Voting by mail
I've voted by mail the last couple of election cycles, which has been long enough to see some changes to how campaigns handle that. The 2004 presidential election was the first real push for absentee voting among certain populations. Since then, many states have opened up their absentee processes which made 2008 the top year for such voting. Then states like Oregon, which has been vote-by-mail for years, and Washington, which changed its laws to allow vote-by-mail and most counties have done so, have the entire process by mail.
Campaigns and parties like this idea. A lot. A person who casts their legally binding vote on October 15th, can't take it back (depending on laws) if their candidate gets caught, nude, in a swimming pool with nude underage girls on the 29th. This helps blunt the effects of an October Surprise. And as far as campaigns are concerned, that's nothing but a good thing.
People in absentee-ballot states frequently have the ability to cast a vote in-person that will trump their filed absentee ballot. These are voters for whom an October Surprise is still very much a real concern. Vote-by-mail states don't have this provision, so opposition candidates plotting an October Surprise have to get it out right before the ballots get mailed rather than 5 days before the election.
States like VBM as its cheaper by quite a lot. Polling places don't have to be rented. Election Volunteers don't have to be obtained for the 13+ hours each polling place is open. Ballots can be counted in a few locations rather than in many, which makes deploying new ballot technologies a lot cheaper.
The down side is the requirement to have mail service, and a $0.44 stamp. Opponents of vote-by-mail call this a poll tax. This is why Washington state law requires the presence of drop-boxes for people to drop off their ballots without a stamp.
Things are beginning to change out there. This election saw a very significant increase of direct-mail pieces timed to arrive in my mailbox the same day I got my ballot. This is absolutely needed, since there is a certain large percentage of people out there who vote as soon as the ballot arrives. Conversely, this has not yet changed the TV ad-battles leading up to today's election. Last night one ad in three was a paid political of some kind, which is right up there with car ads. This election is not a major one, so I haven't been getting any robo-calls and therefore can't judge how that's changed.
How will this change in the future? Well, we're already seeing parties and campaigns actively whipping early voters to vote, and that will only increase. I suspect that the prime-time for TV ads will continue to be the week before the election, but the emphasis on the Monday-night before election-day will wane. The consequence of the early voters voting when they do is that the 'decideds' pull themselves out of the race, leaving the undecideds as the people who haven't voted in the last days of the campaign. Voter ID will become even more important as parties track likely early voters in order to exclude them from the last week direct-mail/robo-call blitz, and thus allow them to focus on the voters that still need persuading. I fully expect a TV ad blitz on the three days bracketing ballot-day, just to catch the people who vote when they get the ballot.
All in all, vote-by-mail is probably more expensive for the campaigns because it lengthens the 'final mile' by four weeks in some cases. That said, we're still early enough in the learning process that we just don't know all the ways this will affect things. Political Action Committees were a campaign finance reform in the 1970's, yet these days they're the reviled 'special interests.' These things change.
Campaigns and parties like this idea. A lot. A person who casts their legally binding vote on October 15th, can't take it back (depending on laws) if their candidate gets caught, nude, in a swimming pool with nude underage girls on the 29th. This helps blunt the effects of an October Surprise. And as far as campaigns are concerned, that's nothing but a good thing.
People in absentee-ballot states frequently have the ability to cast a vote in-person that will trump their filed absentee ballot. These are voters for whom an October Surprise is still very much a real concern. Vote-by-mail states don't have this provision, so opposition candidates plotting an October Surprise have to get it out right before the ballots get mailed rather than 5 days before the election.
States like VBM as its cheaper by quite a lot. Polling places don't have to be rented. Election Volunteers don't have to be obtained for the 13+ hours each polling place is open. Ballots can be counted in a few locations rather than in many, which makes deploying new ballot technologies a lot cheaper.
The down side is the requirement to have mail service, and a $0.44 stamp. Opponents of vote-by-mail call this a poll tax. This is why Washington state law requires the presence of drop-boxes for people to drop off their ballots without a stamp.
Things are beginning to change out there. This election saw a very significant increase of direct-mail pieces timed to arrive in my mailbox the same day I got my ballot. This is absolutely needed, since there is a certain large percentage of people out there who vote as soon as the ballot arrives. Conversely, this has not yet changed the TV ad-battles leading up to today's election. Last night one ad in three was a paid political of some kind, which is right up there with car ads. This election is not a major one, so I haven't been getting any robo-calls and therefore can't judge how that's changed.
How will this change in the future? Well, we're already seeing parties and campaigns actively whipping early voters to vote, and that will only increase. I suspect that the prime-time for TV ads will continue to be the week before the election, but the emphasis on the Monday-night before election-day will wane. The consequence of the early voters voting when they do is that the 'decideds' pull themselves out of the race, leaving the undecideds as the people who haven't voted in the last days of the campaign. Voter ID will become even more important as parties track likely early voters in order to exclude them from the last week direct-mail/robo-call blitz, and thus allow them to focus on the voters that still need persuading. I fully expect a TV ad blitz on the three days bracketing ballot-day, just to catch the people who vote when they get the ballot.
All in all, vote-by-mail is probably more expensive for the campaigns because it lengthens the 'final mile' by four weeks in some cases. That said, we're still early enough in the learning process that we just don't know all the ways this will affect things. Political Action Committees were a campaign finance reform in the 1970's, yet these days they're the reviled 'special interests.' These things change.
posted by Corwin at 8:13 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home