The relationship between <scp>in‐person</scp> voting and <scp>COVID</scp>‐19: Evidence from the Wisconsin primary

Cotti, Chad; Engelhardt, Bryan; Foster, Joshua; Nesson, Erik; Niekamp, Paul

doi:10.1111/coep.12519

Cited by 34 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The general belief that the virus is not real and the safety measures are not required could mean that COVID-19 may not reduce inperson voter turnout in Nigeria, contrary to the finding that it reduced turnout in the US primary elections (Flanders et al 2020;Morris and Miller 2020). However, this may lead to an increase in the number of COVID-19 cases, as Cotti et al (2020) argued, and perhaps increased casualties for the aged population (Bertoli et al 2020) because age increases the odds of voting, as this study's results indicate. Thus, in this scenario, increasing absentee voting may be encouraged as many voters shift to a more health-preserving means of voting (Yoder et al 2020).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…The research exploring the relationships between COVID-19 and electoral outcomes is still very nascent and absent in Africa and many other developing countries and regions. Most of the few studies that have been done were conducted in the US (Cotti et al 2020;Flanders et al 2020;Morris and Miller 2020), except a very few studies done in France (Bertoli et al 2020;Cassan and Sangnier 2020). The thrust of the existing studies has been on determining whether turnout during the pandemic increased the risk of more cases (Cotti et al 2020;Flanders et al 2020) or deaths from COVID-19 (Bertoli et al 2020;Cassan and Sangnier 2020).…”

Section: Review Of the Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Most of the few studies that have been done were conducted in the US (Cotti et al 2020;Flanders et al 2020;Morris and Miller 2020), except a very few studies done in France (Bertoli et al 2020;Cassan and Sangnier 2020). The thrust of the existing studies has been on determining whether turnout during the pandemic increased the risk of more cases (Cotti et al 2020;Flanders et al 2020) or deaths from COVID-19 (Bertoli et al 2020;Cassan and Sangnier 2020). Others focused on the potential impact of the pandemic on voter turnout (e.g., Morris and Miller 2020) and absentee voting (Yoder et al 2020).…”

Section: Review Of the Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Morris and Miller (2020) showed that COVID-19 reduced turnout in the US primary elections. Cotti et al (2020) investigated the extent to which inperson voting increased the number of COVID-19 cases after the Wisconsin primary elections and found a statistically and economically significant association between in-person voting and the spread of COVID-19 two to three weeks after the election. Flanders, Flanders, and Goodman (2020) examined the relationship between US primary elections' voter turnout with county-level COVID-19 incidence early in the pandemic and found that COVID-19 risk was related to voter turnout most strongly in Michigan during the week starting three days postelection.…”

Section: Review Of the Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

COVID-19 pandemic and political participation in Lagos, Nigeria

Nwankwo

2021

SN Soc Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The paper investigates the relationships between COVID-19 and voter turnout. Current studies have focused on determining whether turnout during the pandemic increased the risk of more cases of or deaths from COVID-19 and others focused on the potential impact of the epidemic on voter turnout and absentee voting. The present study explores, via hierarchical multiple regression, the powers of traditional variables to predict voter turnout while controlling for opinions on the safety measures for curtailing COVID-19. Data were collected through a questionnaire survey in Lagos, the epicenter of the pandemic in Nigeria. Results indicate a general tendency to believe COVID-19 is not real in Nigeria, and most of the safety measures in fighting against the virus are not essential. COVID-19 skeptics are significantly more likely to vote during the pandemic. However, since most skeptics do not have trust in government and hence abstain, voter turnout during the pandemic is likely to be very low because people who would have voted (i.e., those having trust in government) prefer not to turnout rather than contract the virus. The paper indicates the essentials of the social connectedness and political efficacy models for exploring the connection between COVID-19 and political participation.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Section: Review Of the Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Review Of the Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Review Of the Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

COVID-19 pandemic and political participation in Lagos, Nigeria

Nwankwo

2021

SN Soc Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Among several studies documenting "superspreading" events due to large public gatherings, [13][14][15] some studies have suggested that elections may also be linked to increased viral transmission 16,17 ; however, evidence on these surges has been mixed. 18 Nevertheless, in 2020 state governments implemented election delays and varying changes to voting processes for statewide and national elections, such as mailing ballots or ballot applications to voters and temporarily switching to universal mail-in voting.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Emergency Absentee Voting for Hospitalized Patients and Voting During COVID-19: A 50-State Study

Tang

Wong

Ganguli

et al. 2021

WestJEM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Voters facing illness or disability are disproportionately under-represented in terms of voter turnout. Earlier research has indicated that enfranchisement of these populations may reinforce the implementation of policies improving health outcomes and equity. Due to the confluence of the coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and the 2020 election, we aimed to assess emergency absentee voting processes, which allow voters hospitalized after regular absentee deadlines to still obtain an absentee ballot, and election changes due to COVID-19 in all 50 states. Methods: We performed a cross-sectional study collecting 34 variables pertaining to emergency voting processes and COVID-19-related election changes, including deadlines, methods of submission for applications and ballots, and specialized services for patients. Data were obtained from, in order of priority, state boards of elections websites, poll worker manuals, application forms, and state legislation. We verified all data through direct correspondence with state boards of elections. Results: Emergency absentee voting processes are in place in 39 states, with the remaining states having universal vote-by-mail (n = 5) or extended regular absentee voting deadlines (n = 6). The emergency absentee period most commonly began within 24 hours following the normal absentee application deadline, which was often seven days before an election (n = 11). Unique aspects of emergency voting processes included patients designating an “authorized agent” to deliver their applications and ballots (n = 38), electronic ballot delivery (n = 5), and in-person teams that deliver ballots directly to patients (n = 18). Documented barriers in these processes nationwide include unavailable online information (n = 11), restrictions mandating agents to be family members (n = 7), physician affidavits or signatures (n = 9), and notary or witness signature requirements (n = 15). For the November 2020 presidential election, 12 states expanded absentee eligibility to allow COVID-19 as a reason to request an absentee ballot, and 18 states mailed absentee ballot applications or absentee ballots to all registered voters. Conclusion: While 39 states operate emergency absentee voting processes for hospitalized voters, there are considerable areas for improvement and heterogeneity in guidelines for these protocols. For future election cycles, information on emergency voting and broader election reforms due to COVID-19 may be useful for emergency providers and patients alike to improve the democratic participation of voters experiencing illness.

show abstract

Throwing caution to the wind: How hurricanes affect COVID‐19 spread

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study exploits the pathway of Hurricane Laura to assess its impact on the spread of COVID‐19. Using US hospital data on confirmed and suspected adult COVID‐19 cases, we find average daily cases per week rose by more than 12% primarily in tropical storm‐affected counties in subsequent weeks. We suspect the key mechanisms involve constraints on social distancing for two reasons. First, there is significant evidence of storm‐induced mobility. Second, lower income areas endured higher growth in hospital cases during the post‐hurricane period. These findings provide crucial insights for policy‐makers when designing natural disaster protocols to adjust for potential respiratory viral illnesses.

show abstract

The relationship between in‐person voting and COVID‐19: Evidence from the Wisconsin primary

Cited by 34 publications

References 33 publications

COVID-19 pandemic and political participation in Lagos, Nigeria

COVID-19 pandemic and political participation in Lagos, Nigeria

Emergency Absentee Voting for Hospitalized Patients and Voting During COVID-19: A 50-State Study

Throwing caution to the wind: How hurricanes affect COVID‐19 spread

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About