Skip to main content
    • Aa
    • Aa
  • Get access
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
  • Cited by 10
  • Cited by
    This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by CrossRef.

    Dawood, Yasmin 2015. Campaign Finance and American Democracy. Annual Review of Political Science, Vol. 18, Issue. 1, p. 329.

    Morton, Rebecca B. Muller, Daniel Page, Lionel and Torgler, Benno 2015. Exit polls, turnout, and bandwagon voting: Evidence from a natural experiment. European Economic Review, Vol. 77, p. 65.

    Burden, Barry C. Canon, David T. Mayer, Kenneth R. and Moynihan, Donald P. 2014. Election Laws, Mobilization, and Turnout: The Unanticipated Consequences of Election Reform. American Journal of Political Science, Vol. 58, Issue. 1, p. 95.

    Montjoy, Robert S. 2010. The Changing Nature … and Costs … of Election Administration. Public Administration Review, Vol. 70, Issue. 6, p. 867.

    La Raja, Raymond 2009. Redistricting: Reading Between the Lines. Annual Review of Political Science, Vol. 12, Issue. 1, p. 203.

    Gronke, Paul Galanes-Rosenbaum, Eva Miller, Peter A. and Toffey, Daniel 2008. Convenience Voting. Annual Review of Political Science, Vol. 11, Issue. 1, p. 437.

    Thompson, Dennis F. 2008. Electoral Simultaneity: Expressing Equal Respect. Journal of Social Issues, Vol. 64, Issue. 3, p. 487.

    Urbinati, Nadia and Warren, Mark E. 2008. The Concept of Representation in Contemporary Democratic Theory. Annual Review of Political Science, Vol. 11, Issue. 1, p. 387.

    Grofman, Bernard and King, Gary 2007. The Future of Partisan Symmetry as a Judicial Test for Partisan Gerrymandering after LULAC v. Perry. Election Law Journal, Vol. 6, Issue. 1, p. 2.

    Richey, Sean 2005. Who votes alone? The impact of voting by mail on political discussion. Australian Journal of Political Science, Vol. 40, Issue. 3, p. 435.


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

  • DOI:
  • Published online: 01 February 2004

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.

Corresponding author
Alfred North Whitehead Professor, Department of Government, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02138 (
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? *