The role of elections in promoting accountability to popular sentiment is a central tenet of democratic theory. The extent to which such accountability is enhanced in judicial elections in the American states, however, is threatened by low levels of citizen involvement in contests for the state judiciary—due in part to ballot roll‐off: many voters, though already at the polls, simply ignore judicial contests. Critics of elections as a means of selecting state judiciaries contend that high ballot roll‐off renders citizen participation too low for such elections to secure greater judicial accountability. This research—an analysis of seventy‐one Kentucky counties voting in recent state supreme court elections—suggests that an emerging electoral technology, the electronic voting machine, substantially reduces ballot roll‐off in judicial elections, thereby increasing citizen participation in state judicial elections. These findings have significant implications for the debate over judicial selection by popular ballot.
Discusses the impact of use of the electronic voting machine on the rate at which voters take part in direct democracy by lowering ballot roll-off, that is, failure by voters at the polls to record a preference in referenda contests; based on voting data, 1992 and 1996; Kentucky.
Innovations in voting systems raise questions about the electoral effects of such developments. This study examines the impact of a new voting device, electronic voting machines, on ballot roll-off. It is found that electronic machines sharply attenuate roll—off—particularly in lower visibility contests at the bottom of the ballot—even after various other forces related to voter fatigue are taken into consideration. These are surprising results, given that recent studies have attributed only minimal effects to electronic machines. Finally, the electoral and normative implications of widespread use of electronic voting machines are considered.