Early Voting in the Constitutional Amendments, 2019

I will be posting daily on voter turnout in the election to consider ten proposed amendments to the Texas Constitution. Amended 498 times since 1876, the Constitution continues to have layers of new skin applied to the deteriorating body that was crafted in 1875 in response to the administration of Governor E.J. Davis and Radical Republican Reconstruction. Unfortunately, the skin doesn't perfectly cover the scars left by years of face lifts and other cosmetic procedures.

Voter turnout is not good in Texas, and it's even worse in special elections, which are held to fill vacancies in some offices, consider bonds, and adopt or reject constitutional amendments. In the most recent special election for constitutional amendments, November 2017, only 4.5 percent of the voting age population and 5.81 percent of registered voters turned out. The prospects aren't good for a large turnout in this election. Although the early voting percentages from the state's 30 counties with the largest number of registered voters is not necessarily predictive of total turnout, it does provide a measure of voter enthusiasm and interest. I know that several groups in Travis County are pushing turnout as the county this election is the premier of the county's new voting system. There is also at least one measure, Proposition 4 on the prohibition of an income tax on individuals, that has created some discussion.

So, starting tomorrow, I will be posting a graph depicting early voting in the counties from the Texas Secretary of State's office. I will also be posting the figures from 2017 and 2015 for comparison. In 2015, 8.30 percent of the voting age population and 11.34 percent of registered voters vote. The 2015 and 2017 elections will provide an interesting basis for comparison.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Whither the Republican Party?

Jonathan Rauch and Benjamin Wittes write in The Atlantic magazine: So we arrive at a syllogism: (1) The GOP has become the party of Trumpism. (2) Trumpism is a threat to democratic values and the rule of law. (3) The Republican Party is a threat to democratic values and the rule of law. A syllogism is, according to dictionary.com: 1. Logic. an argument the conclusion of which is supported by two premises, of which one (major premise) contains the term (major term) that is the predicate of the conclusion, and the other (minor premise) contains the term (minor term) that is the subject of the conclusion; common to both premises is a term (middle term) that is excluded from the conclusion. A typical form is “All A is C; all B is A; therefore, all B is C.”. 2. deductive reasoning. 3. an extremely subtle, sophisticated, or deceptive argument. Which definition applies here?   First, has the GOP become the party of Trump? Has he taken control of the party appa...
Read more

Choices for the Final Four (ICRC Commissions, that is)

Image
With four commission positions remaining to be filled, whom should the commissioners select? The commissioners should choose an African American male from TCCC precinct 1. Since the greatest concentrations of African Americans are located in TCCC precinct 1 (see this map ), choosing an African American from this geographic area would provide the greatest voice to the area with the highest concentration of African Americans in the city and the area that would most likely be included in a council district that would possess a plurality of African Americans. The choice should Nathaniel Bradford because of his connections to the community. An Anglo male and an Anglo female should be chosen from TCCC precinct 2. One, if not both, should be chosen from those voter precincts slightly east and west of MOPAC that featured high voter turnout in the 2012 mayoral election (see this map ). The male and female from those voting precincts who the ARP considered the most qualified are He...
Read more

In Defense of a Theory

I’m a big fan of political scientist Seth Masket, but what he wrote in defense of the theory of presidential nominations expounded in The Party Decides intrigues me. First, he notes that his initial defense caused some blowback: Last week at Mischiefs of Faction , I wrote about the book The Party Decides and the extent to which the 2016 is causing trouble for it. I argued that the Republican race isn't providing a very clean test of the theory, while the Democratic race is. This invited substantial pushback from Jonathan Chait , Justin Grimmer , and others, suggesting that I was either protecting the theory from actual testing, or that the theory itself was untestable. So I'd like to clarify a bit and suggest just what evidence we've gathered this year. Then, he goes on to explain more fully: Now, in my recent post, I focused on what I see as the central claim of the book: The party generally gets what it wants. That is, when party elites have selected a...
Read more