1 / 34

SURVEY OF UOCAVA VOTERS

SURVEY OF UOCAVA VOTERS. Facilitating UOCAVA Voting Conference September 22, 2007 University of California, Washington Center Sponsored by the U.S. Election Assistance Commission. PURPOSE OF SURVEY. TO OBTAIN PERCEPTIONS OF OVERSEAS VOTERS ABOUT THE PROCESS OF VOTING ABROAD

quon-hubbard
Download Presentation

SURVEY OF UOCAVA VOTERS

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. SURVEY OF UOCAVA VOTERS Facilitating UOCAVA Voting Conference September 22, 2007 University of California, Washington Center Sponsored by the U.S. Election Assistance Commission

  2. PURPOSE OF SURVEY • TO OBTAIN PERCEPTIONS OF OVERSEAS VOTERS ABOUT THE PROCESS OF VOTING ABROAD • TO GET THEIR EVALUATIONS OF DIFFERENT BALLOT TRANSMISSION METHODS • TO ASSESS OTHER POTENTIAL VOTING CONCERNS SUCH AS PRIVACY

  3. SURVEY SAMPLE • A 55 QUESTION SURVEY INSTRUMENT ADMINISTERED BETWEEN DEC 2006 AND APRIL 2007 • A FOUR STATE SAMPLE (MT, SC, FL,ILL) WITH 1603 RESPONSES • A SUPPLEMENTAL POOL OF 4166 OBTAINED WITH ASSISTANCE OF VOTING ASSISTANCE OFFICERS • RESPONSE RATE EMAILED/MAILED WAS 13% AND FOR ONLINE WAS 20%

  4. SAMPLE CHARACTERSITICS • COMBINED SAMPLE INCLUDE ELIGIBLE VOTERS FROM 50 STATE AND 132 COUNTRIES • THE FOUR STATE SAMPLE IS MORE MILITARY (47%), YOUNGER, AND LIVED OVERSEAS FOR SHORTER PERIOD • THERE IS LITTLE OF NO DIFFERENCE IN AGE, EDUCATION OR GENDER BETWEEN SAMPLES • FINDINGS ARE MOSTLY SIMILAR IN BOTH SAMPLES

  5. RELATIVELY HIGH LEVEL OF SATISFACTION • 71% of all respondents and 87% of the four state sample were satisfied or somewhat satisfied with the process of obtaining and casting a ballot • About 18% tried to vote but did not complete the process • 89% found the ballot easy or somewhat easy to complete • 92% said that they would use the same method of sending in their ballots again

  6. But Some Important Variations • Controlling for other factors, non-military voters were less likely to vote, and were more likely to express dissatisfaction with both receiving and sending a ballot • Older, more experienced and better educated voters had more success • Citizens in non-OECD nations had more difficulty with voting and the transmission of voting materials.

  7. Table 2: 2006 Voting Experience, by Voter Type

  8. USE OF ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSION STILL LOW • 27% in the four state sample downloaded the blank reg form from a website or filled out the form online • 8% faxed or emailed the reg/ballot request form back • 4% received their ballots from Fax or email • 3% sent their ballots back by FAX or email • 89% were using electronic transmission for the first time

  9. SATISFACTION WITH ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSION • The numbers are small but the satisfaction levels are high with electronic transmission of materials (i.e. 77%) • Over 95% said that they would use the same form of electronic transmission • 77% found the electronic transmission method to be either easy or somewhat easy • 30% were asked to give up their right to private vote but only 1/3 of those had concerns about that

  10. Table 4: Ease of Method, by Electronic Transmission of Voted Ballot Note: One person reported internet fax of a ballot and reported it as “somewhat difficult.” One person reported internet fax of a ballot & original ballot by mail and reported it as “easy.”

  11. Table 3: Perception of Security, by Blank Ballot Delivery Method

  12. Table 8: Security Concerns, by Method of Transmission of Voted Ballot

  13. Table 7: Future Method Use, by Method of Transmission of Voted Ballot

  14. Table 5: Satisfaction, by Electronic Transmission of Voted Ballot Note: One person reported sending ballot by internet fax and indicated they were “somewhat satisfied” with that method. One person reported sending ballot by internet fax & original by mail and indicated they were “satisfied” with that method.

  15. Table 6: Waiving Privacy, by Electronic Transmission of Voted Ballot Note: One person reported sending in their ballot by internet fax and indicated they were asked to give up the right to a private vote.

  16. Table 7: Future Method Use, by Method of Transmission of Voted Ballot

  17. Table 8: Security Concerns, by Method of Transmission of Voted Ballot

  18. Table 9: Whether Confirmed Arrival, by Method of Transmission of Voted Ballot

  19. Table 10: Comfort with Electronic Voting, by Concerns with Electronic Transmission

  20. Figure 1: Predicted Probability of Voting, by Voter Type

  21. Figure 2: Predicted Probability of Voting, by State

  22. Figure 3: Voting with Electronic Transmission, by Age Group

  23. Figure 4: Voting with Electronic Transmission, by State

  24. Figure 5: Experience of Receiving Blank Ballot, by Voter Type

  25. Figure 6: Ease of Completing Ballot, by Voter Type

  26. Figure 7: Ease of Completing Ballot, by State

  27. Figure 8: Ease of Sending Voted Ballot, by Sending Method

  28. Figure 9: Ease of Sending Voted Ballot, by Voter Type

  29. Figure 10: Satisfaction with Voting Process, by Voter Type

  30. Figure 11: Satisfaction with Voting Process, by State

  31. Figure 12: Perceived Security of Method for Receiving Blank Ballot, by Voter Type

  32. Figure 13: Perceived Security of Vote, by Voter Type

  33. Table 1: Age Breakdown of Sample

More Related