Political Behavior

, Volume 34, Issue 1, pp 1–26 | Cite as

Did Disfranchisement Laws Help Elect President Bush? New Evidence on the Turnout Rates and Candidate Preferences of Florida’s Ex-Felons

  • Traci BurchEmail author
Original Paper


This paper re-examines the impact of Florida’s disfranchisement law on the 2000 Presidential election. The analysis simulates outcomes in Florida under scenarios consistent with the turnout rates of Georgia and North Carolina ex-felons in 2000 and Florida ex-felons in 2008. Survey evidence on candidate preferences as well as data on ex-felon party registration in Florida and North Carolina are used to produce estimates of support for Bush and Gore among ex-felons. Based on the simulations, the ex-felon population in Florida would have favored Bush in 2000. Assuming that ex-felons supported Gore at rates similar to GSS respondents with at most a high school diploma, Bush would have defeated Gore by 4,925 and 7,048 votes, assuming turnout of 10 and 15%, respectively.


Felony disfranchisement Criminal justice Voting behavior 2000 General election 



The author would like to thank Jennifer Hochschild, Sidney Verba, Kay Schlozman, Gary King, Dan Galvin, and Alec Ewald for their comments on earlier drafts of this paper.


  1. Bartels, L. M. (2005). What’s the Matter with What’s the Matter with Kansas? Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association. Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  2. Beck, A. et al. (1993). Survey of State Prison Inmates, 1991. NCJ 136949, United States Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.Google Scholar
  3. Behrens, A., Uggen, C., et al. (2003). Ballot manipulation and the menace of Negro domination: Racial threat and felon disfranchisement in the United States 1850–2002. American Journal of Sociology, 109(3), 559–605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Biemer, P., et al. (2003). An evaluation of procedures and operations used by the voter news service for the 2000 presidential election. Public Opinion Quarterly, 67, 32–44.Google Scholar
  5. Blalock, H. M. (1967). Toward a theory of minority-group relations. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  6. Brewer, M. D., & Stonecash, J. M. (2001). Class, race issues, and declining white support for the democratic party in the South. Political Behavior, 23(2), 131–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brown-Dean, K. L. (2003). Culture, context, and competition: Explaining state-level variation in felon disfranchisement laws. Annual Meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association. Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
  8. Bunche, R. J. (1973). The political status of the Negro. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  9. Burch, T. (2007a). Punishment and participation: How criminal convictions threaten american democracy. Program in Government and Social Policy Ph.D., Harvard University, Cambridge, p. 250.Google Scholar
  10. Burch, T. (2007b). A Study of Felon and Misdemeanant Voter Participation in North Carolina. The Sentencing Project. Available online from
  11. Burch, T. (Forthcoming). Turnout and party registration among convicted offenders in the 2008 general election. Law and Society Review.Google Scholar
  12. Campbell, A. (1960). Surge and decline: A study of electoral change. Public Opinion Quarterly, 24(3), 397–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Campbell, A., Converse, P., et al. (1960). The American voter. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  14. Citrin, J., Schickler, E., & Sides, J. (2003). What if everyone voted? Simulating the impact of increased turnout in senate elections. American Journal of Political Science, 47(1), 75–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Conn, J. B. (2005). Felon disfranchisement laws: Partisan politics in the legislatures. Michigan Journal of Race and Law, 10, 495–539.Google Scholar
  16. Dawson, M. C. (1994). Behind the mule. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  17. DeNardo, James. (1980). Turnout and the vote: The joke’s on the democrats. American Political Science Review, 74(2), 406–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Diedrich, J. (2006). Signs detailing voting rules for felons removed, returned; wording differs from state message. Milwaukee, Wisconsin: Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.Google Scholar
  19. Erikson, R. S. (1995). State turnout and presidential voting. American Politics Quarterly, 23(4), 387–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Federal Elections 2000: Election Results for the U.S. President, the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House of Representatives (2001) Federal Elections Commission.Google Scholar
  21. Finkel, S. E., & Scarrow, H. A. (1985). Party identification and party enrollment: The difference and the consequence. Journal of Politics, 47, 620–647.Google Scholar
  22. Fording, R. C. (1997). The conditional effect of violence as a political tactic: Mass insurgency, welfare generosity, and electoral context in American States. American Journal of Political Science, 41(1), 1–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Fraga, L. R., & Leal, D. L. (2004). Playing the latino card: Race, ethnicity, and national party politics. The DuBois Review, 1(2), 297–317.Google Scholar
  24. Frank, T. (2004). What’s the matter with Kansas?. New York: Metropolitan Books.Google Scholar
  25. Grofman, B., Owen, G., et al. (1999). Rethinking the partisan effects of higher turnout: So what’s the question? Public Choice, 99, 357–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Grose, C. R., & Yoshinaka, A. (2002). Electoral Institutions and Voter Participation: The Effect of Felon Disfranchisement Laws on Voter Turnout in the U. S. Southern States, 1984–2000. Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association. Boston, MA.Google Scholar
  27. Harlow, C. W. (2003). Education and correctional populations. Bureau of Justice Statistics.Google Scholar
  28. Harvey, A. E. (1994). Ex-Felon disfranchisement and its influence on the black vote: The need for a second look. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 142(3), 1145–1189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Highton, B., & Wolfinger, R. E. (2001). The political implications of higher turnout. British Journal of Political Science, 31, 179–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hillygus, D. S., & Shields, T. G. (2005). Moral issues and voter decision making in the 2004 Presidential Election. PS: 201–209.Google Scholar
  31. Holland, P. W. (1986). Statistics and causal inference. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 81(3), 945–960.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hull, E. A. (2006). The disfranchisement of Ex-Felons. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Key, V. O., Jr. (1949). Southern politics in State and Nation. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
  34. Keyssar, A. (2000). The right to vote. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  35. Konner, J., et al. (2001). Television’s Performance on Election Night 2000: A Report for CNN. Available online from Accessed 17 Sep 2010.
  36. Knack, S. (1994). Does rain help republicans? Theory and evidence on turnout and the vote. Public Choice, 79, 187–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Krajick, K. (2004). Why can’t ex-felons vote? Washington, DC: The Washington Post.Google Scholar
  38. Kristof, N. D. (2004). Living poor, voting rich. New York: The New York Times.Google Scholar
  39. Kurtz, H. (2000). Exit wounds: Polls led networks astray; data, human error tied to Botched calls. The Washington Post, 9 November, A31.Google Scholar
  40. Leighley, J. E., & Nagler, J. (2007). Who votes now? And does it matter? Paper prepared for presentation at the 2007 Annual Meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, IL, April 12–15, 2007.Google Scholar
  41. Manza, J., & Uggen, C. (2004). Punishment and democracy: Disfranchisement of nonincarcerated felons in the United States. Perspectives on Politics, 2(3), 491–506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Manza, J., & Uggen, C. (2006). Locked out: Felon disfranchisement and American democracy. Cambridge: Oxford.Google Scholar
  43. Miles, T. J. (2004). Felon disfranchisement and voter turnout. Journal of Legal Studies, 33(1), 85–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Nagel, J. H., & McNulty, J. E. (1996). Partisan effects of voter turnout in senatorial and gubernatorial elections. American Political Science Review, 90(4), 780–793.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Palast, G. (2001). The wrong way to fix the vote. Washington DC: The Washington Post.Google Scholar
  46. Pew Hispanic Center. (2008). Among Hispanics in Florida, 2008 Voter Registration Rolls Swing Democratic. Online; Accessed December 10, 2009, from
  47. Pierre, R. E. (2001). Botched name purge denied some the right to vote. Washington, DC: The Washington Post.Google Scholar
  48. Pierson, P. (2004). Politics in time. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  49. Piven, F. F., & Cloward, R. A. (2000). Why American still don’t vote. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
  50. Preuhs, R. R. (2001). State Felon disfranchisement policy. Social Science Quarterly, 82(4), 733–748.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Rosenstone, S. J., & Wolfinger, R. E. (1978). The effect of registration laws on voter turnout. American Political Science Review, 72(1), 22–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Shaffer, S. D. (1982). Policy differences between voters and non-voters in American elections. Western Political Quarterly, 35(4), 496–510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Stonecash, J. M. (2000). Class and party in American politics. Boulder: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  54. Tucker, H. J., Vedlitz, A., et al. (1986). Does heavy turnout help democrats in presidential elections? American Political Science Review, 80(4), 1291–1304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Wlezien, C. (2001). On forecasting the presidential vote. Political Science and Politics, 34, 25–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Word, D. L. & Colby Perkins, R. Jr. (1996). Building a Spanish surname list for the 1990’s—A new approach to an old problem. U. S. Bureau of the Census Technical Working Paper No. 13. Retrieved January 27, 2010, from
  57. Yoshinaka, A., & Grose, C. R. (2005). Partisan politics and electoral design: The enfranchisement of felons and ex-felons in the United States, 1960–1999. State and Local Government Review, 37(1), 49–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Northwestern UniversityChicagoUSA
  2. 2.American Bar FoundationChicagoUSA

Personalised recommendations