Voter Turnout and Percentage of the Vote for Minority Candidates in the 2014 Austin Council Election

Zoltan Hajnal (America’s Uneven Democracy, pages 76-78) argues that higher voter turnout is conducive to ethnic minorities’ representation on city councils. He states that it is more advantageous for Hispanics and Asian Americans than for African Americans. The Austin City Council election in November 2014 provides an opportunity to test whether Hispanics and African Americans benefitted in districts where those minorities constituted either a substantial percentage of the population of the district or constituted a majority of the district. 

District 1, located in northeast Austin, is considered an opportunity district for African Americans. Although African Americans do not constitute a majority of the voting age population, their percentage of the population is considered large enough to allow an African American candidate an equal opportunity to win the election in the district. According to the 2010 census, African Americans constituted 29.68 percent of the district’s voting age population (VAP)—residents who are 18 years of age or older; Hispanics were 37.06 percent of the VAP, and Asian Americans were 3.59 percent of the VAP. Because Hispanics are more likely than African Americans to be non-citizens, the district is an African American opportunity district.

Among the nine candidates in District 1, five were Anglos, and four were African Americans. Table 1 depicts the combined votes for the five Anglo candidates and for the four African American candidates, by precinct.

Table 1:  Votes for Anglo Candidates, Votes for African American Candidates, Voter Turnout in District 1, by Precinct

Precinct	Votes for Black Candidates	Votes for Anglo Candidates	% Vote for Black Candidates	% Vote for Anglo Candidates	Voter Turnout
101	141	56	71.6%	28.4%	37.81%
102	110	121	47.6%	52.4%	22.67%
103	320	244	56.7%	43.3%	34.69%
104	232	189	55.1%	44.9%	34.20%
108	264	154	63.2%	36.8%	28.03%
117	426	148	74.2%	25.8%	21.38%
118	107	48	69.0%	31.0%	18.26%
121	200	31	86.6%	13.4%	23.69%
122	837	122	87.3%	12.7%	31.73%
124	1,191	293	80.3%	19.7%	27.68%
126	1,313	340	79.4%	20.6%	31.33%
129	652	142	82.1%	17.9%	26.78%
130	472	198	70.4%	29.6%	32.99%
132	760	177	81.1%	18.9%	33.43%
133	379	142	72.7%	27.3%	32.44%
139	51	30	63.0%	37.0%	19.42%
141	54	37	59.3%	40.7%	19.61%
151	632	284	69.0%	31.0%	36.60%
153	594	388	60.5%	39.5%	27.77%
154	481	238	66.9%	33.1%	30.75%
156	267	97	73.4%	26.6%	34.50%
203	29	24	54.7%	45.3%	24.54%
227	16	14	53.3%	46.7%	13.04%
325	4	8	33.3%	66.7%	23.53%
444	24	9	72.7%	27.3%	12.27%

I calculated the relationship between percentage of the vote for African American candidates and voter turnout for each precinct, which resulted in a Pearson product moment correlation of 0.25, which is a weak relationship. The scatterplot of the African American vote and turnout is in figure 1. The linear trend line reflects the weak, but positive relationship.

Figure 1: Graph of Relationship between Percentage of the Vote for African American candidates and Voter Turnout

For candidates, perhaps the campaign’s concentration is on those precincts that provide a larger percentage of the district’s total vote. This is reflected in the precinct’s contribution to the total vote in the district. Table 2 displays the total votes cast in each precinct and the percentage of the total vote contributed by each precinct.

Table 2: Total Votes and Percentage Contribution, by Precinct

Precinct	Total Votes	% Vote Black Candidates	% Contribution
101	197	71.6%	1.5%
102	231	47.6%	1.8%
103	564	56.7%	4.3%
104	421	55.1%	3.2%
108	418	63.2%	3.2%
117	574	74.2%	4.4%
118	155	69.0%	1.2%
121	231	86.6%	1.8%
122	959	87.3%	7.3%
124	1484	80.3%	11.3%
126	1653	79.4%	12.6%
129	794	82.1%	6.1%
130	670	70.4%	5.1%
132	937	81.1%	7.2%
133	521	72.7%	4.0%
139	81	63.0%	0.6%
141	91	59.3%	0.7%
151	916	69.0%	7.0%
153	982	60.5%	7.5%
154	719	66.9%	5.5%
156	364	73.4%	2.8%
203	53	54.7%	0.4%
227	30	53.3%	0.2%
325	12	33.3%	0.1%
444	33	72.7%	0.3%
	13090	73.0%	100.0%

The Pearson product moment correlation of percentage of the vote for African American candidates in District 1 and the percentage contribution of the precinct to the total vote is .53, a stronger relationship. The scatterplot also reflects the stronger relationship.

Figure 2: Graph of Relationship between a Precinct’s Contribution to the Total District Vote and Percentage of the Vote for African American Candidates

An analysis of the majority Hispanic districts will be a future post.