However, the upfront costs of online registration are  generally modest and quickly surpassed by the savings generated after  implementation. Efficiencies and Other Benefits

According to literature we reviewed and state and local election officials  we spoke with, the benefits of implementing an online registration system  include administrative efficiencies that can result in improved registration  accuracy and cost savings, including cost savings to voters in the form of  greater convenience. For instance, the majority of studies we reviewed that assessed  the effect of same day registration and all vote-by-mail on voter turnout  found that these policies increased turnout. As a result, distinguishing the unique effects of a policy from the  effects of other factors that affect turnout can be challenging. Moreover, the  development and implementation of various election administration  policies are informed by a variety of factors at the state and local level,  and thus research findings on turnout may not be the only considerations  for election officials in deciding whether to implement changes to election  administration policies. Vote centers (polling places where registrants can vote regardless of  assigned precinct) and the sending of text messages to provide  information about registration and elections have not been studied as  much as some of the other policies, but almost all of the studies we  reviewed on these policies (with the exception of one study on vote  centers) reported increased turnout. Some studies of mailings to provide information and no-excuse  absentee voting policies also found that these policies increased  turnout, while other studies associated with these policies reported  mixed evidence or no evidence of an effect. Most studies that examined e-mail and robocalls used to provide  information reported no evidence of an effect on turnout. Election Activities Result in Various Costs, and These Costs Can Be Difficult to Quantify

States and local election jurisdictions incur a variety of costs associated  with administering elections, and the types and magnitude of costs can  vary by state and jurisdiction. Special elections can also affect the total costs for  conducting elections by increasing the number of elections. Election Costs are Difficult to Quantify

Quantifying the costs for all election activities is difficult for several  reasons, including that multiple parties incur costs associated with  elections and these parties may track costs differently. Although some  parties’ costs can be easily identified in state and local budgets or other  cost-tracking documents, other costs may be difficult to break out or  attribute to election activities. We incorporated technical comments received from other parties in the  report as appropriate. Appendix II: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

This report addresses the following questions:  1. What are the reported benefits and challenges of efforts to collect and  share voter registration information electronically? What is known about the effect of selected policies and practices on  voter turnout? What is known about the costs of elections? For all three questions, we (1) reviewed and analyzed relevant literature  and (2) conducted interviews with state and local jurisdiction election  officials from five selected states, Colorado, Delaware, Illinois, Oregon,  and Rhode Island. The following is a list of the election jurisdictions we visited in  our five selected states:
Colorado: Denver City and County, Grand County
Delaware: Kent County, New Castle County, and Sussex County  Illinois: City of Chicago, Sangamon County
Oregon: Multnomah County, Yamhill County
Rhode Island: City of Pawtucket, Town of Scituate  While our selected states and local jurisdictions are not representative of  all states and jurisdictions nationwide and their responses cannot be  generalized to other states and local election jurisdictions, officials in  these locations provided a range of perspectives on efforts to collect and  share voter registration information electronically, the effect of selected  policies and practices on voter turnout, and elections-related costs. Appendix IV: Review of Research on Effects of Eleven Selected Election Administration Policies on Voter Turnout

From more than 400 publications we initially identified related to voter  turnout, we identified and reviewed 118 studies within 53 publications that  (1) assessed policies that have been or could be implemented by a state  or local government (11 such policies in total across the 118 studies), (2)  contained quantitative analyses of the effect of a given policy on turnout,  and (3) used sufficiently sound methodologies for conducting such  analyses. We found that 11 studies  reported an increase in turnout, 3 studies reported no evidence of an  effect on turnout, 4 studies reported a combination of these (increases  and non-significant findings), 1 study reported a combination of a  decrease in turnout and no evidence of an effect on turnout, and 2  studies reported decreases in turnout. (Study 11)

	Early In-Person Voting

Fitzgerald, Mary.
Why GAO Did This Study

Since the enactment of the Help America Vote Act of 2002, there have been notable changes in how states and local election jurisdictions conduct key election activities, such as registration and voting. States regulate some aspects of elections, but the combinations of election administration policies can vary widely across the country's approximately 10,500 local election jurisdictions.
GAO was asked to examine the benefits, challenges, and other considerations of various election administration policies. This report addresses the following questions: (1) What are the reported benefits and challenges of efforts to collect and share voter registration information electronically? (2) What is known about the effect of selected policies on voter turnout? (3) What is known about the costs of elections?
To address these three questions, GAO reviewed and analyzed relevant literature from 2002 through 2015. GAO identified 118 studies that examined the effect of selected policies that have been or could be implemented by state or local governments on voter turnout. GAO reviewed the studies' analyses, and determined that the studies were sufficiently sound to support their results and conclusions. In addition, GAO conducted visits and interviewed state and local election officials from five states that had implemented efforts and policies relevant to GAO's research questions to varying degrees, and provided geographic diversity. The results from these five states are not generalizable, but provide insight into state and local perspectives.

What GAO Found

According to GAO's literature review and election officials interviewed, the benefits of collecting and sharing voter registration information electronically include improved accuracy and cost savings; while challenges include upfront investments and ongoing maintenance, among other things. For example, establishing infrastructure for online registration requires time and money, but can generate savings and enhance accuracy by, for instance, reducing the need for local election officials to manually process paper registration forms. The upfront costs of online registration are generally modest and quickly surpassed by savings generated after implementation.
GAO reviewed research to identify 11 election administration policies that had each been studied multiple times in connection with voter turnout and found varying effects. For example:
The majority of studies on same day registration and all vote-by-mail found that these policies increased turnout.
Vote centers (polling places where registrants can vote regardless of assigned precinct) and the sending of text messages to provide information about registration and elections have not been studied as much as some of the other policies, but almost all of the studies reviewed on these policies reported increases in turnout.
Some studies of mailings to provide information and no-excuse absentee voting also found that these policies increased turnout, while other studies reported mixed evidence or no evidence of an effect.
Most studies of e-mail and robocalls to provide information reported no evidence of an effect on turnout.
Most studies of early in-person voting reported no evidence of an effect on turnout or found decreases in turnout, while the remaining studies reported mixed evidence.
Distinguishing the unique effects of a policy from the effects of other factors that affect turnout can be challenging, and even sufficiently sound studies cannot account for all unobserved factors that potentially impact the results. Additionally, research findings on turnout are only one of many considerations for election officials as they decide whether or not to implement selected policies.
States and local election jurisdictions incur a variety of costs associated with administering elections, and the types and magnitude of costs can vary by state and jurisdiction. Further, quantifying the total costs for all election activities is difficult for several reasons, including that multiple parties incur costs associated with elections and may track costs differently. Although some parties' costs can be easily identified in cost-tracking documents, other costs may be difficult to attribute to election activities. Additionally, voters' costs can also be difficult to quantify because each voter's costs vary based on factors such as method of voting, or time required to travel to polling places, among other things.
The Election Assistance Commission did not have any comments on this report, and GAO incorporated technical comments provided by state and local election officials and DMV officials as appropriate.