Solving the Problem of Low Voter Turnout in Local Elections

Off-Cycle Elections: The Elephant in the Room

While national elections garner significant attention and participation, local elections, which occur during off-cycle years, face abysmally low voter turnout.

Despite the importance of local governments in shaping our communities through policy decisions and budget allocations, voter turnout in these elections hovers around 20%, a stark contrast to the 50-60% participation seen in presidential and midterm elections.

Broken Signals and skewed Participation

This low turnout distorts election results and fails to accurately represent the preferences of our citizenry.

Older, more affluent, and white voters are significantly more likely to participate in local elections, leading to policies that prioritize their interests at the expense of minority communities and younger generations.

The result is a breakdown in communication between elected officials and their constituents.

Fiscal Folly and Ineffective Governance

Holding off-cycle elections comes at a hefty financial cost, demanding the same level of resources as high-turnout elections.

This expenditure is a fiscal travesty, especially considering the minimal participation.

Furthermore, low turnout undermines the ability of local governments to respond effectively to the needs of their communities.

A Novel Solution: Consolidating Elections

To address these challenges, experts propose a simple yet transformative solution: moving local election dates to align with on-cycle, high-turnout elections held in even years.

Multiple studies have demonstrated that this shift can double or even triple voter turnout.

The Benefits of Consolidation

Consolidating elections has numerous advantages:

• Increased participation: Makes voting more accessible by reducing the number of separate election dates.
• Improved representation: Results in a voting population that more accurately reflects the demographics of the community.
• More effective government: Elected officials are better equipped to make policies that align with the priorities of the majority.
• Cost-effectiveness: Fewer elections translate to lower costs for the government.

Gaining Traction and Overcoming Obstacles

This solution is gaining momentum, with several states and hundreds of cities adopting it.

Unlike other electoral reforms that face congressional gridlock, moving local elections to even years can be implemented at the state or municipal level.

Public opinion also strongly supports the move, with two-thirds of Americans favoring it.

Urging Action

Addressing this problem is crucial for improving local governance and ensuring that our elected officials represent the interests of all constituents.

Civil society organizations, concerned citizens, and elected officials must work together to push for this transformative reform.

By moving local elections to even years, we can invigorate our democracy and empower all voices in shaping our communities.