Race, Ethnicity, and Alphabetically Ordered Ballots

Abstract

A number of scholars have recently argued that ballot order effects give certain candidates an unfair advantage in elections and have urged states to randomize or rotate the order of candidate names to make elections more rational and fair. This article suggests that advocates of reform have been too quick to concede that static ordering methods are nondiscriminatory. One common method of ballot ordering, arranging candidates in alphabetical order by their last names, disadvantages specific minority populations by pushing their candidates down the ballot. To substantiate this argument, I engineer two computer simulation experiments which show a significant link between ballot position and racial/ethnic status under alphabetic ordering laws. Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders are particularly burdened by these laws. Because courts apply a higher level of scrutiny to election laws that infringe fundamental voting rights than laws that merely regulate elections, the discriminatory impact of alphabetic ordering rules significantly bolsters the case to rotate or randomize ballot order.A number of scholars have recently argued that ballot order effects give certain candidates an unfair advantage in elections and have urged states to randomize or rotate the order of candidate names to make elections more rational and fair (e.g., Beazley, 2013;L. Miller, 2010). Courts have been reluctant to entertain Equal Protection challenges to ballot ordering laws and scholars tend to emphasize other arguments. This article suggests that advocates of reform have been too quick to concede that static ordering methods are nondiscriminatory. One common method of ballot ordering, arranging candidates in alphabetical order by their last names, pushes specific minority populations own the ballot. Because courts apply a higher level of scrutiny to election procedures that discriminate against a racial or ethnic minority group, evidence of discriminatory effect, to date neglected in the literature, significantly bolsters the case to rotate or randomize ballot order. 1 While no state opted to alphabetically order its ballots to intentionally discriminate against a particular minority group, this method of ordering ballots may have the unintended consequence of limiting particular minority groups' ability to participate in the political process. In particular, alphabetic ordering puts Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders (API) at a disadvantage because API surnames generally appear later in alphabetical order than do the names of other races and ethnicities. In this article, I discuss the legal status of alphabetically ordered ballots, offer a statistical analysis of the effect of alphabetic ordering on Asian American candidates, and discuss the implication of this research. I conclude that courts should strictly scrutinize laws that require alphabetically ordered ballots and find them unconstitutional.

Alphabetically Ordered Ballots and the Composition of American Legislatures

“…37. Edwards (2014) 1998). But recent research suggests election costs are primarily a function of the number of elections, the size of the jurisdiction, and polling operations, rather than ballot design (Montjoy 2010).…”

“… 28. Recent research, however, suggests that the racial and ethnic groups identified by the Census Bureau have similar surname distributions, except for Asian-Pacific Islanders who tend to have late-alphabet surnames (Edwards 2014). …”

“… 37. Edwards (2014) maintains that alphabetically ordering ballots unintentionally disadvantage Asian American candidates and violate the fundamental right to vote. …”