全球智库信息集成服务系统

Almost 92 million eligible Americans did not vote in the 2016 presidential elections.¹ In the 2014 midterm elections, an estimated 143 million eligible Americans failed to vote, marking the lowest voter participation in 72 years.² For the nation’s democracy to function properly and for government to provide fair representation, all eligible Americans must have the opportunity to vote—and be encouraged to do so. Our collective self-rule is established and fostered through free, fair, accessible, and secure elections through which the voice of every eligible American is heard.

The American people recognize the importance of voting in our democracy. In a 2018 Pew Research Center survey, 74 percent of respondents ranked election participation as a very important determinant of good citizenship—above paying taxes and following the law.³ And yet, millions of eligible voters are missing from America’s political decision-making process. This may be because of unnecessary barriers in the voter registration and voting process that prevent would-be voters from casting ballots or because potential voters feel alienated from government. Nationwide, roughly 6 million American citizens are barred from having their voices heard because of antiquated and discriminatory ex-offender disenfranchisement laws. Voter suppression tools, including improper voter purges such as those recently upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court, keep countless eligible Americans from voting each election cycle.⁴

However, America can build an election system based on pro-voter policies and practices that drive participation by all eligible voters. To do so, first, barriers to registering to vote and to voting must be eliminated, and reforms must be implemented in order to enable all eligible Americans to cast a ballot that will be securely counted. Implementing automatic voter registration (AVR) in all 50 states and the District of Columbia could result in more than 22 million newly registered voters in just the first year of implementation.⁵ In addition, eliminating ex-offender disenfranchisement laws would bring more than 6 million new voters into the electorate.⁶ At the same time, civic engagement tools must be designed to encourage voting, particularly for those who have become alienated from the democratic process and do not feel heard by their elected leaders or represented in government.

When people exercise their power as voters, they can elect local, state, and national leaders who are responsive to and reflective of the communities they serve. For example, in November 2017, Philadelphia voters translated their desire for criminal justice reform by electing Larry Krasner as the city’s new district attorney with 74 percent of the votes.⁷ Krasner is a vocal critic of mass incarceration, racial bias, and corruption within the criminal justice system and recently ended cash bail requirements for low-level offenders.⁸ Voters have also used their power to diversify government bodies and make them more reflective of the broader population, for example, by electing LGBTQ candidates and people of color.⁹ In one instance, recognizing the important issues at stake in the November 2017 elections—from immigration reform to health care to civil rights—voters in Virginia exercised their power over government at higher rates than in past gubernatorial elections: 47.6 percent in 2017, compared with 43 percent in 2013.¹⁰

This report examines the problem of low voter participation in America, which includes structural barriers that keep Americans from having their voices heard as well as widespread disillusionment with the political process. As this report shows, obstacles to voting and distrust in government have repercussions for representational democracy, leading to participation gaps across demographics as well as elected bodies that are unrepresentative of the broader population of American citizens.

To increase voter participation and expand voting opportunities for eligible voters, states have a number of tools available, including those detailed in this report. Taken together, the policies and practices explored in the sections below are proven to increase voter participation and make voting more convenient. The success of these programs depends largely on states’ commitment—as well as that of campaigns and grassroots organizations—to inform eligible voters of their availability, how to use them, and why exercising their power as voters can make a difference in their lives. In addition to analyzing the contributing factors to low voter turnout and the effectiveness of pro-voter policies in increasing participation, this report examines the impact of civics education and voter engagement work.

This report also outlines the following recommendations to drive voter participation and make the process of voting more convenient for eligible Americans:

1. Streamline voter registration with automatic voter registration, same-day voter registration (SDR),¹¹ preregistration of 16- and 17-year-olds, and online voter registration
2. Make voting more convenient with in-person early voting, no-excuse absentee voting, and vote-at-home with vote centers
3. Provide sufficient resources in elections and ensure voting is accessible
4. Restore rights for formerly incarcerated people
5. Strengthen civics education in schools
6. Invest in integrated voter engagement (IVE) and outreach

This report also highlights the success of these policies based on existing literature. Where possible, gains in voter participation were projected using current impact data. Of course, demographics and voting cultures differ across states and even by jurisdiction, so these projections are not exact. However, they do provide an idea of how many of America’s missing voters could be engaged through these policies. There were some policies for which the authors were unable to project gains because key data points were unavailable. For these policies, more research must be done to determine their potential impact on voter participation in future elections. (See Methodology for a more detailed explanation)

• Automatic voter registration: Center for American Progress research finds that, if every state implemented Oregon’s model of AVR, more than 22 million registered voters could be added to state voter rolls in just the first year.¹² Based on this analysis, one could expect more than 7.9 million new voters nationwide—including 3.2 million previously disengaged voters—within just the first year of implementation.
• Same-day voter registration: States with SDR, which this report defines as including Election Day registration, experience, on average, a 5 percent increase in voter participation and consistently have the highest participation in the country.¹³ According to the authors’ calculations, if all states without SDR had passed and implemented the policy, there could have been approximately 4.8 million more voters in the 2016 elections.
• Preregistration: In Florida, preregistration laws have been found to improve youth voting participation by 4.7 percentage points.¹⁴
• Online registration: A study of Georgia’s online voter registration system found that approximately 71 percent of those who registered online turned out to vote, compared with 48 percent and 52 percent of those registering by mail or through a state agency, respectively.¹⁵ According to the authors’ calculations, had every state implemented an online voter registration policy such as Georgia’s, there could have been more than 536,000 additional voters during the 2016 elections.
• Early voting: One study found that early voting can increase participation by about 2 to 4 percent.¹⁶ Eliminating early voting has also been found to decrease turnout in communities of color.¹⁷ According to the authors’ calculations, if all states had early voting in place during the 2016 elections, there could have been at least 789,500 more voters.
• No-excuse absentee voting: No-excuse absentee voting has been projected to increase voter participation by about 3 percent over time.¹⁸
• Vote-at-home with vote centers: Colorado’s vote-at-home plus vote centers policy increased voter participation in the state by about 2 to 5 percent and increased participation for young people by 9 percent.¹⁹
• Restore rights for formerly incarcerated people: More than 25,000 formerly incarcerated people in Virginia participated in the 2016 elections after having their rights restored by former Gov. Terry McAuliffe (D).²⁰ Based on Virginia’s experience, all else being equal, if all formerly incarcerated people had their rights restored, there could have been more than 914,000 additional voters during the 2016 elections.
• Strengthen civics education in schools: As one example, a study of Kids Voting USA—a civics education model—in Kansas found that voter participation was 2.1 percent higher for both 18-year-olds and their parents in Kansas counties that incorporated Kids Voting into school curricula.²¹
• Invest in integrated voter engagement and outreach: Integrated voter engagement groups combine issue advocacy and organizing with voter mobilization to effectuate positive change within the communities they serve. From 2012 to 2016, the IVE group Emgage, saw a 17.2 percent increase in participation among Muslim American voters. Grassroots voter outreach efforts are also successful in driving participation; one study showed that an additional vote is produced for every 14 people contacted by canvassers.²² According to the authors’ calculations, had every eligible nonvoting American been contacted by canvassers, there could have been approximately 6.2 million more voters during the 2016 elections.

These pro-voter policies are mutually dependent and reinforcing. For example, the effectiveness of more convenient voting options—including early voting, vote-at-home, and no-excuse absentee voting—depends on eligible voters being registered. As aptly described in a report by the director of the Elections Research Center at the University of Wisconsin, Barry C. Burden, and others, “The additional convenience of early voting is worthless to a potential voter who finds that she is actually not registered, and therefore unqualified to vote.”²³ At the same time, the benefits of registration modernization cannot be fully realized if voters do not have opportunities to exercise their civic duty. Moreover, these policies often complement each other. Whereas early voting on its own has been shown to increase participation by about 2 to 4 percent, early voting combined with same-day voter registration has increased voter participation by 4.2 to 11 percent where it has been implemented.²⁴

The policies examined in this report—registration modernizations, convenience voting, sufficient resources, and rights restoration—have shown success in increasing voter participation and in making voting more convenient, particularly among historically underrepresented groups. Along with ensuring strong civics education and carrying out robust integrated voter engagement, these policies have the potential to reshape and reinvigorate the electorate. Through them, the 92 million eligible voters who did not vote in the 2016 elections will find or regain their voices, resulting in a more representative and responsive government that works for all Americans.

Recognizing that these policies increase participation and expand the electorate, many states are prioritizing advancement of pro-voter reforms. For example, in 2018, Washington state took significant strides to improve its pro-voter policy structure by enacting a reform package that included automatic voter registration, preregistration for 16- and 17-year-olds, and same-day voter registration.²⁵ CAP estimates that, in Washington, AVR could result in more than 50,000 new voter registrants, 21,000 of whom would be unlikely to register without the program.²⁶ And in April 2018, New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) issued an executive order restoring voting rights to an estimated 36,000 eligible Americans on parole.²⁷

Table 1 lists the states in which each of the pro-voter policy reforms assessed in this report have been adopted—although, in some instances, implementation is still underway.

• Table 1: Status of pro-voter reforms in the states

Millions of eligible Americans today are either choosing not to vote or are prevented from participating in the electoral process. Voter participation remains low by historical measures. Since 2000, voter participation for U.S. citizens has hovered between 54 and 64 percent during presidential elections and between 41 and 48 percent during midterm elections.²⁸ In 2016, falling participation defined the election, as swing states such as Wisconsin and Ohio saw voter participation drop by approximately 3 percent and 4 percent, respectively, compared with 2012.²⁹ Voter participation rates are particularly low during primary and local elections. During the 2016 primaries, only 28.5 percent of eligible voters cast votes for party candidates, while a mere 14.5 percent participated in the 2012 primaries.³⁰ For local mayoral elections, participation falls below 20 percent in 15 of the country’s 30 most populous cities.³¹

America’s representative government is warped by low voter participation, and, of those who do vote, the group is not representative of the broader population of eligible American citizens. Research shows that communities of color, young people, and low-income Americans are disproportionately burdened by registration barriers, inflexible voting hours, and polling place closures, making it more difficult for these groups to vote. Participation gaps persist along racial, educational, and income-level differences. (see Figure 1)

These participation gaps matter for who we elect and who holds public power. Although the 115th Congress is the most diverse in history, communities of color are still underrepresented.³²

Furthermore, according to a Quartz analysis, the typical member of Congress is at least 12 times wealthier than the average American household.³³ Nearly half of all 535 members of Congress have a net worth of at least $1 million, whereas the median net worth for an American adult in 2014 was only about $45,000.³⁴ President Donald Trump’s initial cabinet—which included Rex Tillerson, Tom Price, and Reince Priebus—was worth a combined $9.5 billion, exceeding the combined wealth of more than a third of all U.S. households.³⁵

Eligible voters are clear about the barriers tthat keep them from voting. For example, a 2017 Pew study examined why registered voters refrained from voting in the 2016 elections and found the most common reason among respondents—25 percent—to be that they “Didn’t like candidates or campaign issues,” followed by “Not interested, felt vote wouldn’t make difference,” at 15 percent; “Too busy or conflicting schedule,” 14 percent; “Illness or disability,” 12 percent; “Out of town or away from home,” 8 percent; “Registration problems,” 4 percent; “Forgot to vote,” 3 percent; “Transportation problems,” 3 percent; and “inconvenient hours or polling place,” 2 percent.”³⁶

There are a number of challenges associated with analyzing the effectiveness of pro-voter policies in boosting voter participation—including diverging research methodologies, uniqueness of state and local policy models, and difficulty distinguishing between correlation and causation in election settings. However, the policies discussed in this report have been shown to improve voter participation and help make the process of voting more convenient by eliminating many of the barriers keeping millions of Americans from exercising their civic duty.³⁷ Additionally, strong civics education and integrated voter engagement programs can help to address widespread alienation by connecting voting to the issues that affect people’s lives, by demystifying government, and by educating people on the electoral process and inviting them to participate. If properly implemented, these policies and practices have the potential to expand the electorate and to elect representatives that are more reflective of and responsive to the American population.

The utility and impact of the pro-voter structural policies described in this report depend largely on people knowing that they exist and how to use them. As described by voting expert Tova Wang:

“For election reforms to work, people have to know about them. People don’t even know about the options available to them. They need to be provided with this information in very simple straightforward terms.”³⁸

Infrequent or first-time voters are especially unlikely to know about the availability of things such as same-day voter registration and early voting. This obligation falls largely on states and localities, both of which should send eligible voters notifications regarding voting registration deadlines and information about eligibility as well as where and how to register. Well in advance of Election Day, eligible voters should receive notifications that remind them to vote and include information about their respective polling place and voting hours. This would help cut down on improperly cast ballots.³⁹ Distributing sample ballots can also help to improve the voting experience and reduce wait times at polling places.⁴⁰ One study found that, during the 2000 elections, participation was 2.5 percent higher in states that mailed information about polling places to voters in advance and 2 percentage points higher in states that mailed sample ballots.⁴¹ The effects were especially notable for voters with little education and for young people.⁴² In the seven states that mailed sample ballots, voter participation for registered youths was 73 percent, compared with 67.3 percent in states that did not distribute sample ballots.⁴³

The sections that follow describe pro-voter tools that states can adopt in order to increase voter participation and provide more voting opportunities for eligible Americans. By adopting the following recommendations, states can diversify and expand the electorate, resulting in a government that is more representative of the American populace and in policy outcomes that better reflect public will.

Streamline voter registration

One of the most effective ways to improve voter participation is to increase the number of people who are registered to vote by making the process more convenient. Every state except North Dakota requires that people register to vote before casting their ballot.⁴⁴ Yet there are still millions of Americans who are unregistered; according to the U.S. Census Bureau, in 2016, approximately 1 in 7 American citizens who were of voting age self-reported that they were not registered to vote.⁴⁵ In 2012, Pew estimated that nearly 1 in 4 eligible Americans were unregistered.⁴⁶

Simply registering more people to vote would increase participation, as registered individuals are more likely to cast a ballot in elections. For example, in 2016, 61 percent of U.S. citizens reported voting, compared with 87 percent of people registered to vote.

Each election cycle, barriers to the voter registration process—including a lack of accessible information about where and how to register—prevent countless Americans from voting. In a 2017 survey, 6 percent of respondents said that they were not registered to vote because they did not know how to register.⁴⁷ Meanwhile, a 2018 report found that, in Arizona, New Mexico, Nevada, and South Dakota, Native Americans most commonly fail to register to vote because they do not know where or how to register and because they miss the voter registration deadline.⁴⁸ In 2014, 1.9 million people failed to register because they did not know where to register or how to do so.⁴⁹

Certain groups are less likely to be registered to vote; these include communities of color, low-income Americans, those with disabilities, and young people.⁵⁰ In 2016, 69 percent of black and 57 percent of Hispanic Americans were registered to vote, compared with 72 percent of whites.⁵¹ Asian Americans were 16 percent less likely to be registered to vote than whites.⁵² Furthermore, in 2012, only 66 percent of American Indians and Alaska Natives were registered—7 percentage points lower than their white counterparts.⁵³ A shocking 20-point gap exists in registration rates between Americans making less than $25,000 per year and individuals making $100,000 or more per year.⁵⁴ Eligible Americans with disabilities are also less likely to be registered to vote—by about 2 percentage points—than people without disabilities.⁵⁵ And in 2012, 735,000 potential voters were prevented from having their names added to the voter rolls because of language barriers in the registration process.