How does partisan regulation of political markets
affect elections? We investigate how the partisan control of ballot
format, which is expressly regulated in all U.S. states, often to
the apparent advantage of incumbents and major parties, affects
voting. Through the analysis of a unique randomized natural
experiment, we study whether and how the name order of candidates on
ballots affects election outcomes. Previous studies, relying
largely on observational data, have yielded conflicting results.
California law mandates randomizing the ballot order with a lottery,
permitting us to solve this identification problem with more
credible assumptions and methods. Our analysis of statewide
elections from 1978 to 2002 reveals that ballot order might have
changed the winner in twelve percent of all primary races, including
major and minor party races. We also show that randomization may be
substantially more cost-effective at reducing voting bias than
currently proposed voting technology reforms. This suggests that
electoral jurisdictions should consider randomizing the ballot order
more broadly to reduce ballot effects. (Last Revised July 19, 2005)
|