Public Choice Theory & UVA Election Turnout

In the March 2020 UVA elections, turnout for both the Honor referendum and the Student Council presidential elections was around 10 percent. That number increased to 23.8% and 17.4%, respectively, in the March 2022 elections. Why is this turnout relatively low? One’s marginal costs of voting are, no doubt, lower in UVA’s elections than federal or local government elections, as voting can be done online. But, the half hour it takes to vote certainly contains high opportunity costs, especially for students in the middle of midterm season. The marginal benefit can be measured by the chance of affecting the outcome multiplied by the benefit of the desired result. The probability of affecting the outcome is certainly higher than for a public election, but (given the ~6,000 student turnout of the 2022 elections) is still about the same as lifetime odds that one dies of sunstroke (link). And the utility or monetary value of getting a desired outcome is also likely very small. Some argue that -- beyond lobbying and maintaining a budget -- Student Council is ineffective, and most students never have to deal with the Honor system. So, here, again, we have the classic public choice conclusion of the costs of voting outweighing the benefits.

I would argue that if, from a normative perspective, we wish to increase UVA voter turnout (which, many seem to want to do), there would be (at least) two economic ways of doing so. First, use the social pressure thesis to increase costs of not voting. This was done to a certain degree in the run-up to the single-sanction Honor referendum of 2022, which might help explain that vote’s relatively higher voter turnout. Many high-profile CIOs and students endorsed the referendum, arguing that a vote in favor of the change was a vote of anti-racism (see, e.g., this poster retweeted by now-Student Council President Ms. Cecilia Cain, containing a statement made by a majority of the Honor Committee). College students today generally wanting to be seen as anti-racist, this, I think, offers a good social pressure that increases the costs of not voting. Second, UVA and the University Board of Elections could make efforts to literally increase the monetary marginal benefit of voting. This has been done in the past by entering every student who votes into a raffle for one of about 36 chances to win a prize valued at about $30 (e.g., a Bodo’s gift card). This would increase each students’ marginal benefit by about $0.18 (36/6,000 chance to win a $30 prize). While some might decry such efforts as corrupting the ideal of student self-governance, I argue an economist would see this as a potentially effective way to incentivize voting (and as we all know, incentives affect behavior!!). All in all, as calls to increase UVA voter turnout continue, I think it would beHOOve the University and its students to consider how economic and social incentives can be a tool to impact turnout.