those

with the D/S designation. San Francisco/ Marin/ and San Diego Counties have the

largest D/S percentages of these more populated counties, as shown below:

County D/S Percent Of Total

San Francisco 12.9 Marin 11.8 San Diego 11.4 Santa Barbara 11.3 Santa Clara 10.9

Santa Cruz 10.8 Solano 10.7 San Mateo 10.7 Monterey 10.3 Alameda 10.2

counties with the lesser number of registrants/ Alpine

percent/ followed by Mono County with 15.9 percent and

with 12.7 percent, Keith: Declined-to-state page four

For elections within the state/ the number of D/S registrants is equally significant. On a statewide basis/ D/S registrants number slightly less than one

to four Republicans and slightly more than one to six Democrats. Nine counties

have at least one D/S registrant for every three Republican registrants/ and 16 counties have at least one D/S registrant for every five Democratic registrants. San Francisco has more than one D/S registrant for every two Republicans/ and MonO/ Alpine/ San Diego/ Santa Barbara/ and Del Norte Counties have at least one

D/S registrant for every four Democrats. As Election Day approaches and several races appear to becoming close/ candidates are once again being made aware that there are more than enough "declined-to-state" registrants to determine the winners for several offices

throughout the state.

-IGS- "One-Party System" Alive And Well In Elections For Major Offices

In Over A Quarter Of California's Counties

California's "two-party system" may get a lot of lip service in an election yearr but for many Californians the "two-party" designation has seldom, if ever, accurately described their county in the major electoral races. In fact for 15

California counties, the "one-party system" has been very much alive and well for some time.

During 1960-1986, these 15 (3 Democrat, 12 Republican) California counties cast 56 or more percent of their two-party vote for candidates of the same party in the major elections for President, Governor, and U. S. Senator. Further, in the 1960-1986 period, these three Democratic counties gave Democratic candidates the most votes in 93 percent of these major elections; the 12 Republican counties gave Republican candidates the most votes in 86 percent of them.

Yet of these 12 "Republican" counties during the 1960-1986 period, the aver age percentage of registered Democrats of the two-party registration exceeded Rep ublican registrants in all but three counties. With the alignment of Democratic voters in consistent support of Republican candidates in the major elections in these counties, however, the two-party system has operated primarily in name only.

These are some of the several findings made in recent research by the

University of California, Berkeley's Institute of Governmental Studies (IGS) from data originally certified in the California Secretary of State's

"Reports of Registration" and "Statements of Vote." Election analyst

California, as measured by registration of voters, has been, in relation to the two parties, a Democratic state by an approximate ratio of 3 to 2 since 1936

— 52 years ago. Even so, on a statewide basis. Republicans have made it a two-party fight for the major offices of President, Governor, and U. S. Senator.

In those 44 elections during 1936-1986, Republicans have been victors in 26 of the contests, while the Democrats have won in 18.

However, there are counties within the state which have been one-party strongholds for several years. In the major elections beginning in 1960, for example, San Francisco County has cast over 64 percent of its vote for Democratic candidates to lead the state's Democratic counties. In the seven elections since

1980, San Franciscans have been even more Democratic, giving Democratic candidates more than 69 percent of their two-party vote. These are the six "most Democratic" counties since 1960 as measured by the Democratic percentage of the two-party vote in the major elections: Democratic Percentage County Of The Two-Party Vote

San Francisco 64.6 Alameda 60.1 Yolo 57.1

Solano 54.9 Plumas 54.1 Humboldt 53.0

In addition, at the time of the 1988 Primary Election, these six counties' registration averaged 59 percent Democratic, having an average of 30 percent more registered Democrats than registered Republicans.

Democratic candidates for both the major political and the state legislative offices have been particularly successful in these counties. Only one of the major political elections since 1960 disrupted the regular pattern of Democratic voting. This was in the 1962 U. S. Senatorial campaign won by Republican Thomas

H. Kuchel, who carried all of the 58 counties. With that exception. Democratic Keith: One-Party System page three

candidates in San Francisco and Alameda Counties have won in each of the remaining

22 major elections. Democratic candidates were victors in 20 elections in Yolo

Countyf and in 16 elections in Plumas County.

There is even a larger number of counties in the state that are just as strongly "more Republican." Mono County has been the leading citadel of the

Republican party, casting more than 64 percent of its vote for Republican candi dates in the 1960-1986 period. Orange, Sutter, and Inyo Counties have also been prominent Republican centers, having given Republican office seekers in major races over 61 percent of the two-party vote in the same period.

Although "Republican" counties outnumber "Democratic" counties 12 to 3, the total registrants of seven of the lesser populated Republican counties combined still falls over 16,000 registrants short of the number of registrants on the rolls of Democratically-inclined Yolo County.

These are the 12 counties since 1960, that have given 56 or more percent of their two-party vote to Republican candidates in the 23 major elections:

Republican Percentage County Of The Two-Party Vote

Mono 64.2 Orange 63.4 Sutter 62.4 Inyo 61.3

Glenn 59.9 Alpine 58.9 Butte 58.5 Calaveras 57.5

San Diego 57.2 Modoc 57.1 Nevada 57.0 Colusa 56.0

Regardless of the vote, during the period 1960-1986, only Alpine, Orange, and Mono Counties had an average of more registered Republicans than registered

Democrats. Eight of the 12 "Republican" counties voted, at least, an average of Keith: One-Party System page four

11.8 percent "more Republican" than the percentage of their Republican two-party registration. These are those eight counties in the order in which their voting exceeded their Republican registration:

Percentage More Than County Republican Registration

Glenn 17.3 Sutter 15.9 Modoc 15.2 Calaveras 14.9

Inyo 14.6 Colusa 14.5 Butte 12.8 Mono 11.8

Republican seekers of the major political offices have dominated those races in these counties since 1960. Republican candidates in Mono, Sutter, and Inyo

Counties were successful in 22 of the 23 major elections, and, in Orange County, they were victorious in 21 of the contests. San Diego County voters have favored

Republican aspirants in 20 of the races, while Glenn, Calavaras, Butte, Nevada, and Alpine voted Republican in 19 of the elections.

California will continue to be a state in which the two major political parties battle it out statewide for the major political offices, and divide the victories somewhat evenly as in the past. To those Californians living in approx imately one-fourth of the state's counties, however, elections for the major offices are monopolized and dominated by one party.

-IGS- More California Democrats Call The Republican Stronghold Of San Diego County

"Home" Than They Do Any Other County/ Except Los Angeles

San Diego County continues to maintain its lead in the contest for the county that would be home to the most Democrats in the state after Los Angeles County.

Passing Orange County, which held that distinction from 1976 through 1982, San

Diego took over second-place honors in the General Election of 1984 and maintained that position through all succeeding elections including the Primary Election of

1988. Edging out Orange County for third place after San Diego was Alameda County.

San Diego County has continued since 1984 to build upon its 25,000 lead over

Alameda County in each succeeding election, having a numerical superiority in

Democratic registrants over the Bay Area County in excess of 48,000 at the time of the 1988 Primary Election.

These are some of the several findings made in recent research by the

University of California, Berkeley's Institute of Governmental Studies (IGS) from data originally certified in the California Secretary of State's

"Reports of Registration" and "Statements of Vote." Election analyst

Achieving its rank among the state's counties in 1984 as the home of the second-largest number of California Democrats, San Diego County has continued to maintain and expand its edge over Alameda and Orange Counties, the other leading contenders. In 1960, San Diego ranked fourth in number of registered Democrats.

It trailed behind the counties of Los Angeles, Alameda, and San Francisco. In

1968, it and Orange County pushed ahead of San Francisco. From 1968 through Keith: San Diego Democrats page two

1982, San Diego County maintained its third-place standing. Since 1984, it has been in the second-place position. The following illustrates San Diego County's rise among the top 10 Calif ornia counties in ranking in numbers of Democratic registrants in the period beginning with the General Elections of 1960-1986 up through the 1988 Primary

Election:

1982 1984 1988 County 1960 1968 1976

3rd 2nd 2nd San Diego 4 th 3rd 3rd 3rd 4 th 4 th 3rd Alameda 2nd 2nd 2nd 4 th 4 th Orange 5 th 4 th 2nd 5 th 5 th 5 th 5 th Santa Clara 6 th 6 th

6 th 6 th 6 th Sacramento 7 th 7 th 7 th 7 th 6 th 7 th 7 th San Francisco 3rd 5 th 8 th 8 th 8 th San Bernardino 8 th 9 th 10th 8 th 9 th 9 th 9th Contra Costa 9 th 8 th 11th 10th 10th Riverside 13th 12th 11th

Between the 1972 General Election and the 1988 Primary Election, San Diego County Democrats added over 96,000 registrants to their rolls, while Los Angeles and San Francisco Counties were losing over 174,000 and 31,000 Democrats, respect ively. These are the Democratic registration data for the 1972 and 1980 General Elections, and the 1988 Primary Election for the twelve most numerous Democratic

counties:

1988 Change County 1972 1980 1972-1988 General General Primary

1,901,392 -174,361 Los Angeles 2,075,753 1,898,256 444,728 +96,341 San Diego 348,387 420,075 396,392 +9,706 Alameda 386,686 367,546 366,883 +29,604 Orange 337,279 422,303

341,960 +34,986 Santa Clara 306,974 314,390 277,194 +59,116 Sacramento 218,078 237,104 250,062 -31,658 San Francisco 281,720 246,338 223,667 +59,417 San Bernardino 164,250 190,990 Keith: San Diego Democrats page three

California Democratic Registration Data (continued)

i972 1980 1988 Change General General Primaru 1972-1988

Contra Costa 178,380 192,169 212,628 +34,248 Riverside 121,962 153,399 197,378 +75,416 San Mateo 171,253 159,924 160,808 -10,445 Fresno 127,717 128,874 154,440 +26,723

San Diego County posted the greatest increase in numbers of Democratic regist

rants, followed by Riverside, San Bernardino, and Sacramento Counties.

The number of those individuals eligible to register to vote in California

was also on the increase during this time. Examination of the period of the 1980

General Election through the 1988 Primary Election indicates that the number of

San Diego County eligibles increased by 194,154, or 15.2 percent. In the 12 counties with the largest number of Democratic registrants, the average county increase was 16.9 percent, with eighth-place San Bernardino and tenth-place River side increasing 40.8 and 48.8 percent, respectively.

Even so, only in Fresno County in the period of the 1980 General Election to the 1988 Primary Election did the percentage change of Democratic registrants

exceed the percentage gain of individuals eligible to register to vote and then by only 1.5 percent. San Diego County, by contrast, fell below by 11.8 percent; San Francisco dropped by 10.7 percent. The following table outlines the inability of Democratic recruiters to keep pace during the 1980-1988 period with the

increased numbers of individuals eligible to register to vote as California's population continued to grow: Keith: San Diego Democrats page four

County- Percentage Change Percentage Change Difference In Democratic In Individuals (percent) Registrants Eligible To Register

Fresno + 19.8 + 18.3 + 1.5 Alameda + 7.8 + 12.4 -4.6 Sacramento + 16.9 + 21.9 -5.0 San Mateo +0.6 +7.0 -6.4

Contra Costa + 10.6 +17.4 -6.8 Santa Clara + 8.8 + 18.5 -9.7 San Francisco + 1.5 + 12. 2 -10.7 San Diego + 3.4 + 15.2 -11.8

Los Angeles + 0.2 + 14. 2 -14.0 Riverside + 28.7 +48.8 -20.1 San Bernardino + 17.1 +40.8 -23.7 Orange -13.1 + 12.0 -25.1

Alameda Countyr which in 1960 was home to more Democratic registrants than any other county except Los Angeles, now in 1988 has a firm grip on third place with a 30,000 lead over Orange County. In the four General Elections of the 1980-

1986 period and the 1988 Primary Election, Alameda County Democrats have recruited an average of 30 percent more of those eligible to register than have Alameda

County Republicans. In contrast, since 1984 San Diego County Republicans have recruited more adherents than have San Diego County Democrats.

Regardless, San Diego County Democrats have continued to expand their number of registrants over the Alameda County Democrats with each succeeding General Elec tion. San Diego County's percentage increase in those eligible to register con tinues to be larger than Alameda's, which is further overshadowed by its neighbors,

Santa Clara and Contra Costa Counties. If Alameda County Democrats hope to regain their status as the state's "Number Two," they will have to try even harder if they are to succeed.

-IGS- San Franciscan Registrants Make Up Larger Percentage Of "No Shows" At

General Election Time In The 1970-1986 Period Than Any Other

California County's Registrants

Most citizens of San Francisco County register to vote, but, in comparison with citizens of other California counties having had 20,000 or more registrants since 1970, San Franciscans have had a larger percentage of registrants who were

"no shows" at the General Elections in the period since 1970 than any other

California county. Registrants of Alameda and Fresno Counties had the second and third poorest record in the 1970-1986 period. "Voter turnout" is determined by dividing the total votes cast in an election by the number of those registered to vote in that election.

In addition, San Francisco and Fresno Counties' registrants are the only counties in the state to place among the 10 California counties with the poorest voter-turnout record in eight of the nine General Elections since 1970. San

Francisco County registrants, in fact, are the registrants of the only county in

California to have placed in the bottom ten counties in voter turnout in every

General Election, but one, since 1962.

These are some of the several findings made in recent research by the

University of California, Berkeley's Institute of Governmental Studies (IGS) from data originally certified in the California Secretary of State's

"Reports of Registration" and "Statements of Vote." Election analyst

election results, and voter participation in California's 58 counties. These

research efforts are directed toward providing information potentially helpful

or interesting to the California voter in the approaching 1988 General Election. Keith: "No Shows" page two

While some changes in ranking among the counties for the lowest voter turnout occurred between the period of 1970-1978 and 1980-1986/ a major change in the rankings of the counties resulted in the 1986 General Election. In the

1970'S/ registrants in San Francisco, Alameda, and Los Angeles Counties led the state in not casting a ballot, while in the 1980's. Kings County and San Diego

County registrants ranked second and third behind first-place San Francisco

County registrants. In 1986, San Diego County registrants followed by those in

Stanislaus and San Bernardino Counties took first, second, and third-place honors in not voting.

San Francisco County had the lowest voter turnout record of any California county (having 20,000 or more registrants since 1970) in the six General

Elections of 1970, 1972, 1978, 1980, 1982, and 1984. Alameda County compiled the lowest voter-turnout record in the 1974 General Election, Butte County did so in the 1976 General Election, and San Diego County came in first in the 1986 General

Election. The eight counties ranking most frequently among the 10 California counties with the lowest voter-turnout records in each General Election are shown in order of their overall standing for the 1970-1986 period:

State Rank In Voter Turnout In General Elections

County 1970 1972 1974 1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986

San Francisco 1st 1st 7th 2nd 1st 1st 1st 1st Fresno 6 th 10th 9 th 3rd 3rd 8 th 9 th 4 th San Bernardino 4th 8th 3rd 7th 7 th 7th 3rd Alameda 4 th 1st 3rd 5th 2nd 5 th

Imperial 6th 5 th 2nd 8 th 5th 7th Kings 2nd 7 th 6 th 2nd 2nd 8 th San Diego 8 th 9th 6 th 6th 1st Los Angeles 3rd 2nd 10th 4th 4th

California registrants normally go to the polls in larger percentages in

Presidential elections than in elections for Governor. In the four Presidential Keith: "No Shows" page three elections of 1972-1984/ an average of 78.9 percent of California's registered voters cast a ballot. By contrast, only 68.1 percent went to the polls in the five gubernatorial elections of 1970-1986. For the 1970-1986 period, California averaged 72.9 percent in those nine General Elections.

The same eight counties, led again by San Francisco, also compiled the lowest average voter turnout for the nine General Elections in 1970—1986. These are the averages of those eight counties and of California for those nine elections, including the four Presidential and five gubernatorial races:

All Presidential Gubernatorial County Elections Elections Elections (percent) (percent) (percent)

San Francisco 67.8 72.2 64.2 Alameda 70.7 76.3 66.2 Fresno 71.4 77.7 66.4 San Bernardino 71.7 78.8 66.1

San Diego 71.9 79.3 66.0 Imperial 71.9 77.9 67.2 Los Angeles 72.1 78.0 67.3 Kings 72.1 77.1 68.2

California 72.9 78.9 68.1

Alameda County registrants' voter-turnout percentage has consistently been below the state average in all General Elections since 1944.

In the 1986 gubernatorial General Election, only 59.4 percent of all Calif ornia registrants cast a ballot — a drop of 10.4 percent from the 69.8 percent cast in the preceding Governor's race in 1982. San Francisco registrants, however, in 1986 generally maintained their approximate voter-turnout percentage, being only 1.8, 1.3, and 2.0 percent less than in the previous three gubernatorial

General Elections of 1974, 1978, and 1982, respectively.

The characteristic of registering to vote, but avoiding a trip to the polls has been descriptive of San Francisco County registrants for a long time. For Keith: "No Shovs" page four the 38-year period of 1946-1984^ the voter-turnout record of San Franciscans was below the state average. However, in 1986, San Francisco County registrants exceeded the state average by 2.0 percent^ although dropping 1.3 and 2.0 percent in the voter turnout they attained in the 1978 and 1982 gubernatorial races, respectively.

What factors are present in a county whose citizens willingly register to vote, but who become "no shows" on the day of the election? Does the carnival atmosphere associated with many registration drives attract marginals who never make it to the polls? Is the act of registration so frequently "hit and run" that, while it leaves the individual registered, it has become an end in itself and ignores instilling any desire in the individual registered to vote? Is there more of a mob-psychology factor associated with registration than with the act of an individual going to the polling place? Does peer pressure play more of a role in registration than in voting? Does it, in the final analysis, depend primarily on each individual involved?

The composition of the population of some of these counties has changed over the years, but the individual act of going to the polls continues to be missing from a very large segment of registrants, as evidenced, in part, by the experiences of San Francisco and Alameda Counties.

-IGS- Los Angeles County's Dominance Of State Voter Registrant Percentages Broken

Further In 1972-1988 Period, As Other Southern Counties Compile Major Gains

Los Angeles County's percentage of total California registrants of would-be voters continues its downward trend, begun in 1960, dropping another 7.3 percent from its 1972 share to a new low of 27.2 percent at the time of the 1988 Primary

Election. This is down 13.2 percent from its 1960 General Election share of 40.4 percent of all California registrants; in 1972, it was home to 34.5 percent of the state's registrants.

Much of Los Angeles County's loss was retained within the southern section of the state. These "Other Southern Counties" gained 5.3 percent of the state's registrants in the 1972-1988 period, or a total of 10.8 percent since 1960.

Orange and Ventura Counties' percentages of the state's total registrants, for example, have almost doubled since 1960, while their actual number of registrants more than tripled.

Regardless of its reduction in number of registrants, Los Angeles County continues to play the predominant role of any California county in selecting the winners of state-wide offices. This was emphasized most recently in the 1986

U. S. Senatorial Election, when its voters provided winner Democrat Alan Cranston with a county margin of 234,364 votes, although his state-wide margin was only

104,868 and his opponent carried 42 of California's 58 counties.

These are some of the several findings made in recent research by the

University of California, Berkeley's Institute of Governmental Studies (IGS) from data originally certified in the California Secretary of State's

"Reports of Registration" and "Statements of Vote." Election analyst

Dr. Bruce E. Keith, associated with IGS in its voter research projects of

the past two decades and co-author of the book, "California Votes, 1960-1972," has been investigating and reviewing past and present registration records,

election results, and voter participation in California's 58 counties. These Keith: Regional Registration page two research efforts are directed toward providing information potentially helpful or interesting to the California voter in the approaching 1988 General Election.

In this report, the Southern California section includes all counties south of the line formed by the northern boundary of Santa Barbara, Ventura, Los Angeles, and San Bernardino Counties. The Southern California section was further divided into two regions: Los Angeles County and Other Southern Counties. The Northern

California section is also composed of two regions: the San Francisco Bay Area and Other Northern Counties. The nine counties included in the San Francisco Bay

Area are Alameda, Contra Costa, Marine, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa

Clara, Solano, and Sonoma.

These Bay Area counties' percentage of the state total diminished slightly since 1972, losing 1.4 percent of their earlier share as of the 1988 Primary

Election. "Other Northern" California counties posted a gain of 3.4 percent in their share of total state registrants in the 1972-1988 period.

The following table compares the four regions in the 1972-1988 period in voter registration and the percentage change of each in the total registration and that of the two major political parties:

Total Democratic Republican Percentage Percentage Percentage Region 1972 1988 Change 1972 1988 Change 1972 1988 Change

Los Angeles 34.5 27.2 -7.3 35.4 29.8 -5.6 33.0 24.8 -8.2

Other South ern Counties 23.1 28.4 +5.3 19.7 22.7 +3.0 28.0 35.6 +7.6

San Francisco Bay Area 24.6 23.2 -1.4 26.1 25.8 -0.3 21.9 18.7 -3.2

Other North ern Counties 17.8 21.2 +3.4 18.8 21.7 +2.9 17.1 20.9 +3.8 Keith: Regional Registration page three

The trends displayed during the 1972-1988 period were even more pronounced in the 1960-1972 period. Consequently^ large percentage losses in its share of the state Democrats and Republicans characterized Los Angeles County in the

1960-1988 period, as its share of the state Democrats dropped 10.8 percent and its share of the state Republicans plummeted 15.0 percent. Other Southern

Counties made the largest percentage gains, adding 15.9 percent of its share of the state's Republicans, totaling 35.6 percent at the time of the 1988 Primary

Election.

The San Francisco Bay Area's loss of 5.4 percent of its share of the state Republican strength since 1960 represented that region's major change, whereas the slightly increased Democratic and Republican percentages of the state totals were the major characteristics of Other Northern Counties.

Total registration for the 1988 Primary Election — demonstrating the normal decrease in registrants between the previous General Election and the succeeding

Primary Election — is shown by section/region for that election and the 1986

General Election as follows:

Section/Region Registrants

1988 1986 Primary Election General Election

Southern California: 6,974,044 7,181,736

Los Angeles County 3,416,191 3,543,382 Other Southern Counties 3,557,853 3,638,354

Northern California: 5,563,163 5,652,184

San Francisco Bay Area 2,911,650 2,977,014 Other Northern Counties 2,651,513 2,675,170

State of California: 12,537,207 12,833,920

Decrease: 296,713 Keith: Regional Registration page four

The shift in percentages of registrants to the Other Southern Counties

region of California, in particular, is seen as a continuing trend for several years. However, political power once gained, as in the case of Los Angeles

County, will continue to be actively and shrewdly defended. Major alterations in

allocations of California Assembly and Senate seats bearing on that exercise of

legislative power should not be expected to occur quickly. At the moment,

nevertheless, the gain of over one and one-third million registrants since 1960

spells increased political clout for Orange and San Diego Counties. In

addition, the power centers based in Santa Clara, Alameda, Sacramento, and San

Francisco Counties will continue their efforts to expand and consolidate their

influence.

-IGS- Keith; Democratic Cushion page four

Democratic-Incumbent Registrant Advantage In 1986

Assembly House Of Representatives

Percent More Number Percent- Number Percent Democrats Than age age Republicans

0-20 8 18.2 5 18.6 20-25 10 22.7 9 33.3 25-30 7 15.9 4 14.8 30-35 7 15.9 3 11.1 35-50 5 11.4 3 11.1 50-70 5 11.4 2 7.4 70-75 2 4.5 1 3.7

Total: 44 100.0 27 100.0

Average Advantage: 31.4 percent 29.7 percent

With these large Democratic registrant advantages/ how did the Democratic political leaders divide the state's registrants among the several districts? The present district lines drawn after the 1980 Census resulted, at the time of the 1984 elections, in the division of California's registered voters among the 80 o Assembly Districts — each of which elects one Assembly member — aso follows:

Number Of Number Of Registrants Assembly Districts Percentage

66,000 - 99,999 6 7.5 100,000 - 124,999 12 15.0 125,000 - 149,999 26 32.5 150,000 - 169,999 23 28.7 170,000 - 179,000 8 180,000 - 197,000 5 6.3

Total: 80 100.0

These district lines produced Democratic registrant majorities in 61 of the 80

Assembly Districts. Los Angeles County is home to eight of the nine districts in

the state with the fewest registrants. The 1986 and 1988 data produce similar

results. An absence of equality of numbers of registered voters characterizes

the present Assembly District boundaries. Keith: Democratic Cushion page five

A similar situation exists among the congressional districts. Current reapportionment divides the state's 45 Congressional districts into these categories of registrants of these approximate strengths:

Number Of Number Of Registrants Congressional Districts Percentages

145,000 - 174,999 2 4.4 175,000 - 204,999 5 11-1 205,000 - 234,999 7 15.6 235,000 - 264,999 9 20.0 265,000 - 294,999 13 28.9 295,000 - 324,999 8 17.8 325,000 - 355,000 1_ 2.2

45 100•0

These district lines produced Democratic registrant majorities in 36 of the 45 congressional districts. Los Angeles County is the site of the five districts in

the state with the fewest registrants. The 1986 and 1988 election data recorded

similar results. This characteristic absence of equality of numbers of registered

voters in the drawing of district boundaries was particularly prevalent among the

congressional districts.

Some California voters may believe that their vote is equally important with

the vote of other Californians in electing a member to the Legislature or to the

Congress. In reality, not all votes of California's poll-going citizens have

equal effect on election results. In California in the upcoming 1988 General Elec

tion, Democratic incumbent candidates are "more equal" than Republican challengers,

some Democratic voters are much "more equal" than other Democrats, and citizens

of Los Angeles County are "more equal" than the citizens of California's other

counties.

-IGS- Democratic Political Leaders Strive For 30 Percent Registrant Cushion For

Democratic Incumbent Assembly And Congressional Members In Reapportionment

A Democratic Party registration advantage in excess of 30 percent for those

Congressional and Assembly seats earmarked for Democratic occupants is presently interwoven into the fabric of California's reapportionment plans. This allocation gives the average Democratic incumbent in these two legislative bodies an average advantage of 65 Democratic registrants for every 35 Republican registrants in his or her district.

A statistical examination of the California official registration and voting data of the 1984 and 1986 elections establishes that Democratic incumbents held seats in the House of Representatives in the Congress and in the Assembly of the

California Legislature that gave them an average of 31 percent registration advan tage over potential Republican challengers in the Congress, and an average of 33 percent registration advantage in the Assembly.

In so doing, California's Democratic political architects distributed the state's registrants unequally among the districts. At the time of the most recent

General Election, Los Angeles County's Assembly District 56 had only 56,132 regis trants, while Alameda/Contra Costa Counties' Assembly District 12 was home to

208,022 registrants — almost four times as many, yet each district elected only

one member of the Assembly. Similar distribution of registrants characterized the

Congressional districts. Alameda/Contra Costa Counties provided 343,963 regis

trants for their District 8, while Los Angeles County's District 25 had only

166,046 registrants — less than half of the Bay Area district, yet each elected

one member to the Congress.

These are some of the several findings made in recent research by the

University of California, Berkeley's Institute of Governmental Studies (IGS)

from data originally certified in the California Secretary of State's Keith: Democratic Cushion page two

"Reports of Registration" and "Statements of Vote." Election analyst Dr. Bruce E. Keith/ associated with ICS in its voter research projects of the past two decades and co-author of the book/ "California Votes/ 1960-1972/" has been investigating and reviewing past and present registration records/ election results/ and voter participation in California's 58 counties. These research efforts are directed toward providing information potentially helpful or interesting to the California voter in the approaching 1988 General Election.

This is the distribution of those Democratic incumbent seats in the Assembly and in the House of Representatives in 1984 by percentage grouping resulting in the 33 percent Democratic-registrant advantage enjoyed by the Democratic incumbents in the House and the 34 percent registrant advantage awarded Democratic incumbents in the Assembly:

Democratic-Incumbent Registration Advantage In 1984

Assembly House Of Representatives

Percent More Number Percent Number Percent Democrats Than age age Republicans

0-20 5 10.6 2 7.4 20-25 8 17.0 5 18.5 25-30 8 17.0 8 29.7 30-35 8 17.0 3 11.1 35-50 11 23.4 5 18.5 50-70 5 10.7 3 11.1 70-75 2 4.3 1 3.7

Total: 47 100.0 27 100.0

Average Advantage: 34.9 percent 33.0 percent

Similar results characterize the California Senate.

Some Republican incumbents also appeared to be given "special" consideration.

Of the 17 Republican incumbents in the House in 1984/ nine of them were in dis

tricts where there were an average of 9.5 percent more Republican registrants than Keith: Democratic Cushion page three

Democrats; the other nine Republican Congressmen were in districts with an average of nine percent more Democratic registrants. This gave the Republican incumbents an average of 0.2 percent more Republican registrants. In the 1984 General Elec tion, Republican candidates outpolled Democratic candidates for Congress statewide by a margin of over 418,000 votes of the poll-going Californians.

Of the 33 Republicans in the Assembly in 1984, 19 of them were in districts with an average of eight percent more Republicans; the other 14 Republican Assembly members were in districts with an average of 10 percent more Democrats. This gave the Republican incumbents an average of 0.9 percent more Republican registrants.

In the 1986 General Election, Republican candidates added three Assembly seats to the Republican total.

California for more than 40 years has had approximately three Democratic registrants for every two Republican ones. After the 1980 census, new district lines for the California Assembly and Senate and for the House of Representatives were drawn by a Democratically-controlled Assembly and Senate, and a Democratic

Governor with the assistance from some California Democratic congressional office holders. The resulting district lines favored the Democrats as has been the custom in most of the 50 states, when one political party has a majority of both houses of the Legislature, and the Governor is also of the same party.

A Democratic registrant cushion of similar magnitude for Democratic incum bents was in place in 1986 for those members of the House of Representatives and the California Assembly. The following table sets forth the distribution of those seats by percentage grouping resulting in the Democratic-registrant percentage advantage for the Democratic incumbents of 29.7 percent for House members and of

31.4 percent for Assembly members: II n. BERKELEY LIBRARIES