Relationship between voter turnout and incentives or the siren call of fried chicken…

Ok, admit to yourself, you are really reading this because you want to find out the relationship between voter turnout and friend chicken. But think about it what incentivizes people to vote? I’ve read about the effects of early and consistent civic education and strength of civil society positively contributes to voter turnout. For example, children that grow up exposed to lessons of why it matters to vote and learn to participate in democracy early – such as voting for class president or hall monitor – grow into adults which vote in greater numbers. Feeling of ownership of your neighborhood, city, state and country, in other words a well developed civil society also predicts higher voter turnout. 

Last week Damon M. Cann of Utah State University presented results of his curious study at a political science conference in Chicago. You can read more about the conference in The Atlantic article found here. Mr. Cann conducted an experiment on voter incentives. Basically he divided the residents of River Heights, Utah into two groups and then knocked on doors with his two different messages. One group of people that Mr. Cann talked to received a well reasoned argument why it matters to vote in the upcoming election, in other words an argument in favor of participatory democracy. The other group of people Mr. Cann reached out to got the promise of discount coupons for fried chicken, French fries, a Mexican meal and rock climbing, in return for voting in that same election. If a resident that was promised discounts showed up as voted in the polls, he or she received coupons. If that person elected the chicken discount, they got two buckets of chicken at the local KFC. 

Which pitch proved more persuasive a well reasoned argument in favor of participatory democracy or incentives presented by the dismal science, aka economics? While a well reasoned argument for participatory democracy created an increase of 4% bump in voter turnout, economic incentives (promise of coupons) bumped voter turnout by a further 9%. Economic incentives are stronger than arguments for civic duty should not come as a surprise. I mean, think of Tammeny Hall and Boss Tweed in early 20^th century NYC. If you are not a political science junkie from New York, this link might help shed light on my arcane reference. I mean had we been magically transported back to NYC in 1917 supporting a particular candidate would have gotten you two buckets of chicken – also this type of incentivizing is illegal. Therefore ideas of how to properly incentivize the electorate, shall we say, definitely not new.  

While talking about boosting voter turnout numbers with free buckets of chicken is kind of fun, maybe this soon to be published study may shed some light on why we take time out of our day to vote.  Why our voter turnout trails so many other industrialized nations? My previous statement includes voter turnout during elections that are perceived as being close contests, where people turn out to vote in greater numbers, in other words you feel that your vote counts more as you possibly cast the deciding vote. Well, I look forward to reading more details of the study, when I can get my hands on it, as it stands: participatory democracy 0, dismal science 1.