Skip to main content
×
Home
    • Aa
    • Aa

Election Time: Normative Implications of Temporal Properties of the Electoral Process in the United States

  • DENNIS F. THOMPSON (a1)
Abstract

Elections take place at intervals, most citizens vote on the same day, and the electoral outcome is irrevocable until the next election. Each of these temporal properties—periodicity, simultaneity, and finality—is grounded in fundamental democratic values. Analyzing the properties shows how and why several anomalies in electoral theory and practice in the United States should be eliminated. Together the properties mark off electoral politics as a sphere that requires different and often more stringent standards than the rest of political life outside of government. Periodicity requires that the control of redistricting be independent of legislatures. Simultaneity opposes publishing the results of exit polls, expanding the use of early voting, and granting legislatures the authority to select presidential electors on their own schedule. Finality justifies more stringent regulation of campaign practices, such as electioneering ads.

Copyright
Corresponding author
Alfred North Whitehead Professor, Department of Government, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02138 (dennis_thompson@harvard.edu).
Linked references
Hide All

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.

AnsolabehereStephen, and James M.SnyderJr.2002aThe Incumbency Advantage in U.S. Elections: An Analysis of State and Federal Office, 1942–2000.” Election Law Journal13: 31538.

CoxGary W., and Jonathan N.Katz. 1996Why Did the Incumbency Advantage in U.S. House Elections Grow.” American Journal of Political Science40(May): 47897.

CoxGary W., and Jonathan N.Katz. 1999The Reapportionment Revolution and Bias in U.S. Congressional Elections..” American Journal of Political Science43(July): 82833.

CoxGary W., and Jonathan N.Katz. 2002Elbridge Gerry's Salamander: The Electoral Consequences of the Reapportionment Revolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

FerejohnJohn A.1977On the Decline of Competition in Congressional Elections.” American Political Science Review71(March): 16676.

GelmanAndrew, and GaryKing. 1990Estimating Incumbency Advantage without Bias.” American Journal of Political Science34(November): 114264.

GelmanAndrew, and GaryKing. 1994Enhancing Democracy through Legislative Redistricting.” American Political Science Review88(September): 54159.

IssacharoffSamuel. 2002aGerrymandering and Political Cartels.” Harvard Law Review116(December): 593649.

IssacharoffSamuel, and RichardPildes. 1998Politics as Markets: Partisan Lockups of the Democratic Process.” Stanford Law Review50(February): 643717.

JacksonJohn E.1983Election Night Reporting and Voter Turnout.” American Journal of Political Science27(November): 61535.

ManinBernard. 1997The Principles of Representative Government. New York: Cambridge University Press.

OliverJ. Eric. 1996The Effects of Eligibility Restrictions and Party Activity on Absentee Voting and Overall Turnout.” American Journal of Political Science40(May): 498513.

PersilyNathaniel. 2002In Defense of Foxes Guarding Henhouses: The Case for Judicial Acquiescence to Incumbent-Protecting Gerrymanders.” Harvard Law Review116(December): 64982.

PrzeworskiAdam, Susan C.Stokes, and BernardManin, eds. 1999Democracy, Accountability and Representation. New York: Cambridge University Press.

SchuckPeter H.1987The Thickest Thicket: Partisan Gerrymandering and Judicial Regulation of Politics.” Columbia Law Review87(November): 132584.

SteinRobert M.1998Early Voting,” Public Opinion Quarterly62(Spring): 5769.

WaldronJeremy. 1999The Dignity of Legislation. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

American Political Science Review
  • ISSN: 0003-0554
  • EISSN: 1537-5943
  • URL: /core/journals/american-political-science-review
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 16
Total number of PDF views: 57 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 547 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 23rd September 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.