Full mailbox for high propensity voters
Has your mailbox been stuffed with an unending supply of expensive-looking campaign flyers and brochures the past few weeks? If so, you are in a very select group of voting-age citizens that well-paid political consultants call “high propensity” voters.
High propensity voters are deemed more likely to cast ballots based on the number of times they’ve voted in past elections, and, since campaigning is expensive, candidates often ignore low propensity and occasional voters to focus on those most apt to vote.
Candidates buy the names of high propensity voters and then aim mailers and recorded phone calls to those so identified. The number of these likely voters varies according to the type of election: presidential, mid-term and partisan primary.
In Yorba Linda, likely voters in a presidential contest now number more than 30,000 and in a mid-term election more than 20,000, out of some 40,000 registered voters. But for a primary election like this June’s contest, far fewer voters are considered high propensity.
In the June 2008 primary, 6,823 of 24,737 Yorba Linda Republicans cast ballots, but only 6,267 voted in a local contest at the end of the ballot. For Democrats, 2,353 of 9,474 cast ballots, but only 1,703 marked the down-ballot race. Surely, more occasional GOP voters turned out this year, due to lively battles for governor, senator and Congress nominations.
Again this election cycle, the most disheartening election-mail tactic involved candidates using paid endorsements on so-called “voter guides” or “slate mailers” to fool voters into thinking they’ve earned support from organizations with important-sounding names.
As a high propensity voter, I received 15 such mailers this year, from groups with names designed to associate candidates willing to pay hefty fees with lower-tax, small business, pro-law enforcement, conservative Republican and various patriotic principles.
Actually, they’re for-profit enterprises that give the impression they’ve vetted candidates against a set of values as reflected by key words in the mailer’s name—COPS, Taxpayer Protection, Save Prop 13, Tax Limitation, Republican Leadership and similar language.
They make money by charging candidates more for endorsements than the cost to print and mail the material. And the only vetting involves making sure the checks are signed.
Sadly, voters will see a similar onslaught of these phony guides in the November election that includes two City Council seats. Local candidates already are paying in advance-- $800 to $1,200 per mailer—for the pictures and wording each selects for the “guides.”
But contenders who value honesty and transparency in politics should stop buying these spurious endorsements and avoid becoming complicit with the snake-oil merchants who sell space on these flag-waving flyers to the first or, in some cases, the highest bidder.
High propensity voters are deemed more likely to cast ballots based on the number of times they’ve voted in past elections, and, since campaigning is expensive, candidates often ignore low propensity and occasional voters to focus on those most apt to vote.
Candidates buy the names of high propensity voters and then aim mailers and recorded phone calls to those so identified. The number of these likely voters varies according to the type of election: presidential, mid-term and partisan primary.
In Yorba Linda, likely voters in a presidential contest now number more than 30,000 and in a mid-term election more than 20,000, out of some 40,000 registered voters. But for a primary election like this June’s contest, far fewer voters are considered high propensity.
In the June 2008 primary, 6,823 of 24,737 Yorba Linda Republicans cast ballots, but only 6,267 voted in a local contest at the end of the ballot. For Democrats, 2,353 of 9,474 cast ballots, but only 1,703 marked the down-ballot race. Surely, more occasional GOP voters turned out this year, due to lively battles for governor, senator and Congress nominations.
Again this election cycle, the most disheartening election-mail tactic involved candidates using paid endorsements on so-called “voter guides” or “slate mailers” to fool voters into thinking they’ve earned support from organizations with important-sounding names.
As a high propensity voter, I received 15 such mailers this year, from groups with names designed to associate candidates willing to pay hefty fees with lower-tax, small business, pro-law enforcement, conservative Republican and various patriotic principles.
Actually, they’re for-profit enterprises that give the impression they’ve vetted candidates against a set of values as reflected by key words in the mailer’s name—COPS, Taxpayer Protection, Save Prop 13, Tax Limitation, Republican Leadership and similar language.
They make money by charging candidates more for endorsements than the cost to print and mail the material. And the only vetting involves making sure the checks are signed.
Sadly, voters will see a similar onslaught of these phony guides in the November election that includes two City Council seats. Local candidates already are paying in advance-- $800 to $1,200 per mailer—for the pictures and wording each selects for the “guides.”
But contenders who value honesty and transparency in politics should stop buying these spurious endorsements and avoid becoming complicit with the snake-oil merchants who sell space on these flag-waving flyers to the first or, in some cases, the highest bidder.
posted by Jim Drummond at 12:00 PM
<< Home