Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Election Day

Election Day in the United States is the statutorily designated date for holding general elections for public offices, occurring annually on the following the in . This date, codified in under 2 U.S.C. § 7, standardizes the timing for electing the and every four years, all 435 members of the every two years, and approximately one-third of the 100 U.S. Senators every two years, alongside concurrent state and local elections in most jurisdictions. Established by an to replace disparate state scheduling that previously spanned weeks or months, the choice of early accommodated post-harvest travel for rural voters while avoiding severe winter conditions, with selected to follow a journey after religious observance in an dominated by farmers and limited by unpaved roads. Unlike in many democracies, is not a , though some states mandate time off for workers, and it serves as the traditional focal point for in-person amid rising early and absentee options that have extended the effective voting period. The day underscores the constitutional framework of under Article I and II, where states administer elections subject to ional regulation for times, places, and manner, yet persistent debates over turnout—historically averaging 60% in presidential races—and access reforms highlight its role as a logistical and civic milestone rather than an immutable ritual.

History

Colonial and Early Republic Practices

In colonial America, elections for assemblies and other offices were governed by provincial charters and local customs, with no standardized national or even colonial-wide date for voting. These contests typically occurred in the fall or as summoned by governors, often spanning multiple days to facilitate attendance from dispersed rural populations traveling by foot or . Voting rights were confined to white male property owners, generally those aged 21 or older who held freehold land worth a minimum value—such as 40 shillings annual income in many colonies—or paid sufficient taxes, reflecting a that only economic stakeholders should influence . Such elections emphasized oral or public voting methods, including viva voce declarations at county courthouses, where voters announced choices amid gatherings that doubled as social events with food, drink, and music to encourage participation. This decentralized approach prioritized community consensus over secrecy, with turnout varying widely based on local mobilization rather than fixed schedules. After the Constitution's ratification in 1788, Article II empowered state legislatures to determine the manner of appointing presidential electors, resulting in diverse practices without a uniform election day. In the inaugural 1788–1789 presidential election, states conducted voting between December 15, 1788, and January 7, 1789; five states, including and , had legislatures select electors directly, while others like used popular vote in districts. By the 1800 election, voting extended from late to early across states, accommodating sequential polling in large areas to allow horsedrawn travel. Early Republic suffrage mirrored colonial restrictions, limiting participation to white male property owners or taxpayers, excluding women, free Blacks, and non-propertied white men, as states retained control over qualifications under the Constitution's silence on voter eligibility. Elections often lasted weeks or months in expansive states, with polling stations rotating through counties to mitigate logistical barriers like poor roads and weather, ensuring electors could convene as required by federal statute. This state-driven variability underscored the absence of centralized federal oversight until later reforms.

Standardization Under Federal Law

Congress enacted the Presidential Election Day Act on January 23, 1845, establishing a uniform date for states to choose presidential electors as the first Tuesday after the in . This law, codified at 9 Stat. 721, addressed inconsistencies in state election timing that had persisted since the nation's founding, where practices varied widely and could allow later-voting states to react to results from earlier ones, as occurred in the 1840 election when news of William Henry Harrison's apparent victory influenced subsequent state contests. The measure responded to the expanding republic's logistical challenges, including slower communication and travel across distances, necessitating synchronized national processes to ensure electors could convene as required by the by early December without undue influence from staggered voting. The selection of November reflected agrarian realities, positioning elections after the fall —typically completed by late in much of the country—but before severe winter weather impeded travel, while avoiding conflicts with rural court sessions or religious observances. was chosen to accommodate farmers, who often attended markets or handled business on Mondays following church services, providing a practical day for journeying to polling places without Sabbath violation or midweek disruptions like midweek religious meetings or legal proceedings in some jurisdictions. In 1875, extended uniformity to elections for the and, in presidential years, the (though senators were then chosen by state legislatures), mandating the same Tuesday-after-Monday date in even-numbered years to align federal contests and streamline administration amid ongoing debates over election integrity and voter coordination. This codified at 18 Stat. 386, aimed to mitigate fragmented voting schedules that had allowed disparate state timings to complicate national outcomes and foster perceptions of uneven electoral playing fields.

20th-Century Developments and Expansions

The ratification of the Nineteenth Amendment on August 18, 1920, extended to women across the , prohibiting denial of the vote and effectively doubling the eligible electorate from approximately 27 million to over 50 million potential voters. This expansion followed decades of state-level variations, where women had gained partial voting rights in 15 states by 1919, but federal standardization addressed persistent barriers, leading to measurable increases in female participation; for instance, women's turnout reached about 36% in the 1920 presidential election, rising to parity with men by the 1930s as registration and access improved. Procedural innovations emerged during wartime to accommodate absent citizens, particularly military personnel. Absentee voting, initially limited and state-specific since the , expanded significantly for soldiers through special ballots authorized in multiple states by 1918, allowing over 2 million servicemen to vote remotely via or under federal encouragement from the War Department. This practice persisted and broadened post-World War II, with all states permitting military absentee ballots by 1944 under the Soldier Voting Act, facilitating 3.2 million such votes in that year's election and setting precedents for civilian extensions in subsequent decades, though usage remained low at under 5% of total ballots until the 1970s. The , signed into law on August 6, addressed empirical patterns of racial disenfranchisement concentrated in Southern states, where Black voter registration averaged below 30% due to mechanisms like literacy tests and poll taxes despite the Fifteenth Amendment. The Act's preclearance formula targeted jurisdictions with low turnout and discriminatory tests, resulting in rapid compliance; Southern Black registration surged from 29% in 1964 to 61% by 1969, with federal observers documenting over 250,000 new registrations in alone within months. These changes correlated with national turnout stabilization around 60% in presidential elections post-1960, though causal links to reduced barriers are evident in regional data showing diminished white-black turnout gaps from over 30 points to under 10 by 1972. Technological advancements in the latter half of the century shifted from manual counting to mechanized systems, enhancing efficiency amid growing voter rolls. Punch-card systems, such as the Votomatic introduced in 1965, gained adoption in the 1960s and 1970s, processing votes via perforated cards readable by tabulators and used in up to 40% of jurisdictions by 2000, which streamlined aggregation but introduced residual issues like undervotes in complex ballots. in presidential elections, measured by voting-eligible population, averaged 58-62% from 1960 to 2000, reflecting procedural expansions' role in sustaining participation levels above mid-century lows, with absolute votes rising from 68 million in 1960 to 105 million in 2000 despite .

Constitutional Provisions

The Constitution establishes a framework for elections that delegates primary authority to the states while reserving limited regulatory power to , reflecting the framers' intent to preserve and prevent centralized control over the electoral process. Article I, Section 4, Clause 1 vests in state legislatures the power to prescribe the "Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives," with empowered to "make or alter such Regulations" but explicitly prohibited from dictating the places for choosing senators, ensuring states retain foundational discretion. This provision underscores a decentralized approach, where uniform federal mandates are exceptions rather than the rule, as evidenced by the clause's origins in debates at the prioritizing state sovereignty to avoid national overreach. Article II, Section 1, Clause 2 similarly assigns to state legislatures the method of appointing presidential electors, stating that "Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors" equal to its congressional representation, without mandating a direct popular vote for president. This structure delegates electoral mechanics—including voter qualifications and —to states, allowing diverse practices such as legislative appointment of electors in early years, a flexibility rooted in the framers' design to balance popular input with institutional safeguards against mob rule. The absence of a election day or uniform voting standards in the original text further highlights this state-centric model, countering later interpretations that might imply inherent federal supremacy. Subsequent amendments have expanded the electorate without altering the core federal-state division of authority. The Twelfth Amendment, ratified in 1804, reformed the process by requiring separate ballots for and to resolve ambiguities exposed in the 1800 election, while preserving state appointment of electors. The Fifteenth Amendment (1870) prohibits denying the vote based on "race, color, or previous condition of servitude," targeting post-Civil War disenfranchisement but leaving enforcement to congressional legislation and state implementation. The Nineteenth Amendment (1920) extended to women irrespective of sex, empirically increasing voter rolls by approximately 10 million in subsequent elections. The Twenty-Fourth Amendment (1964) banned poll taxes in federal elections, addressing economic barriers that had persisted in some Southern states despite the Fifteenth Amendment, with ratification driven by evidence of their suppressive effects on low-income and minority voters. Finally, the Twenty-Sixth Amendment (1971), ratified in response to Vietnam War-era protests and data showing 18- to 21-year-olds comprising 11% of the population yet lacking federal voting rights, lowered the age to 18 for all elections. These expansions, while broadening participation, operate within the constitutional bounds of state administration subject to federal prohibitions, maintaining the original balance against comprehensive .

Key Federal Statutes

The Act of January 23, 1845 (5 Stat. 721), established a uniform nationwide date for electing presidential electors as the following the first Monday in , addressing prior inconsistencies where states held elections over a 34-day window. This law aimed to synchronize the process before the Electoral College's meeting, as mandated by Article II, Section 1 of the , while allowing states flexibility in administration. Subsequent extended uniformity to congressional elections; 2 U.S.C. § 7, codified from acts including that of , designates the same in even-numbered years for electing Representatives and Senators, ensuring offices align temporally. These statutes prioritized logistical coherence for agrarian travel patterns and harvest cycles, mandating a fixed without preempting state conduct of polls. The Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act (UOCAVA), enacted August 27, 1986 (P.L. 99-410, 100 Stat. 924), requires states to facilitate absentee registration and voting for active-duty military, their dependents, Merchant Marine members, and U.S. citizens abroad in elections, including transmission of ballots without notary requirements. It enforces these protections through oversight, with non-compliance risking loss of election administration funds, to preserve voting rights for those unable to appear in due to service or residence. The National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA, P.L. 103-31), signed May 20, 1993, mandates states to offer voter registration opportunities during applications and renewals ("Motor Voter"), via mail forms, and at designated public assistance offices, while prohibiting purging of registrants solely for non-voting. This law standardizes pre- registration processes for federal elections, requiring uniform forms and agency coordination to expand eligible participation without altering core Election Day voting. In response to the 2000 Florida recount disputes, the Help America Vote Act (HAVA, P.L. 107-252), signed October 29, 2002, imposes requirements for provisional ballots—allowing challenged voters to cast countable votes pending verification—and accessible voting systems, such as machines providing private, independent marking for disabled individuals. HAVA also directs creation of statewide lists and establishes the Election Assistance Commission for standards, focusing on integrity through auditable processes and error minimization on .

State-Level Implementation

States administer Election Day operations within the constraints of federal uniformity on the date, exercising over polling hours, employee voting accommodations, and electoral vote allocation methods, which contributes to interstate variations in voter and participation. Polling places generally operate for 12 to 14 hours, with most states opening at 7:00 a.m. and closing at 8:00 p.m. , though specifics differ; for example, some like close at 6:00 p.m. while others like extend to 7:00 p.m. or later in certain localities. This state-level flexibility reflects federalism's allocation of authority to the states under the , allowing adaptation to local needs but also creating disparities in convenience. Regarding workplace accommodations, no federal requirement mandates time off for , leaving it to state laws, which vary widely and lack uniformity in penalties for employer interference. Approximately 21 states require employers to provide unpaid leave for if employees lack sufficient time outside work hours, with a subset like and mandating up to two hours of paid leave; the remaining states either encourage voluntary accommodations or impose no specific obligations, though many prohibit outright denial of voting time with civil penalties ranging from fines to charges. These provisions aim to mitigate barriers for working voters but result in uneven protections, as states without mandates rely on labor laws or policies. In allocating presidential electoral votes on Election Day results, 48 states adhere to a , awarding all votes to the candidate with the plurality of the state's popular vote, while and employ a method, apportioning two statewide votes by statewide winner and one vote per district by district winner—a practice adopted in 1972 and in 1992. This variation, rooted in state legislative authority under Article II, Section 1 of the , amplifies the impact of swing states in national outcomes. Empirical data underscore these implementation differences' effects on turnout, with no consistent national pattern for Election Day-specific penalties or holidays tying directly to participation rates, but competitive "battleground" states often exhibit higher engagement; for instance, in the 2020 presidential election, turnout among the voting-eligible population reached 71.9% in and 70.9% in —key battlegrounds—compared to the national average of about 66.8%, while lower-competition states like recorded 56.2%. Such disparities highlight how state-specific practices, including polling duration and accommodations, interact with electoral competitiveness to influence civic participation without a uniform federal overlay.

Date and Rationale

Calculation of the Specific Date

The date of federal in the United States is fixed by as the immediately following the in November of even-numbered years, when presidential electors, members of the , and one-third of the are chosen. This formula, established in 3 U.S.C. § 1, yields between November 2 and November 8 inclusive. To compute the date, first locate the initial Monday of November, which ranges from (if is a ) to (if is a ). The next thereafter becomes the election . For instance, if the first falls on , Election Day is ; if on , it is . In 2024, with the first on , the was . This range arithmetically excludes as a possible under the rule. The interval from to —the federal "safe harbor" deadline under 3 U.S.C. § 5, by which states must certify electors and resolve disputes for congressional acceptance—spans 30 to 36 days. From to allows 36 days for vote tabulation, legal challenges, and elector appointment; from , it provides 30 days. This buffer supports causal requirements for orderly certification before electors convene. While federal elections adhere to even-year November dates, certain state and local contests occur in odd-numbered years, such as off-cycle municipal or school board votes in jurisdictions like or .

Historical Reasons for Tuesday in November

The selection of November for federal elections originated in the need to accommodate the realities of an agrarian and seasonal travel constraints in the early to mid-19th century , where the majority of the population consisted of farmers reliant on unpaved roads and horse-drawn transport. By the , congressional debates emphasized holding elections after the autumn —typically completed by early —to ensure voters could participate without disrupting critical agricultural work, while avoiding the summer months when heat, fieldwork, and family vacations deterred travel. This timing also preceded the onset of winter snow and mud, which could render rural roads impassable and isolate polling places for days or weeks, thereby maximizing accessibility for the dispersed electorate. The choice of Tuesday within November stemmed from the weekly rhythms of rural life and religious observance, as codified in the 1845 federal law standardizing Election Day as the Tuesday following the first Monday. Monday was commonly reserved for livestock markets and trade fairs, where farmers from remote areas converged on county seats to sell produce and animals, positioning them conveniently in town to vote the next day without additional travel. Wednesday often served as court day in many jurisdictions, potentially conflicting with polling logistics, while Sunday voting was broadly rejected due to widespread Christian Sabbath observance prohibiting secular activities like elections. This framework, enacted via the Presidential Election Day Act of January 23, 1845, reflected pragmatic design for broad participation rather than any deliberate exclusionary intent, adapting to empirical conditions where over 80 percent of Americans lived in rural settings and turnout depended on minimizing barriers to in-person . Contemporary from congressional proceedings show no of motives disadvantaging specific groups; instead, the aimed to synchronize processes and facilitate the timely convening of electors by early December, as required by the .

Election Procedures

Traditional In-Person Voting

Traditional in-person voting on occurs at designated polling places, typically open for 12 to 14 hours, such as from 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. or 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. local time, depending on state law. Voters at precinct-based sites, often schools or community centers, where officials verify eligibility using poll books or electronic systems. Voter identification requirements differ across states; as of 2024, 36 states mandate that voters present some form of at the polls, ranging from photo ID to non-photo alternatives like utility bills. Same-day registration, allowing eligible individuals to register and vote concurrently, is available in 22 states and the District of Columbia. Upon verification, voters receive ballots, which may be hand-marked paper, scanned via optical readers, or marked using ballot marking devices (BMDs), in compliance with standards set by the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) of 2002 and subsequent Voluntary Voting System Guidelines (VVSG). These systems prioritize voter-verifiable paper audit trails to enable recounts or audits. Chain-of-custody protocols ensure ballot integrity from issuance to tabulation: officials log ballot distribution, voters mark selections in private booths, and completed ballots are deposited into secure boxes or immediately scanned, with logs documenting every transfer. Bipartisan poll watchers, appointed by or candidates, observe check-in, voting, and counting processes to monitor adherence to procedures without interfering. Post-election, most states conduct audits, such as risk-limiting audits (RLAs) in select jurisdictions, where a statistical sample of paper ballots is hand-counted against machine totals to confirm accuracy. These measures, rooted in state election codes, provide empirical verification of results while maintaining voter privacy.

Modern Expansions: Early, Absentee, and Mail-In Voting

Early in-person voting, also known as advance voting, permits registered voters to cast ballots at designated polling locations prior to without requiring an excuse. This option is available in 47 states and the District of Columbia, with periods typically ranging from 4 to 50 days before , though most states offer 14 to 45 days. In , early in-person voting accounted for 30.7% of total ballots nationwide. Absentee and mail-in voting allow eligible voters to request ballots by mail, complete them remotely, and return them via or secure drop boxes, often without needing to provide a reason in no-excuse states. Usage expanded significantly in the 2020 presidential election, comprising 43% of all votes amid temporary pandemic-related policy changes that facilitated broader access in multiple states. By 2024, mail-in ballots represented 29.0% of votes, reflecting a decline from 2020 levels as some states reverted to pre-pandemic restrictions. Common verification processes for absentee and mail-in ballots include signature matching against voter registration records, employed by all but a few states, and barcode or unique identifier tracking systems that enable voters to monitor ballot status online in approximately 40 states. Ballot drop boxes, utilized in over 40 states for returning mail-in ballots, are typically secured with tamper-resistant features such as heavy metal construction, locks, and 24-hour video surveillance at many locations. These mechanisms aim to maintain chain of custody from submission to tabulation.

Administration and Security Measures

State election administration is primarily managed by secretaries of state, who serve as chief election officials in 47 states, responsible for certifying results, testing voting equipment, and providing guidance to local officials. Local election boards and county officials handle operational tasks such as staffing polling places, processing ballots, and resolving voter issues on Election Day. Federal oversight includes monitors deployed by the Department of Justice under Section 203 of the , which authorizes observers in jurisdictions with significant language minorities to ensure compliance with federal voting protections during polling and ballot counting. These observers document procedures but do not intervene directly, focusing on empirical verification of access and integrity. Following irregularities in the 2000 presidential election, the Help America Vote Act of 2002 mandated reforms including provisional voting options, statewide databases, and accessible voting systems to enhance uniformity and verifiability. By 2024, nearly all states required paper ballots or voter-verifiable paper audit trails for elections, ensuring a durable record for post-election checks and covering the vast majority of votes cast. Security protocols incorporate post-election audits, with risk-limiting audits—statistical methods that sample paper ballots to confirm results with high probability—implemented in states including , , and by 2024. These audits provide empirical limits on the risk of undetected errors, expanding from initial pilots to routine use in multiple jurisdictions. In the 2024 presidential election, administration proceeded with minor disruptions, such as hoax bomb threats in swing states like , , and that prompted temporary evacuations and polling extensions but affected few locations overall. State officials reported high confidence in the process, with certifications completed statewide without systemic failures, supported by paper records and audit mechanisms.

Cultural and Societal Significance

Civic Participation and Turnout Patterns

Voter turnout in presidential elections has historically averaged approximately 60% of the voting-eligible population (VEP), with notable peaks in recent cycles such as 66.6% in 2020, driven by intense partisan competition and expanded access options. In 2024, turnout stood at 65.3% of the voting-age population, reflecting sustained high engagement amid close national races but falling short of 2020's record. Midterm elections, which occur without a presidential contest, consistently yield lower participation, averaging around 40-50% of the VEP; for instance, 2022 saw 45.1% turnout for races. These patterns underscore that turnout surges with the salience of the highest office on the ballot, independent of structural incentives like national holidays.
Election YearPresidential Turnout (% VEP)Midterm Turnout (% VEP, approx.)
201659.2-
2018-50.3
202066.6-
2022-45.1
2024~65 (VAP-adjusted)-
Data compiled from Pew Research Center and U.S. Census Bureau estimates; VEP excludes non-citizens and ineligible felons for consistency. Empirical analysis reveals that while procedural reforms like the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 have eased registration—boosting overall participation by an estimated 5-10 percentage points—persistent disparities arise from socioeconomic factors rather than access alone. levels causally elevate turnout through mechanisms such as enhanced civic duty perceptions and better information processing, with effects strengthening over time; college graduates vote at rates 20-30% above those without high school diplomas. Similarly, correlates positively with participation, as higher earners face fewer opportunity costs and perceive greater stakes in policy outcomes, sustaining gaps even in states with automatic registration. Electoral competition further amplifies turnout, with closer races increasing participation by up to 5% via heightened perceived efficacy, as evidenced in analyses. These turnout dynamics highlight Election Day's role in gauging authentic within a framework, where decentralized administration ties to localized stakes—such as measures or congressional —fostering participation driven by self-interest over symbolic gestures like holidays. Low baseline turnout, despite expansions in early and mail , indicates that compulsory mechanisms or observances yield marginal gains compared to intrinsic motivations, as voluntary abstention persists among lower-engagement demographics. This pattern reinforces the system's emphasis on individual agency, with turnout fluctuations reflecting real-world incentives rather than institutional barriers alone.

Economic and Workplace Impacts

Election Day is not a holiday, so employees and most workers are required to report for duty as on a standard weekday, with no guaranteed nationwide. However, laws in 35 states and of Columbia mandate that employers grant unpaid time off for to employees whose work hours prevent access to polls during open periods, typically ranging from one to three hours depending on the jurisdiction. In 21 states, including , , and , this leave must be paid under specified conditions, such as advance notice and minimal duration needed. Noncompliance can result in fines or lawsuits in several states, incentivizing broad employer adherence. Employers commonly mitigate potential disruptions through voluntary measures like adjusted shifts, extended breaks, or flexibility, particularly since the expansion of models post-2020. These adaptations, combined with widespread early and options, limit absenteeism to low single-digit percentages in most sectors, with no historical data indicating widespread operational halts from the Tuesday scheduling. The event sustains normal economic functions, as stock exchanges and major industries operate without closure, preserving continuity in supply chains and . Quantifiable economic effects remain marginal, with no observable drag on quarterly GDP from the voting day itself, as national output metrics reflect uninterrupted activity amid routine work expectations. Any dips, such as from localized distractions or post-voting fatigue, are dwarfed by offsetting factors like temporary hiring of approximately 1.4 million poll workers—many paid stipends of $100–$300 per day by state and local entities—bolstering short-term labor demand in administrative roles. Broader election-season contributes to estimated losses of $2 billion in equivalent workdays from and anxiety, but these span months rather than concentrating on polling, underscoring the day's contained footprint relative to claims of systemic burden.

Proposals for National Holiday Status

Proposals to designate as a federal holiday have been introduced in periodically since the , with renewed attention in recent election reform packages. The 2021 For the People Act (H.R. 1), which passed the but stalled in the , included a provision (Section 1909) to establish as a legal for federal employees and encouraged states to follow suit. Similar standalone bills, such as the Election Day Holiday Act of 2021 (H.R. 222), aimed to treat the first Tuesday after the first Monday in as a paid holiday for federal workers. In 2024, H.R. 7329 proposed the same measure but did not advance beyond introduction. Advocates argue that a federal holiday would boost voter turnout by removing work-related barriers, particularly for low-wage and shift workers, potentially increasing participation by providing dedicated time for civic engagement. However, empirical evidence from states treating Election Day as a holiday—such as Delaware, Hawaii, and parts of New England—shows minimal causal impact on turnout, with interstate comparisons indicating gains of less than 2 percentage points or none at all after controlling for confounding factors like demographics and voting laws. A analysis of 2004 and 2006 Current Population Survey data found no statistically significant turnout difference attributable to holiday status, suggesting that convenience alone does not drive participation when alternatives like early voting exist. Opponents highlight substantial economic costs, estimated at $818 million per election cycle for paid leave to over 2 million employees, totaling around $4 billion over a , excluding private-sector ripple effects or lost productivity. The policy could disproportionately benefit public-sector workers, who already enjoy higher leave provisions and may exhibit partisan voting patterns favoring holiday proponents, raising concerns about unintended incentives skewing electoral outcomes without addressing root barriers like registration hurdles. Following the 2024 presidential election, won by , no federal holiday designation materialized despite ongoing state-level variations, underscoring persistent congressional resistance to added fiscal burdens amid evidence that turnout expansions correlate more strongly with procedural reforms than holidays. This outcome aligns with critiques that symbolic holidays yield marginal returns compared to targeted incentives, as 2020's record 66.8% turnout occurred without federal holiday status, driven instead by expanded and early options.

Controversies and Debates

Voter Fraud Concerns and Empirical Evidence

Voter fraud in U.S. elections occurs at low rates but remains a documented reality, with proven instances highlighting vulnerabilities especially in absentee and mail-in systems lacking robust verification. The Heritage Foundation maintains a database cataloging over 1,500 cases of election fraud convictions or judicial findings across the country since the 1980s, including absentee ballot manipulation and false registrations. Empirical reviews of large-scale elections, such as Arizona's audits of millions of ballots over decades, identify fraud in fewer than 40 instances, yielding rates under 0.0001%, though critics note such aggregates may undercount undetected irregularities due to incomplete prosecution data. Specific cases underscore risks in expanded voting methods. In New Jersey's May 2020 Paterson city council , fraudulent absentee ballots—allegedly submitted by supporters of one candidate—prompted a judicial finding and new , with charges against involved parties for mishandling and coercing votes. Non-citizen voting, illegal under , has led to prosecutions like the 2016 indictment of 19 foreign nationals for casting ballots in multiple states and a 2024 case against a Canadian citizen for registering and voting in federal elections. Mail-in processes amplify double-voting potential; officials flagged about 1,000 such incidents across its June primary and August runoff in 2020, where voters cast absentee ballots and later appeared in person without safeguards preventing dual counting. Post-2020 audits and 2024 outcomes reveal no evidence of at scales altering national results, yet procedural errors persist, reinforcing calls for verifiable voter ID and paper ballot trails. Wisconsin's legislative of the 2020 election affirmed overall security but identified gaps in absentee handling and drop-box usage, prompting recommendations for stricter chain-of-custody protocols. In 2024, isolated cases emerged, including seven charged in for fraudulent voter registrations via street-level operations and a non-citizen indicted in for to vote federally. These findings align with studies indicating 's rarity—often tied to individual opportunism rather than organized schemes—but causal analysis of unsecured mail systems shows incomplete safeguards enable non-zero risks, particularly in high-volume elections where even marginal incidences could influence tight races absent preventive measures like real-time cross-checks and .

Claims of Suppression Versus Accessibility Debates

Advocates on the political left have frequently alleged that voter identification requirements and reductions in polling locations following the 2013 decision, which invalidated the Voting Rights Act's preclearance formula, disproportionately suppress turnout among racial minorities. These claims posit that strict photo ID laws create barriers for low-income and minority voters lacking easy access to required documents, while polling closures—often justified by local officials as efficiency measures—lengthen wait times and deter participation in affected communities. However, rigorous empirical analyses using and regression discontinuity designs have found little to no causal that strict voter ID laws significantly reduce overall or minority turnout. A nationwide study examining elections from to concluded that such laws do not demonstrably suppress votes, even in diverse jurisdictions, attributing any minor discrepancies to self-selection among motivated voters rather than blanket disenfranchisement. Similarly, examinations of states like and , which track ballots cast without ID, reveal negligible impacts on election outcomes or participation rates from ID mandates. In , despite post-Shelby polling consolidations and the introduction of ID requirements, Black voter turnout rose from approximately 59% in the 2016 presidential election to over 65% in 2020, exceeding white turnout gaps seen in prior cycles and contradicting suppression narratives tied to structural changes. Debates over accessibility expansions, such as widespread mail-in and absentee voting, highlight tensions between convenience and potential vulnerabilities. Proponents argue these methods enhance participation by accommodating work schedules, disabilities, and geographic barriers, with data showing increased turnout in states adopting no-excuse absentee options prior to 2020. Critics, including conservative policy analysts, counter that mail-in systems facilitate or —such as family pressure or organized harvesting in institutional settings like nursing homes—without adequate safeguards, prioritizing election integrity and voluntary participation over maximized volume to preserve causal confidence in results. Broader assessments indicate no verifiable pattern of systemic suppression across U.S. elections, with turnout disparities more closely linked to variations in voter , mobilization, and socioeconomic factors than to purported barriers like ID or closures. Official turnout data from the Census Bureau and state records consistently show rising overall participation since the , even amid contested reforms, underscoring that motivational drivers outweigh access hurdles in determining electoral engagement.

Post-2020 Reforms and 2024 Election Outcomes

Following the 2020 presidential election, more than 20 states enacted legislation to strengthen requirements for -in ballots, including mandates for voter identification on envelopes and restrictions on unsecured drop boxes. For instance, Florida's Senate Bill 90, signed into law on April 6, 2021, required signature matching and ID for mail ballots while limiting drop box usage to periods supervised by election officials. Similar measures in Georgia's (S.B. 202) expanded audits and prohibited unsolicited mailing of absentee applications. These reforms, predominantly in Republican-controlled legislatures, aimed to enhance security amid concerns over expanded voting during the , though critics from organizations like the Brennan Center argued they imposed unnecessary barriers. Empirical data from subsequent elections indicate these changes did not significantly suppress participation, as evidenced by sustained or increased turnout rates. Several states also broadened post-election audit protocols to verify results independently of initial tabulations. By 2024, 36 states and required some form of post-election audit, with expansions in states like and incorporating risk-limiting audits that statistically sample ballots to confirm outcomes with high confidence. These measures, informed by 2020's manual recounts and forensic reviews in battleground states, prioritized statistical validation over full hand recounts to balance thoroughness and efficiency. In the 2024 presidential election, approximately 158 million ballots were cast, marking the highest raw vote total in U.S. history and a turnout rate of about 65.3% of the voting-age population. The U.S. Election Assistance Commission's 2024 Election Administration and Voting Survey reported minor administrative issues, such as localized delays in ballot processing, but no widespread irregularities affecting outcomes. Donald Trump secured victory with 312 electoral votes to Kamala Harris's 226, a result certified by Congress on January 6, 2025, without objections or disruptions. Post-election audits in key states affirmed the integrity of counts, reinforcing that hybrid voting systems—combining in-person safeguards with limited mail options—mitigated fraud risks while preserving access, as extreme expansions of universal mail-in voting faced ongoing scrutiny for potential vulnerabilities in chain-of-custody and verification. This stability contrasted with 2020's higher controversy levels, suggesting reforms contributed to public confidence without partisan overreach.

References

  1. [1]
    [PDF] Election Day: Frequently Asked Questions - Congress.gov
    Nov 2, 2023 · General elections for federal offices—President, Vice President, and U.S. Congress—are held on the. Tuesday after the first Monday in November ...
  2. [2]
    Election Day: Frequently Asked Questions - Congress.gov
    Nov 1, 2024 · Senators were selected by state legislatures, as established in the Constitution. States chose presidential electors in different ways, some by ...What Does the Constitution... · Why Was the First Tuesday...
  3. [3]
    Why Is Election Day a Tuesday in November? - History.com
    Oct 30, 2013 · ... law designating the first Tuesday following the first Monday in November as Election Day. Before then, states were allowed to hold elections ...
  4. [4]
    Voting in Early America - Colonial Williamsburg
    Requirements shifted by place and time, but in the eighteenth century, the right to cast a vote belonged largely to white, male property holders.
  5. [5]
    Elections in Colonial Virginia
    While wealthy planters won nearly all of these political contests, the electorate, which was composed of small-landowning and tenant farmers, responded to a ...
  6. [6]
    How Did They Vote?: The Process of Voting in the Early Republic
    The women and men who voted in New Jersey between 1800 and 1807, participated in a democratic process based on British and American precedents.Missing: practices | Show results with:practices
  7. [7]
    Elections in Colonial America Were Huge, Booze-Fueled Parties
    Nov 25, 2019 · From rum to cakes to rowdy parades, election day in colonial America was a time for gathering and celebration.Missing: practices | Show results with:practices
  8. [8]
    Electoral College History | National Archives
    The Founding Fathers established the Electoral College in the Constitution, in part, as a compromise between the election of the President by a vote in ...
  9. [9]
    Elections from 1789 to 1828 | Virginia Museum of History & Culture
    With the next highest total (34 votes), John Adams became vice president. Thus, in the first test of the Electoral College, George Washington was chosen as the ...Missing: procedures | Show results with:procedures
  10. [10]
    Who Voted in Early America? - Colonial Williamsburg
    Nov 6, 2024 · Most of the British American colonies only allowed people who owned property, especially land, to vote. Eighteenth-century political thinkers ...
  11. [11]
    [PDF] acts of the twenty-eighth congress - GovInfo
    STATUTE H. Chap . I.—An Act to establish a uniform time for holding electionsfor electors of. President and Vice President in all the States of the Union( a).
  12. [12]
    Presidential Election Day Act of 1845 and the Election of 1840
    Aug 3, 2020 · The “Act to establish a uniform time for holding elections for electors of President and Vice President in all the States of the Union ...
  13. [13]
    Why Do We Vote on a Tuesday? | The Old Farmer's Almanac
    Oct 25, 2024 · Election Day in the United States falls on the Tuesday after the first Monday in November. Today, most people work on Tuesdays. The day is ...
  14. [14]
    2 U.S. Code § 7 - Time of election - Law.Cornell.Edu
    The Tuesday next after the 1st Monday in November, in every even numbered year, is established as the day for the election.
  15. [15]
    Dates of biennial Federal Elections for Congress - The Green Papers
    Jun 3, 2009 · The States of the American Union, therefore, were entirely free to use whatever dates they might wish as the time for electing their Congressmen ...
  16. [16]
    19th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution: Women's Right to Vote ...
    Feb 8, 2022 · Passed by Congress June 4, 1919, and ratified on August 18, 1920, the 19th amendment granted women the right to vote. The 19th amendment legally ...
  17. [17]
    Voting By Mail History: When Mail-In Ballots Started in U.S. | TIME
    Sep 28, 2020 · Excuse-required absentee voting started during the Civil War—a product of the competition between Abraham Lincoln and George McClellan,” Paul ...
  18. [18]
    Vote-by-Mail Programs Date Back to the Civil War - History.com
    Sep 24, 2020 · By the late 1800s, some states were extending absentee ballots to civilian voters under certain conditions, but it wasn't until 2000 that Oregon ...
  19. [19]
    Voting Rights Act (1965) | National Archives
    Feb 8, 2022 · EnlargeDownload Link Citation: An act to enforce the fifteenth amendment to the Constitution of the United States and for other purposes, ...
  20. [20]
    Voting Rights Act of 1965
    August 6, 1965. Bob Fitch photography archive, © Stanford University Libraries. On 6 August 1965 President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Voting Rights Act ...
  21. [21]
    National Turnout Rates 1789-Present - US Elections Project
    National general election voting-eligible population turnout rates for presidential and midterm elections are plotted below, along with the raw data provided ...
  22. [22]
    Voting Equipment Database – ES&S Votomatic
    The Votomatic was the last punch card voting system used in American elections—last used in two counties in Idaho in the 2014 general election ...<|separator|>
  23. [23]
    [PDF] 100 STAT. 924 Public Law 99-410 99th Congress
    Aug 15, 2025 · This Act may be cited as the "Uniformed and Overseas Citizens. Absentee Voting Act". TITLE I—REGISTRATION AND VOTING BY. ABSENT. UNIFORMED.
  24. [24]
    The Uniformed And Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act
    Apr 5, 2023 · UOCAVA requires that the states and territories allow certain groups of citizens to register and vote absentee in elections for Federal offices.
  25. [25]
    The Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act Overview
    UOCAVA citizens are US citizens who are active members of the Uniformed Services the Merchant Marine, and the commissioned corps of the Public Health Service.
  26. [26]
    The National Voter Registration Act Of 1993 (NVRA)
    Nov 1, 2024 · The National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (also known as the “NVRA” or “motor voter law”) sets forth certain voter registration requirements with respect to ...
  27. [27]
    103rd Congress (1993-1994): National Voter Registration Act of 1993
    Summary of H.R.2 - 103rd Congress (1993-1994): National Voter Registration Act of 1993.Text · Titles (7) · Cosponsors (73) · Committees
  28. [28]
    The Help America Vote Act Of 2002 - Department of Justice
    May 15, 2024 · On October 29, 2002, President Bush signed the "Help America Vote Act of 2002," (HAVA), Pub. L. No. 107-252, 116 Stat. 1666 (2002) into lawMissing: electronic | Show results with:electronic
  29. [29]
    Help America Vote Act - U.S. Election Assistance Commission
    The Help America Vote Act (HAVA) of 2002 was passed by the United States Congress to make sweeping reforms to the nation's voting process.
  30. [30]
    H.R.3295 - 107th Congress (2001-2002): Help America Vote Act of ...
    Declares that States that do not require voter registration for Federal elections may meet these provisional voting requirements using voter registration ...
  31. [31]
    Polling Places - National Conference of State Legislatures
    Our organization does not run elections and cannot provide legal advice. If you are a voter looking for assistance, please contact your local election ...
  32. [32]
    Distribution of Electoral Votes | National Archives
    Allocation among the States Electoral votes are allocated among the States based on the Census. Every State is allocated a number of votes equal to the ...
  33. [33]
    Winner-Take-All States 2025 - World Population Review
    Winner-Take-All States 2025 · State · Winner Takes All State · State Is Part of National Popular Vote Compact · # of Electoral Votes ...
  34. [34]
    United States Voter Turnout - UF Election Lab
    The national and state turnout rates presented here are for the voting-eligible population (aka VEP). As its name implies, these turnout rates are for those ...
  35. [35]
    Record High Turnout in 2020 General Election - U.S. Census Bureau
    Apr 29, 2021 · The 2020 election featured the largest increase in voters between two presidential elections on record with 17 million more people voting than in 2016.
  36. [36]
    Electoral College Timeline of Events | National Archives
    November 5, 2024—Election Day ... first Tuesday after the first Monday in November ... During the general election your vote helps determine your State's electors ...Missing: statute | Show results with:statute
  37. [37]
    Guide to US Presidential Elections - American Bar Association
    Election of the President. The election of the president of the United States of America is always held on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November.<|separator|>
  38. [38]
    Election Day is November 5 | Bipartisan Policy Center
    Election Day is November 5, 2024. The election date is set by federal law and has not changed since 1845. Americans select a president and vice president every ...
  39. [39]
    Election Day is Tuesday, November 5 - FEC
    Nov 4, 2024 · Around election day, the FEC often receives questions about voting, voter fraud and intimidation, ballot access and election results.
  40. [40]
    What 'safe harbor day' is and why it's bad news for Trump
    Dec 8, 2020 · Under the law, Congress must count the electoral votes from states that chose their electors and resolve any legal disputes over the choices by ...
  41. [41]
    Off-date elections - Ballotpedia
    ... date other than the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November. Off ... determine a specific school board election date or have varying school board ...
  42. [42]
    Election 2016: Why Do We Vote On Tuesdays? - NPR
    Tuesday. It's inconvenient. Most people work on Tuesdays and polls ...
  43. [43]
    State Poll Opening and Closing Times (2023) - Ballotpedia
    States that are conducting only municipal elections may have poll times that vary by municipality. Polling hours by state. State, Polling hours (all times local) ...
  44. [44]
    Poll Watchers | U.S. Election Assistance Commission
    Poll watchers, sometimes referred to as "election observers," are individuals who may observe steps in the election process.
  45. [45]
    Voter ID Laws - National Conference of State Legislatures
    Thirty-six states have laws requesting or requiring voters to show some form of identification at the polls.
  46. [46]
    Same-day voter registration, 2024 - Ballotpedia
    As of 2024, 22 states and the District of Columbia had same-day registration provisions enabling voters to register and vote at the same time.
  47. [47]
    Voluntary Voting System Guidelines
    Voluntary Voting System Guidelines (VVSG) are a set of specifications and requirements against which voting systems can be tested to determine if they meet ...
  48. [48]
    Voting Equipment - Verified Voting
    How we vote in the United States is surprisingly complex. Election security experts agree that the most resilient voting systems use paper ballots (marked by ...
  49. [49]
    [PDF] Chain of Custody Best Practices
    Jul 12, 2021 · In-person Voting - Voting before or on Election Day where the voter completes the ballot in person at a designated polling site, elections ...
  50. [50]
    What is the Role of Poll Watchers? | Bipartisan Policy Center
    Sep 6, 2024 · Observation of the voting and ballot counting processes ensures that all rules and procedures are followed fairly and that no one candidate ...
  51. [51]
    Post-Election Audits - National Conference of State Legislatures
    A post-election tabulation audit—often known as a post-election audit or PEA—checks that the equipment and procedures used to count votes during an election ...Introduction · Types of Post-Election Audits · Other Post-Election Options
  52. [52]
    Risk-Limiting Audits - National Conference of State Legislatures
    Risk-limiting audits are one version of a postelection audit, and a version that is growing in interest among election officials and legislators.What Are Risk-Limiting Audits? · Components of an RLA · Types of RLAs<|separator|>
  53. [53]
    Early In-Person Voting - National Conference of State Legislatures
    NCSL does not run elections and cannot provide legal advice. If you are a voter looking for assistance, please contact your local election official.
  54. [54]
    Dates for 2024 Early In-Person and Mail Voting
    Sep 6, 2024 · Only three states do not offer an option to vote before election day. Figure 1. Number of Days Before Election Day that Voters Can Cast a Ballot ...
  55. [55]
    How many voters cast ballots early and by mail? - USAFacts
    In the 2024 election, nearly 60% of voters cast their ballots early or by mail: 29.0% voted by mail, 30.7% voted early, and 39.6% went to the polls on ...
  56. [56]
    Mail-in voting rates drop but early in-person voting is a hit : NPR
    Jul 1, 2025 · Mail voting comprised 30.3% of the turnout for the 2024 election, which is a decrease compared to the 2020 election when mail ballots comprised 43% of turnout.
  57. [57]
    Table 14: How States Verify Voted Absentee/Mail Ballots
    Summarizes methods states use to verify absentee/mail ballots, such as signature verification and having the absentee/mail ballot witnessed or notarized.
  58. [58]
    Ballot drop boxes: explainer on their use and false claims - NPR
    Oct 25, 2024 · Election officials say ballot drop boxes are a secure and accessible way for voters to return mail ballots, but they've also been the ...
  59. [59]
    [PDF] Election Administration and Voting Survey 2024 Comprehensive ...
    Jun 30, 2025 · To this end, the EAC is pleased to present to the 119th U.S.. Congress its report on the 2024 EAVS. This report describes in detail how the 2024 ...
  60. [60]
    Secretary of State (state executive office) - Ballotpedia
    Jan 29, 2025 · In the other 12, the secretary is appointed by either the governor or the state legislature. The position's duties are generally administrative, ...
  61. [61]
    Election Administration at State and Local Levels
    The National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA) mandates that each state designate a chief election official to oversee elections in the state. In 33 states, ...
  62. [62]
    Secretaries of State play key role in overseeing elections and ...
    Aug 22, 2024 · These officials are responsible for certifying election results, testing voting equipment, providing guidance and support to local election officials.
  63. [63]
    About Federal Observers And Election Monitoring
    The Voting Rights Act permits federal observers to monitor procedures in polling places and at sites where ballots are counted in eligible political ...
  64. [64]
    [PDF] Election Monitoring - Department of Justice
    The Civil Rights Division uses Justice Department personnel to monitor polling places on election day to help assess compliance with the federal voting ...
  65. [65]
    The Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA): An Overview
    Sep 30, 2025 · Congress's response to those findings, in HAVA, spanned a correspondingly wide range of elections topics, from voting systems to voter ...
  66. [66]
    Some Good News for Donald Trump: We Already Use Paper Ballots
    Aug 23, 2024 · Nearly all votes cast in the 2024 election will be recorded on paper. Maybe Trump and Kennedy are just a little behind the times.
  67. [67]
    United in Security: How Every State Protects Your Vote
    In collaboration with Issue One and the R Street Institute, we detail the security and integrity protections that make American elections strong, resilient, ...
  68. [68]
    Risk-Limiting Audits - Verified Voting
    A risk-limiting audit (RLA) checks a random sample of voter-verifiable paper ballots, giving strong evidence to support the reported election results.
  69. [69]
    Department of State Begins Risk-Limiting Audit of 2024 General ...
    Nov 18, 2024 · 5, 2024, presidential election. "Risk-limiting audits are the highest standard of comprehensive election audits, not just here in Pennsylvania, ...
  70. [70]
    Bomb threats in swing states disrupt a mostly smooth Election Day
    Nov 5, 2024 · The bomb threats in parts of Arizona, Georgia and Pennsylvania on Tuesday turned out to be hoaxes, but they forced some polling places to evacuate and extend ...
  71. [71]
    Election Day unfolds relatively smoothly after massive turnout ... - PBS
    Nov 5, 2024 · The final day of voting in the 2024 presidential election arrived with tens of millions of Americans having already cast their ballots.
  72. [72]
    Officials say 2024 election saw only 'minor' disruptive activities
    Nov 11, 2024 · From the polling place to the courtroom, ABC News tracks the latest election security developments on Election Day 2024 as experts warn ...
  73. [73]
    Why election experts aren't worried about vote certification - NPR
    Aug 30, 2024 · Election experts and the people actually in charge of tallying the votes are still projecting confidence in the certification process.
  74. [74]
    Voter turnout in US elections, 2018-2022 | Pew Research Center
    Jul 12, 2023 · About two-thirds (66%) of the voting-eligible population turned out for the 2020 presidential election – the highest rate for any national ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  75. [75]
    2024 Presidential Election Voting and Registration Tables Now ...
    Apr 30, 2025 · In the 2024 presidential election, 73.6% of the voting-age population was registered to vote and 65.3% voted according to new voting and ...
  76. [76]
    Midterm voter turnout in 2022 declined from 2018 high, final returns ...
    Mar 10, 2023 · Nearly 107.7 million valid votes were cast in the 2022 House elections, representing about 45.1% of the estimated voting-eligible ...
  77. [77]
    Historical Reported Voting Rates - U.S. Census Bureau
    Apr 24, 2025 · The historical time series tables present estimates alongside various demographic characteristics for each national level election between ...
  78. [78]
    How Education Shapes Voter Turnout in the United States - PMC
    May 28, 2023 · The positive effects of individuals' absolute and relative educational attainment on their voting behavior have increased over time, and this ...
  79. [79]
    Voting and Income | Econofact
    Feb 7, 2019 · in voter turnout. Roughly about 60 percent of eligible people voted in the United States during recent presidential elections. Participation ...
  80. [80]
    [PDF] The Effect of Electoral Competitiveness on Voter Turnout
    In the most recent midterm congressional elections of 2014, over 83 million people entered the polls to vote for the 435 people who would pass legislation for ...
  81. [81]
    Voter turnout | MIT Election Lab
    Apr 28, 2021 · Voter turnout is a measure of civic participation that many people believe best gauges the health of the electoral process.
  82. [82]
    Voter Turnout - FairVote
    Voter turnout in the United States is much lower than in other countries, hovering around 60% in presidential elections and 40% in midterm election years.
  83. [83]
    State Laws: Time Off to Vote - SHRM
    Federal law does not require employers to give employees time off to vote, but a majority of states and some local ordinances mandate voting leave time, ...
  84. [84]
    Employers in These 21 States Must Give You Paid Time Off to Vote
    Oct 31, 2024 · Currently, just 21 states, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico guarantee the right to paid voting leave. Eight additional states protect the right to take ...<|separator|>
  85. [85]
    How Many Employers Are Offering Paid Time Off to Vote? - SHRM
    Oct 28, 2024 · There is no federal law requiring voting leave—but a growing number of employers are offering paid time off so that employees can cast their ...
  86. [86]
    Key facts about US poll workers ahead of the 2024 election
    Oct 24, 2024 · What do poll workers do, and how many typically help in general elections? Read about state requirements for these temporary election ...
  87. [87]
    Study Finds Election-Related Stress & 'Incivility' Has Cost Employers ...
    Nov 6, 2024 · In a high stakes election like the 2024 presidential race, these emotions are only heightened. This, coupled with incivility and rudeness from ...
  88. [88]
    Text - H.R.1 - 117th Congress (2021-2022): For the People Act of 2021
    Prohibiting States from restricting curbside voting. Sec. 1909. Election Day as legal public holiday. Sec. 1910. GAO study on voter turnout rates. Sec ...
  89. [89]
    H.R.222 - Election Day Holiday Act of 2021 - Congress.gov
    Introduced in House (01/06/2021). Election Day Holiday Act of 2021. This bill requires a federal election day to be treated as a holiday for federal employees.Missing: People provision
  90. [90]
    H.R.7329 - Election Day Holiday Act of 2024 - Congress.gov
    Summary of H.R.7329 - 118th Congress (2023-2024): Election Day Holiday Act of 2024.
  91. [91]
    Make Election Day a national holiday - Brookings Institution
    Jun 23, 2021 · As Congress continues to grapple with voting rights legislation this week, Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) has used his considerable influence as ...
  92. [92]
    [PDF] Increasing Voter Turnout: Is Democracy Day the Answer?
    I conclude that having an election holiday, by itself, is not an effective strategy to increase voter turnout. Henry Farber. Industrial Relations Section.
  93. [93]
    Increasing Voter Turnout: Is Democracy Day the Answer?
    My analysis relies on data from Voting Supplements to the Current Population Survey in November 2004 and 2006. The results are clear. There is no evidence from ...
  94. [94]
    $$4+ Billion Cost To Give Federal Employees A New Paid Holiday On ...
    Apr 18, 2021 · New perk for federal workers costs at least $818 million per federal election and $4 billion over ten years.
  95. [95]
    Nearly $1 Billion in Taxpayer Cost – If Election Day Becomes a New ...
    Apr 20, 2021 · Forty-three states and the District of Columbia offer in-person early voting for between four days and 45 days, for an average period of 19 ...
  96. [96]
    Getting time off to vote is based where you live and work. Here are ...
    Nov 5, 2024 · Without a federal law ensuring workers can take time off to vote, some states have stepped up with Election Day voting leave laws.Missing: win | Show results with:win
  97. [97]
    The false promise of an Election Day holiday - The Black and White
    Dec 3, 2024 · In 2020, around two-thirds of eligible voters cast their ballots for the presidential election, the highest voter participation in an ...
  98. [98]
    Heritage Database | Election Fraud Map | The Heritage Foundation
    Jul 28, 2025 · The Heritage Foundation's Election Fraud Map is an interactive tool providing a sampling of proven instances of election fraud across the ...Explore the Data · Categories of Election Fraud · Read More · AboutMissing: 1982 | Show results with:1982
  99. [99]
    How widespread is election fraud in the United States? Not very
    Oct 28, 2024 · ... elections with over 100 million votes cast and found only 39 cases of voter fraud. The percentage of fraudulent votes in Arizona over the ...Missing: empirical | Show results with:empirical
  100. [100]
    May 2020 Third Ward Paterson City Council Election
    2020. State: NEW JERSEY. Case Type: JUDICIAL FINDING. Fraud Type: FRAUDULENT USE OF ABSENTEE BALLOTS. Outcome: The May 2020 election for the Third Ward Paterson ...
  101. [101]
    AG Grewal Announces Voting Fraud Charges Against Paterson
    Jun 25, 2020 · TRENTON – Attorney General Gurbir S. Grewal today announced voting fraud charges against Paterson City Councilman Michael Jackson, ...<|separator|>
  102. [102]
    19 foreign nationals indicted for illegally voting in 2016 elections - ICE
    Jan 24, 2025 · ... elections Friday, and a U.S. citizen was charged with aiding and abetting an alien to falsely claim U.S. citizenship to register to vote.
  103. [103]
    Alien Charged with Illegal Voting in Federal Elections
    Aug 28, 2025 · WILMINGTON, N.C. – A federal grand jury returned an indictment Tuesday charging a Canadian citizen with illegally registering to vote and ...
  104. [104]
    In Georgia, Officials Are Investigating Hundreds of Cases of Double ...
    Nov 3, 2020 · Georgia's secretary of state, Brad Raffensperger, said that 1000 people voted twice in the state's June primary and August runoff elections, ...
  105. [105]
    Georgia Reveals Double-Voting Cases But No Evidence Of Malign ...
    Sep 8, 2020 · Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger says 1000 people voted twice in the state's primary election this year but said he had no evidence the ...Missing: flagged | Show results with:flagged
  106. [106]
    [PDF] Elections Administration | full report - Wisconsin State Legislature
    Oct 19, 2021 · The Legislative Audit Bureau supports the Legislature in its oversight of. Wisconsin government and its promotion of efficient and effective ...
  107. [107]
  108. [108]
    Colombian National Charged with Voter Fraud, Federal Benefit ...
    Jun 2, 2025 · A Colombian woman unlawfully residing in Boston has been indicted by a federal grand jury for identity theft offenses—including receiving ...
  109. [109]
    Effects of Shelby County v. Holder on the Voting Rights Act
    Jun 21, 2023 · The 2013 Supreme Court decision swung open the door for states to enact restrictive voting laws, making it harder for people of color to vote.
  110. [110]
    How Politicians are Trying to Block Voters from the Ballot Box | ACLU
    Aug 17, 2021 · Suppression efforts range from the seemingly unobstructive, like strict voter ID laws and cuts to early voting, to mass purges of voter rolls ...
  111. [111]
    The Impact of Voter Suppression on Communities of Color
    Jan 10, 2022 · This analysis catalogs some of the most prominent research findings on the negative impact of voting restrictions on voters of color.
  112. [112]
  113. [113]
    [PDF] Strict Voter Identification Laws, Turnout, and Election Outcomes
    We do so using historical data on more than 2,000 races in Florida and Michigan, which both allow and track ballots cast without identification. Results ...<|separator|>
  114. [114]
    Voter turnout in Georgia - Ballotpedia
    Ballotpedia uses this expression if the jurisdiction does not report total ballots counted. The overall turnout rate of eligible voters in Georgia in the 2024 ...
  115. [115]
    Georgia Early Voting Statistics
    Nov 5, 2020 · County, Registered Voters, Total Voted, Percent Voted. APPLING, 10,973, 6,295, 57.4%. ATKINSON, 4,742, 2,186, 46.1%.<|separator|>
  116. [116]
    Voting by mail and absentee voting | MIT Election Lab
    Feb 28, 2024 · Americans have traditionally voted in neighborhood polling places, but since the 1980s, many states have eased rules on issuing absentee ...
  117. [117]
    [PDF] THE DANGERS OF MASS MAIL-IN VOTING
    Jun 20, 2024 · While it is not a process without merit, it comes with many risks to election integrity, especially if no safeguards are in place to ensure its ...
  118. [118]
    The U.S. Has Neither Systemic Voter Fraud nor Voter Suppression
    Oct 28, 2020 · The ink was not yet dry on President Trump's certificate of election in 2016 when The Resistance kicked into high gear, attacking the ...
  119. [119]
    State-by-State Guide to Restrictive Changes to Voter ID, Mail Voting ...
    Oct 22, 2024 · This interactive resource gives voters an overview of how voter ID, mail voting, and ballot collection laws have changed since the last presidential election ...
  120. [120]
    Election Audits Across the United States
    Election audits ensure voting systems operate accurately, that election officials comply with regulations or internal policies, and identify and resolve ...
  121. [121]
    How Americans voted in 2024 - POLITICO
    with 158 million of them casting ballots ...
  122. [122]
    Congress certifies Trump's 2024 win, without the Jan. 6 ... - AP News
    Jan 6, 2025 · Vice President Kamala Harris oversaw the certification by Congress of President-elect Donald Trump as the winner of the 2024 election in ...