New Reports on Disability and Voter Turnout

The National Council on Disability and the Research Alliance for Accessible Voting have both released new reports on the Experience of Voters with Disabilities in the 2012 Election Cycle and Disability, Voter Turnout, and Voting Difficulties in the 2012 Elections.

They found that 15.6 million people with disabilities reported voting in the November 2012 elections. Their turnout rate was 5.7 percentage points lower than that of people without disabilities, meaning 3 million more voters with disabilities would have participated if they voted at the same rate as people without disabilities. Additionally in 2012,

• 30.1% of voters with disabilities reported difficulty in voting at a polling place, compared to 8.4% of voters without disabilities. 
• Over one-fourth of voters with disabilities voted by mail, compared to one-sixth of people without disabilities. Among people with disabilities who voted by mail, about one-tenth reported difficulties and the need for assistance in filling out or sending the ballot. 
• Almost one-third of voters with disabilities required assistance in voting, most commonly given by election officials or family members. 

The National Council on Disability noted architectural and physical barriers at registration and polling sites, as nearly 40% of respondents encountered physical barriers at their polling places.

The findings from both reports highlight the ongoing challenges voters with disabilities face in casting a ballot. Through advocacy and voter education we can help ensure that all eligible voters--including those with disabilities--can successfully cast a ballot. An easy way to start is by ensuring that our communities are registered: in 2012, the voter registration rate of people with disabilities was 2.3 percentage points lower than that of people without disabilities.

Can Nonprofits Increase Voter Turnout? Yes.

A new study by Nonprofit VOTE found that turnout among voters contacted by nonprofits during the 2012 election was 74%, six points above the 68% turnout rate for all registered voters.

The clients engaged by nonprofits were markedly more diverse, lower income, and younger than the general population of registered voters. Though these demographic groups are known to turn out at lower rates than their peers, nonprofits were successfully able to narrow traditional voting gaps based on age, race, ethnicity, and household income.

To assess the impact nonprofits have on turnout, Nonprofit VOTE enlisted 94 nonprofit service providers in seven states to track their voter contacts for evaluation purposes. These organizations reached 33,741 clients who registered or signed a pledge to vote. The results are available in a new report, Can Nonprofits Increase Voting Among Their Clients, Constituents, and Staff? An Evaluation of the Track the Vote Program.

"The findings and demographic information from this study underscore the potential of local nonprofits to reach people missed by campaigns and who are not expected to vote," said Michael Weekes, President of the Providers' Council and Nonprofit VOTE Chair.

In the study, the nonprofits had their biggest participation impact among groups underrepresented in the electoral process. The turnout rate of voters contacted by nonprofits compared to all registered voters was:

• 18 points higher for Latino voters (72% vs. 54%), 
• 15 points higher for voters under the age of 30 (68% vs. 53%), and 
• 15 points higher for voters with household incomes under $25,000 (68% vs. 53%). 

"Political participation is highly unequal in the United States, and efforts to engage the lowest-income Americans are scattered," says Peter Levine, Executive Director of CIRCLE, the Center for Information & Research on Civic Learning and Engagement. "One highly promising strategy is to integrate nonpartisan voter registration and outreach into the activities of nonprofits that serve the poorest Americans. The new report from Nonprofit VOTE shows that this approach worked in 2012 and should be strengthened for 2014 and beyond."

Download the Executive Summary and the full report to review the findings. 

Evaluating the Impact of Nonprofit Voter Engagement

What kind of impact do nonprofits have on voter turnout when they talk to their clients and constituents about voting? Who do they reach?

In 2012 we sought to answer these and other questions about the effectiveness and impact of nonprofits conducting voter engagement by having 94 nonprofits track their voter contacts. They engaged 33,741 clients and constituents across seven states, who were successfully matched to the state voter file.

Now, we're pleased to announce our findings from this first of its kind evaluation in a forthcoming report--Can Nonprofits Increase Voting Among Their Clients, Constituents, and Staff? An Evaluation of the Track the Vote Program. The results showed the impact of personal voter outreach by nonprofit service providers in raising turnout out rates among those least expected to vote and closing gaps in voter participation across all demographics.

• The clients and constituents engaged by nonprofits were markedly more diverse, lower income, and younger than all registered voters in the seven states, made up of populations with a history of lower voter turnout in past elections. 
• Voter turnout among those contacted by nonprofits was 74%, six points above the 68% turnout rate for all registered voters--with the largest turnout differences seen among young. Latino, and "low propensity voters" who campaigns typically miss. 

Learn more by signing up to receive a digital copy of the full report and detailed findings as soon as it is available.

Census Releases New Data on 2012 Election

On Wednesday, the Census Bureau released The Diversifying Electorate--Voting Rates by Race and Hispanic Origin in 2012 (and Other Recent Elections). The report draws on data from the November 2012 Current Population Survey Voting and Registration Supplement.

Among other things, it confirms that for the first time ever, black voters turned out at a higher rate than white voters: 66.2% of eligible black voters participated, compared to 64.1% of non-Hispanic white voters. Increased participation among black voters has been a trend since 1996, with participation rates increasing 13 percentage points since then. The data also shows that:

• Voting rates increase with age. In 2012, the percentage of eligible adults who voted ranged from 41.2% for 18- to 24-year-olds, to a high of 71.9% for those 65 and older. 
• Black and non-Hispanic white voters continue to lead in turnout. In 2012, both Hispanic and Asian voters voted at a rate of about 48%, trailing black and non-Hispanic white turnout. 
• Mobility matters. 11.7% of voters who lived at their current residence for less than one year cited "registration problems" as a reason for not voting--compared to 5.5% of all voters. 
• The "gender gap" in voting persists. In every presidential election since 1996, women have voted at higher rates than men. In 2012, the spread was about 4 percentage points, and widest among black voters at 9 percentage points. 

Read the full report to learn more about America's diversifying electorate.

Webinar Materials on Voter Turnout in 2012

Last week's webinar, Voter Turnout in the 2012 Election, is now available. Based on information from America Goes to the Polls 2012, the webinar covered voting trends among populations served by nonprofits, state-by-state turnout rankings, and factors affecting turnout--such as Electon Day Registration and swing state status.

Watch the presentation on YouTube. If you subscribe to our channel, you'll be notified whenever new content is posted. You can also download the PowerPoint presentation and the audio portion of the presentation, or browse all of our resources on voter turnout.

Register now for our May webinar on Voter Registration Modernization, and be sure to check our 2013 webinar schedule for upcoming trainings.

Youth Turnout: An Essay by Peter Levine

Most people expected youth turnout to decline in 2012. Signs of diminished enthusiasm were hard to miss. For instance, the Pew Research Center reported that just 28% of young people were following the election closely, down from 40% at the same point four years ago.

My organization, CIRCLE, asked a random sample of young Americans whether Barack Obama or Mitt Romney was a "typical politician." The largest group, 36%, said "both." Another 19% chose President Obama alone. That means that an outright majority of young people saw the President as a typical politician, not as an inspirational leader, as they might have said in 2008.

But young people (18-29) actually turned out at almost exactly the same rate this year as they had in 2008: 50%. They preferred Barack Obama by a lopsided 23-point margin and were numerous enough to determine the outcome of the campaign. If Governor Romney had drawn half of the youth vote in Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Virginia, he would have won their 80 electoral votes and would now be president.

Since young people voted at the same rate in 2012 despite showing less enthusiasm than four years ago, I think we can conclude that they weren't moved by excitement or hope as much as by commitment and persistence. That is good news because we should want young people of all backgrounds and ideologies to participate in civic life, by voting and also by serving in their communities, following the news, discussing issues, and informing themselves. Civic participation is a habit formed during youth, so the future of our democracy depends on engaging young people today. From that perspective, the increase in youth turnout is heartening, and it's good news that young people have amassed political power by voting–that means that the parties, interest groups, and the news media will compete to engage, persuade, and educate young people.

 But fifty percent turnout is still not impressive. The United States routinely posts the lowest voter turnout rates of any true democracy in the world, and young Americans lag 15 points or more behind older Americans in voting. Also, the "new normal" of massive youth voting is in some ways just a return to the "old normal." In seven of the 10 elections since 1976, youth turnout has been just about 50%. One way to read the trend is to say that youth turnout is stuck at about half of eligible young citizens.

Equally stubborn are disparities in voting by social class. Whereas young people with some college experience voted at a rate of about 63% this November, the turnout of non-college-educated young people was just 36%. Those non-voters were diverse ideologically and included a substantial proportion who liked Mitt Romney better than Barack Obama. But they failed to vote for any candidate.

The whole infrastructure of churches, grassroots political parties, local newspapers, and unions that once introduced working-class young people to politics is now shattered. And the sophisticated turnout operations of modern presidential campaigns focus on likely voters, meaning that college campuses get lots of attention but no one reaches young people who work in retail, service industries, and manufacturing. The hyper-efficient Obama campaign contacted just 5.8% of youth without college experience.

Young voters are back. They turn out in good years and bad and make the difference in close elections. But half of our young people are still non-voters, and their detachment from politics reflects their general alienation from civic life. We can't be satisfied until we reengage them.

Peter Levine is Lincoln Filene Professor of Citizenship & Public Affairs and Director of CIRCLE: the Center for Information & Research on Civic Learning & Engagement at Tufts University's Jonathan M. Tisch College of Citizenship and Public Service.

This Thursday: Voter Turnout in the 2012 Election

There's still time to register for Thursday's webinar on the 2012 election:

Voter Turnout in the 2012 Election
Thursday April 18th, 2:00-3:00pm Eastern

With elections now certified in all 50 states, Nonprofit VOTE has released America Goes to the Polls 2012, the latest in a series of reports on national turnout and voting trends. In this webinar we will share some of the report's most interesting findings, including state-by-state voter turnout rankings and factors affecting turnout, such as Election Day Registration and swing state status. We will also examine key voting trends among populations served by nonprofits, as well as proposals to expand voter registration and the opportunity to vote.

How Did Your State Do? 2012 State Turnout Rankings

In 2012, 58.7% of voting eligible citizens across the country turned out to vote in the presidential election. Turnout ranged from a high of 76.1% in Minnesota to a low of 44.5% in Hawaii. In total, 130.3 million voters cast ballots in 2012, about 2.3 million less than in 2008.

• Minnesota was first in voter turnout in 2012, while Maine (the 2010 title holder) fell to 6th place. Minnesota has led the country in voter turnout in eight of the last nine midterm and presidential elections.

• Five of the ten states with the highest turnout in 2012 have some form of Election Day Registration which allows voters to register or update their information on Election Day before casting a ballot: Iowa, Maine, Minnesota, New Hampshire, and Wisconsin.

• Five of the ten states with the highest turnout in 2012 were swing states--Colorado, Iowa, New Hampshire, Virginia, and Wisconsin--where parties and interest groups invested extensive time and resources in media and mobilization.

• In contrast, five of the lowest turnout states have more burdensome registration requirements and are considered solidly Democratic or Republican--Tennessee, Arkansas, Texas, Oklahoma, and West Virginia. Of those five states, none had a margin of victory in the presidential race of less than 16 points, and Oklahoma had a spread of 34 points.

Where does your state fall in the rankings? 

Download America Goes to the Polls 2012 for more information on turnout and voting trends in the 2012 election.


Source: U.S. Elections Project. The table on the left ranks states by total ballots cast as a percent of eligible voters in the 2012 general election. 2008 turnout rank is in parentheses.

Voting Trends: Online Registration

In 2008 only two states allowed voters to register online. By the 2012 election 13 states had online registration systems up and running. Currently, at least 14 additional states are considering legislation that would allow online registration.

Online registration helps boost registration rates among young voters. Since Arizona pioneered online registration in 2002, the registration rate for 18-24 year olds has risen from 28% to 53%. Today, over 70% of Arizona's registrations are submitted online. In 2012, five states rolled out online voter registration statewide for the first time:

• In California, during the five weeks leading up to the registration deadline, more than one million voters submitted online registration applications or updates. More than 60% of users were under the age of 35. 
• In Ohio, previously registered voters were allowed to update their registration information online and more than 100,000 individuals did so in the two months before the registration deadline--one-third in the week prior to the deadline and 13,000 alone on the day before registration closed. 
•  In Oregon, which has allowed online registration since 2010, nearly 20,000 voters registered online on the state's deadline. 

Not only is online registration convenient for voters, but it also benefits election officials. In Arizona, the costs associated with an online registration are just $0.03 compared to $0.83 for a paper registration. Online registration also reduces data entry errors and can lead to more accurate voter rolls, streamlining the Election Day experience for both voters and election officials.

April 18 Webinar: Voter Turnout in the 2012 Election

Looking for interesting facts about the 2012 election and turnout? Join our next webinar:

Voter Turnout in the 2012 Election
Thursday April 18th, 2:00-3:00pm Eastern

With elections now certified in all 50 states, Nonprofit VOTE has released America Goes to the Polls 2012, the latest in a series of reports on national turnout and voting trends. In this webinar we will share some of the report's most interesting findings, including state-by-state voter turnout rankings and factors affecting turnout, such as Election Day Registration and swing state status. We will also examine key voting trends among populations served by nonprofits, as well as proposals to expand voter registration and the opportunity to vote.

Girls Inc. She Votes 2012: Future voters, future leaders

A partner of Nonprofit VOTE, Girls Inc. is a national affiliate-based organization "inspiring all girls to be strong, smart, and bold."

In 2012, 56 local Girls Inc. affiliates around the country participated in She Votes, enabling 4,424 girls to cast ballots in a mock election. Through She Votes, girls get hands-on experience with voting, and learn about voter registration, the importance of women in politics, who represents them at various levels of office, and how to run campaigns. In addition to the mock election, many affiliates hosted speakers and developed additional programming:

• In Sarasota, FL, girls ran for Mayor, Vice Mayor, Historian, Secretary, and Treasurer, complete with speeches. In order to strengthen girls' understanding of office, these newly elected officials will serve one-year terms and then face reelection. For this project, Girls Inc. of Sarasota partnered with the local county supervisor of elections and a local judge, who swore the girls into office. 
•  Girls Inc. of Kingsport, TN had two girls "stand-in" as candidates for a presidential debate, fielding questions from girls in the audience. 
• U.S. Senator Kelly Ayotte (R-NH), Senate candidate Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), and Gubernatorial candidate Maggie Hassan (D-NH) also spoke to Girls Inc. affiliates last fall, along with an array of county clerks, mayors, and other officials and candidates. 
• Girls Inc. of Southwestern Connecticut met the mayor and toured City Hall. 

In 2012, Girls Inc. also added a parent outreach component to She Votes. Staff created a "take-home card" that informs parents about the program and has a space for girls to track their age during each election until they finally turn 18 and are eligible to vote in a real election. The take-home card also reminds parents to be good civic role models by voting themselves and taking their daughter with them to the polls.

Read the report about Girls Inc. She Votes 2012 to learn more. 

Girls Inc. She Votes is a nonpartisan educational initiative that gives girls the skills and confidence to envision themselves as both future voters and future candidates. Started in 2004, this biennial project helps girls understand the American political system and prepares them for a life as engaged citizens.

Do Voters Contacted by Social Service Agencies Vote?

Last year, 87 service providers in nine states tracked approximately 41,000 voters they registered or had sign a voter pledge card. There were 15,393 voter registrations and 25,416 voter pledges. Now, we're using that data to measure the impact of nonprofit voter engagement and highlight effective strategies for nonprofits. We're excited about what we're learning. Here's the progress report so far:

1. Voter File Match: We're matching the 41,000 voters to state voter files to find out if they're officially listed as registered voters. Our match rate so far is 94%--high given our low-income and mobile populations.

2. Comparing Turnout Rates: For voters matched, we will compare voter turnout rates to average turnout rates for the state and various demographic groups.

3. Learning about our Voters: The state voter file, enhanced with data from research partners, will tell us who our nonprofits are reaching. What is their background and are they first time or infrequent voters? Demographic information on age, gender, ethnicity, and income can generate detailed turnout reports. Turnout rates can also be compared among groups, as well as for each agency and type of contact--either a voter registration or voter pledge.

We'll have additional details to share once the voter file match is complete and we start processing data. A full report, including case studies and data summaries, will be released in May. Stay tuned!

America Goes to the Polls 2012: State by State Turnout

With elections now certified in all 50 states, Nonprofit VOTE is pleased to release the latest edition of America Goes to the Polls--a report on national turnout and voting trends. Despite Hurricane Sandy and a slew of proposed or enacted state-level changes in voting procedures, an estimated 58.7% of eligible voters cast ballots on November 6th. Although turnout was below 2008's benchmark high, it still exceeded turnout for most presidential elections of the last 40 years--even in spite of steep drop off in hurricane-impacted states like New York and New Jersey. Here are other highlights from the report:

• Minnesota was number one in the country in voter turnout. Hawaii was last, while Wisconsin and Colorado came in 2nd and 3rd, respectively.
• Seven of the top ten turnout states had Election Day Registration, swing state status or both. Voter turnout in Election Day Registration states was 12 points higher than in states without it.
• 96% of television ad spending went to ten battleground states--this number represents spending by presidential campaigns and allied groups between April 11th and November 6th.
• Voters continue to embrace early voting. National polls showed that 33-40% of voters voted early in-person or by mail, up from 31% in 2008 and 23% in 2004.
• Youth turnout is growing in both size and diversity. Young voters ages 18-29 increased their share of national voter turnout from 18% in 2008 to 19% in 2012. The percent of eligible young voters who are minorities rose to 42% in 2012.

Read the full report for additional information on 2012 turnout and historic trends.

2012 Spotlight: Boys & Girls Clubs of America

The Boys & Girls Clubs of America's 2012 "Our Voice, Our Choice" campaign effectively combined many elements of the Nonprofit VOTE voter engagement model.

1. Commitment from the top. "Character and Citizenship" is one of BGCA's six program foci, and the vice president responsible for this area was able to get institutional buy-in for voter engagement as a natural extension of this core commitment. This helped ensure the various campaign elements were seen as sanctioned and pre-approved.

2. Planning. High level buy-in was secured in part because the Director and Assistant Director for Character and Citizenship developed a thoughtful and organized multi-stage plan months in advance. They organized voter engagement activities into five "pushes," indicating different activities for staff and program participants, at the national office, and among affiliates. Unlike a spontaneous activity proposed last minute during the height of an intense election season, this prepared approach allowed for internal review, approval, and support.

3. Branding. BGCA developed an attractive "Our Voice, Our Choice" logo that became ubiquitous within and among BGCA affiliates (though it was not part of BGCA's external communications). The campaign tagline, "Great citizens start here," played off a familiar BGCA motto, "Great futures start here."

4. Built in, not tacked on. The BGCA campaign generally didn't require extra resources because most activities were incorporated into existing youth programs and leveraged existing policies:

• National staff: BGCA's campaign plan included a range of activities throughout the various stages, including: Pre- and post-campaign "We the People" quizzes with prizes; iCivics online games; "Lunch & Learn" with county board of elections officials; fun videos made in-house; red, white, and blue "jeans day"; cupcakes and sodas on Election Day; an online guide to activities, and; a special HR memo explaining their paid leave policy for voting.
• Local clubs: BGCA utilized existing communications channels--primarily their internal intranet "online communities"--to provide their 4,000 affiliates and 45,000 staff members with regular messages and reminders as well as well as links to Nonprofit VOTE resources and election information. Local clubs incorporated mock elections, iCivics quizzes and games, and voting activities into ongoing youth programs.

5. Having fun! From the start, the campaign was designed to be fun and festive. BGCA produced a man-in-the-street style video to find out what people know about voting, the national office hosted "Lunch & Learn" sessions, youth played iCivics games online, and Election Day itself was a celebration of democracy featuring balloons and festive attire.

Election Highlights from 2012

The 2012 election is over, but there's plenty to learn from the results. Early voting was popular, particularly in battleground states: 69% of votes in Nevada were cast early along with 53% in Florida, 72% in Colorado, and 42% in Iowa. Many voters are taking advantage of early voting opportunities and the flexibility it affords in deciding when and how to vote. These changes are causing nonprofits, communities, and campaigns to rethink the ways they approach Election Day.

Minority voters cast a record 28% of the votes, up from 26% in 2008. For the first time ever, black voters may have voted at a higher rate than white voters. While this is not yet confirmed, the rise in black turnout has been driven by increases in voter participation, not by demographic shifts, as is often the case with other minority groups. According to Pew Hispanic Center projections, Latinos will account for 40% of the growth in the eligible electorate between now and 2030, at which time 40 million Latinos will be eligible to vote--up from 23.7 million now.

Although lagging in overall numbers, youth participation is becoming a critical factor in deciding elections. 46 million youth were eligible to vote in the November 2012 election, including 16.8 million who became eligible since 2008.

Additional turnout information will be available later this year in the next installment of our America Goes to the Polls series and in the Census Current Population Survey: Voting and Registration Supplement.

Long Lines Discouraged 49,000 Voters in Central FL

After the November election, we reported on long lines in a number of states. Now, a new report suggests that as many as 49,000 people in Central Florida did not cast a ballot because of extended waiting times.

Theodore Allen has been analyzing the impact of long lines at the polls since 2004. His analysis of Central Florida's 2012 results compared precinct closing times, Election Day turnout, and results in the presidential race for all Lake, Orange, Osceola, and Seminole county precincts.

His review indicated that for every additional hour that a precinct stayed open past 7 pm--an indicator of line length throughout the day--turnout dropped by as much as 4.8%. Allen suggests that longer ballots (six pages in Orange County) likely caused longer lines which in turn suppressed turnout. Additionally, fewer early voting days probably contributed to longer wait times on Election Day. Many Central Florida voters waited in line for three or more hours after the polls officially closed.

Whatever the contributing factors, voters simply cannot be expected to set aside hours to cast a ballot. We need to focus on ways to improve access to the ballot, and can start by expanding early and absentee voting opportunities. Additional voter education can also help reduce the amount of time voters spend filling out their ballot. Let's kick 2013 off right and resolve to eliminate long lines at the polls.

Measuring Impact, Learning What Works

This year, Nonprofit VOTE undertook a first-of-its-kind collaboration to assess the capacity of service providers to promote voting and their impact in doing so. Working with seven partners in nine states, we tracked the voter engagement activities of 87 local service providers who each agreed to register or collect voter pledges from 250 or more of their clients. With training from their state partner, local nonprofits tracked the voter contact information of over 40,000 people receiving services--15,110 people registered to vote and another 25,355 clients and staff members filled out pledge to vote cards. Everyone received a follow up mailing and/or call with state-specific voting information. The participating nonprofits represented a diverse pool of organizations, including community action agencies, immigrant serving nonprofits, health centers, affordable housing groups, family and children focused agencies, shelters, and disability programs spread across states like Arizona, Colorado, Michigan, Ohio, and North Carolina.

Early next year, we will review state voter files to find out if the 40,000 people contacted voted in the November election and if, for example, they were first time voters or were already registered but infrequent voters who didn't vote in the 2010 midterm. We're also conducting in-depth interviews with 26 of the participating nonprofits to hear firsthand how they conducted voter engagement, the capacity challenges they faced, and what did and didn’t work. Together, the metrics and case studies will create a more robust roadmap to allow a far greater number of nonprofit service providers to incorporate voter engagement into their work in future election cycles and to do so with greater effectiveness and impact. Stay tuned.

Partner Spotlight: National Association of Community Health Centers

As the year comes to an end, we want to recognize the work of our many state and national partners, along with the local nonprofits who made an impact on voter turnout by registering and educating their communities.

In 2012, the National Association of Community Health Centers (NACHC) had 175 members that conducted voter registration activities. The participating health centers were located in 34 states--from Oklahoma to Massachusetts, South Carolina, and Hawaii--representing both urban and rural locations with mixed demographics. These health centers registered or re-registered over 25,000 voters and collected an additional 10,000 voter pledges.

Although NACHC has managed their Community Health Vote program for a number of years, in 2012 they made great strides in working to develop a reservoir of best practices to help additional health centers determine what strategies might be successful at their specific sites. Health centers engaged in a variety of voter registration, education, and get-out-the-vote activities: a health center in Philadelphia distributed educational materials on voter ID, while centers in Las Vegas and North Carolina provided transportation to the polls during early voting. Some health centers established voter registration and information kiosks in waiting rooms. NACHC also maintained a national number that voters could text to find their polling place which over 1,000 individuals utilized. A provider in South Carolina helped a 108-year-old woman register and vote for the first time.

The National Voter Registration Act requires health centers that enroll patients in WIC and Medicare to ask about voter registration. Thus, many health centers already offer voter registration on an ongoing basis and have used this requirement to consider how to expand voter registration to other points of service. Rather than episodic registration drives, some are considering how to maintain voter engagement efforts year round while expanding the work during general elections.

One barrier is that there is no template for doing this work at health centers because their staffing, foot traffic, services, and populations vary so much. A half dozen health centers participated in case studies to provide ideas and guidance for others moving forward. Like other nonprofits it is often left to the individual organization to determine what will work best for their constituents and community.

Serving Democracy: Nonprofits Promote Voter Engagement in 2012

With Election Day now behind us, it's critical to acknowledge the role the nonprofit sector played in registering, educating, and engaging voters in 2012.

Nonprofit VOTE's Executive Director, George Pillsbury, authored an article that is featured in the current issue of The Nonprofit Quarterly. "Serving Democracy: Nonprofits Promote Voter Engagement in 2012" profiles the growing role of nonprofit service providers in mobilizing their communities to vote. It describes the rationale for it, the research behind it, and how it has continued expanding this year. It's a call for the entire nonprofit sector to do more now and in the cycles to come.

We've come a long way as a sector, but there's much more to come. Read the full article online or download the PDF. It's not too early to start thinking about what your organization can do in 2013!

2012 Ballot Measures: Budgets and Public Services

Ballot measures give citizens the opportunity to directly accept or reject laws or amendments. This year, voters in many states cast ballots on proposals related to revenue, spending, and public services.

In California, voters passed both Propositions 30 and 39, which raised income taxes and corporate taxes, respectively, as a means to prevent cuts to education and fund clean energy jobs. Oregon voters also came out in favor of education when they passed Measure 85, which allocates the corporate income and excise tax "kicker" refund to the General Fund to support K through 12 public education. Oregonians also voted down Measure 84, which would have phased out inheritance and estate taxes.

Some measures that would have severely limited states' power to raise revenue were also defeated. Florida voters rejected Amendment 3, which proposed a limit on state revenue based solely on inflation and population. Similarly, Michigan's Proposal 5 would have required a two-thirds majority in the state legislature in order to raise taxes. The proposal failed, partly because many believed it would have caused gridlock in the state legislature, rendering representatives incapable of raising taxes at all. A majority of New Hampshire voters voted in favor of a constitutional amendment that would ban any new taxes on personal income, however, as an amendment it required a two-thirds majority to become law.

Voters in Arizona and South Dakota voted down sales tax increases aimed at supporting public services. Arizona's Proposition 204, which would have renewed a one-cent sales tax to fund education, failed at the polls. Similarly, Measure 15 in South Dakota, which would have established a one percent sales tax increase in order to fund both education and health care, was also defeated. Voters in Oklahoma struck down an annual increase in property taxes by voting against Question 758.

Find out how nonprofits can get involved in ballot measure education and advocacy.

This post was written by Nonprofit VOTE Intern Lauren Dobbs. Lauren graduated from Boston University with a BA in International Relations in 2011 and will be attending graduate school next fall to obtain an MSc in Development Studies.