University of Utah Are All Precincts Created Equal? The Prevalence of Low-Quality Precincts in Low-Income and Minority Communities Author(s): Matt A. Barreto, Mara Cohen-Marks and Nathan D. Woods Source: Political Research Quarterly, Vol. 62, No. 3 (Sep., 2009), pp. 445-458 Published by: Sage Publications, Inc. on behalf of the University of Utah Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40232392 . Accessed: 23/05/2013 14:08 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp . JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Sage Publications, Inc. and University of Utah are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Political Research Quarterly. http://www.jstor.org This content downloaded from 171.67.216.23 on Thu, 23 May 2013 14:08:26 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions PoliticalResearch Quarterly Volume62 Number3 September2009 445-458 © 2009 Universityof Utah Are All PrecinctsCreated Equal? 10.1177/1065912908319572 http://prq.sagepub.com hostedat The Prevalenceof Low-QualityPrecincts in Low-Income http://online.sagepub.com and MinorityCommunities MattA. Barreto Universityof Washington,Seattle MaraCohen-Marks Loyola MarymountUniversity, Los Angeles, California NathanD. Woods WelchConsulting, Inc., Washington,D.C. More thanforty years after passage of the 1965 VotingRights Act, a fundamentalquestion remains unanswered: although all citizens have an equal rightto the ballot, do all citizens enjoy equal access to the ballot box? That is, are voting precinctsin predominantlylow-income and non-whiteneighborhoods less visible,less stable,harder to find,and harder to navigatethan voting precincts in high-incomeand predominantlywhite neighborhoods? If so, does thelower quality resultin lower levels of voting,all otherthings equal? The authors'analysis indicatesthat the qualityof pollingplaces varies across the diverseneighborhoods of Los Angeles and thatthe qualityof pollingplaces influencesvoter turnout. Low-incomeand minoritycommunities tended to have "lowerquality" precincts, which tended to depressvoter turnout. Keywords:precinct quality, voter turnout, race, class rightto vote is among the most cherished voters'access to thepolling place1 (Bundy 2003), the privilegesafforded citizens in a democracy.That costs imposed by the experience at the polls has so many Americans decide to stay away from the escaped systematicexamination. polls on Election Day and not cast a ballot confounds In this article,we investigatesome of the costs political practitionersand political scientistsalike. potentialvoters experience at theirpolling place and Even in the highlycontested 2000 presidentialelec- how these costs may be distributedacross precincts. tion,a large numberof eligible citizens did not par- We arguethat not all pollingplaces are createdequal: ticipatein the democraticprocess. Since the 1960s, those thatare less accessible, are of lower quality,or scholars have documented the growing number of have less informedpoll workershave lower voter nonvotersand wonderedwhy turnouthas been on the turnout.We expectthat these low-quality precincts are decline (Teixeira 1987; Wattenberg2002). While pre- vious studies have cited declining trustin govern- MattA. Barreto,Assistant Professor ofPolitical Science, University ment, uncompetitiveraces, too frequentelections, ofWashington; e-mail: [email protected]. changingdemographics, and depletingsocial capital, Mara Marks,Assistant Professor of UrbanStudies, Loyola few have focused explicitlyon the costs associated MarymountUniversity; e-mail: [email protected]. with and Hansen When voting (Rosenstone 1993). NathanD. Woods,Director, Welch Consulting, Inc.; e-mail: nwoods theydo, manyof these studiesfocus on how changes @ welchcon.com. in laws or registration early votingprocedures might Authors'Note: The authors thank the Leavey Center for the Study reducethe costs of voting(Brians and Grofman2001; ofLos Angeles at Loyola Marymount University forsponsoring this Highton 1997). However, Election Day costs might researchand for the use of the data. In particular, wethank Fernando also existin theform of thepolling place location,yet Guerraand Chris Zepeda for their input on theprecinct quality checklistand feedback on a draftof this article. We also only one previous study has examined the voter's previous receivedvaluable feedback from Ricardo Ramirez, Nufio, to the as a Stephen physicalrelationship votingprecinct pos- andDavid Leal. An earlier version of this article was presented atthe sible determinantof turnout(Gimpel and Schuknecht 2005 WesternPolitical Science Association annual conference. 2003; Dyck and Gimpel 2005; Haspel and Knotts Pleaseaddress all correspondencetoMatt A. Barreto,mbarreto@ 2005). While some studies have assessed disabled washington.edu. 445 This content downloaded from 171.67.216.23 on Thu, 23 May 2013 14:08:26 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 446 Political Research Quarterly notrandomly distributed within a politicaljurisdiction (1957,274). Effortsto determine the potential benefits but ratherare more prevalentin low-incomeand of votingare also costly,requiring citizens to deter- minorityneighborhoods, further depressing turnout in minewhich party or candidatewould increase their areaswhere residents on averagehave a lowerpropen- expectedutility and thento calculatethe likelihood sityto vote.To explorethese propositions, we con- thattheirs would be thedeciding ballot cast. If citizens ductedthe first-ever scientific monitoring project to concludethat there are benefitsto voting,they then measurepolling place characteristicsin relationto confrontthe costs of registeringto vote,traveling to demographicand turnoutdata. In this article,we thepolling place, and castingthe ballot. Faced with reporton theextent to whichpolling places in Los thesecosts and recognizingthat they are unlikelyto Angelesvary, the geographic distribution oflow-quality cast the decidingballot, most citizensultimately votingplaces, and the relationship between the expe- decidethat voting is notworth their time. However, rienceencountered at thepolls and voter turnout. manycitizens do voteeven though they aren't casting In assessing the relationshipbetween precinct thetie-breaking ballot. This may be theresult of what qualityand voterturnout, we proceedin foursec- Downs, and later Riker and Ordeshook(1968), tions.First, we reviewthe relevant literature on the describeas a senseof civicduty or democraticpride. costsof voting. Second, because ours is thefirst field Althoughthe benefits to votingare low, so tooare the studyto assessthe quality and accessibility of a large costs,driving many citizens to participatein an elec- numberof pollingplaces, we reviewthe design and tionout of a senseof civic duty. However, if the costs implementationof the research. Next, we detailhow escalateor the benefits diminish, even these model cit- thequality and accessibilityof pollingplaces vary izensmay decide it is notworth their time to vote. across our study area, Los Angeles, California. Downs' argumentthat low turnoutstems from Finally,we test the relationshipbetween polling rationalbehavior continues to inspiredebate. In his place quality,the socioeconomiccharacteristics of reexaminationof thecosts of voting, Blais (2000,84) theprecinct, and voter turnout. concludesthat in moderndemocracies, the costs of votingare extremelylow and notlikely prohibitive: "citizenshave only to answera shortquestionnaire to The Costs ofVoting become registeredon the electorallist, to go to a pollingstation that is usuallylocated close to where Althoughfew citizens consciouslyconduct a theylive; and to indicateon a ballotwhich party(ies) cost-benefitanalysis before deciding whether or not and/orcandidate(s) they wish to support.These activ- to vote,all potentialvoters assess whetherit is worth ities are supposedto requirevery little time and theirtime to travel to thepolling place, decide how to effort."Yet, Blais concedesthat increasing the time it vote,and cast a ballot.While many factors influence takesto votecould impose a costsufficient to reduce citizens'decision to voteon ElectionDay, they must turnout.Indeed, other scholars warn against overesti- firstovercome some hurdles or costsassociated with matingthe convenienceof voting.Research by voting:registering to vote,becoming informed about Gimpeland Schuknecht(2003) as well as Dyckand the issues and candidates,learning the locationof Gimpel(2005) demonstratesthat polling place loca- theirvoting place, and takingthe time to vote. tioncan negativelyaffect turnout. Both studies con- Generally,these costs can be dividedinto two cate- sider the geographicdistance of polling places gories,institutional and individual. Institutional costs relativeto thepopulation they serve and find that the arethose associated with the rules and regulations of distanceof suburban voters from their polling place is voting,such as registrationrequirements, while indi- inverselyrelated to suburbanturnout rates. Gimpel vidualcosts are thosethat affect citizens differently, and Schuknechtnote, "Some precinctlocations are suchas gatheringinformation. moreaccessible