June 04, 2004
(Updated) The Unreported Numbers From The Final Official Election Results
Providing Context Through Ballots Cast, Voter Turnout, And Registration Figures
Note: This post has been updated. Any and all updates appear at the end of the original post.
We've seen no official announcement of this anywhere, but the Multnomah County Elections Division website now includes links to what it labels final official election results, and the Division indeed confirmed to us that these are the final numbers.
There's some interesting new data in this June 2 report -- including the counts of "over votes" (when someone casts a vote for more than one person in a given race) and "under votes" (when someone does not cast any vote at all in a given race) -- so we're going to take a fresh look at the local races, one inspired by an essay we wrote back in 1999.
But first, some more general statistics: In the County's 129 precincts, there are 363,589 registered voters, 164,635 of which cast ballots in the May 18 primary -- for a final official voter turnout in Multnomah County of 45.28%.
Some of the data relevant to what follows was taken from the primary election abstracts, which detail the results by precinct.
Note: This might get a little arcane, but bear with us. Our intention here is to provide a greater context for the narrow version of the election results we tend to hear.
Multnomah County District Attorney
In the 129 precincts relevant to the District Attorney race, 98,334 votes were cast for Michael D. Schrunk, while 3,408 write-in votes were cast -- that's 96.65% to 3.35%.
But 164,635 ballots were turned in. Of the remainder, there were 42 over votes and a whopping 62,851 under votes. The latter figure means that 38.18% of those in these 129 precincts who cast ballots in the May 18 primary did not vote in the District Attorney race.
Put another way, while Schrunk received 96.65% of the votes cast in this race, he only received 59.73% of the potential votes, based upon the number of total ballots cast in the precincts relevant to this race.
Widening our perspective and percentages to consider the larger number of registered voters in these 129 precincts (363,589) rather than the above turnout figures, we find that Schrunk received the votes of only 27.04% of those who were registered to vote in the 129 precincts of Multnomah County.
County Commissioner District No. 1
In the 40 precincts relevant to the County Commissioner District No. 1 race, 25,337 votes were cast for Maria Rojo de Steffey, while 6,666 votes were cast for Kerry Dugan (the next closest candidate) -- that's 60.24% to 15.85%.
But 53,422 ballots were turned in. Of the remainder, there were 69 over votes and 11,296 under votes. The latter figure means that 21.14% of those in these 40 precincts who cast ballots in the May 18 primary did not vote in the County Commissioner District No. 1 race.
Put another way, while Rojo de Steffey received 60.24% of the votes cast in this race, she only received 47.43% of the potential votes, based upon the overall voter turnout in the precincts relevant to this race.
Widening our perspective and percentages to consider the larger number of registered voters in these precincts (105,325) rather than the turnout figures, we find that Rojo de Steffey received the votes of only 24.05% of those who were registered to vote in the 40 precincts relevant to this race.
County Commissioner District No. 3
In the 31 precincts relevant to the County Commissioner District No. 3 race, 16,217 votes were cast for Lisa Naito, while 9,655 votes were cast for Ron McCarty (the next closest candidate) -- that's 48.67% to 28.97%.
But 38,096 ballots were turned in. Of the remainder, there were 104 over votes and 4,670 under votes. The latter figure means that 12.26% of those in these 31 precincts who cast ballots in the May 18 primary did not vote in the County Commissioner District No. 3 race.
Put another way, while Naito received 48.67% of the votes cast in this race, she only received 42.57% of the potential votes, based upon the overall voter turnout in the precincts relevant to this race.
Widening our perspective and percentages to consider the larger number of registered voters in these precincts (84,725) rather than the turnout figures, we find that Naito received the votes of only 19.14% of those who were registered to vote in the 31 precincts relevant to this race.
County Commissioner District No. 4
In the 31 precincts relevant to the County Commissioner District No. 4 race, 20,446 votes were cast for Lonnie Roberts, while 4,235 votes were cast for Lonnie H. Stout (the next closest candidate) -- that's 82.23% to 17.03%.
But 30,543 ballots were turned in. Of the remainder, there were 39 over votes and 5,639 under votes. The latter figure means that 18.46% of those in these precincts who cast ballots in the May 18 primary did not vote in the County Commissioner District No. 4 race.
Put another way, while Roberts received 82.23% of the votes cast, he only received 66.94% of the potential votes, based upon the overall voter turnout in the precincts relevant to this race.
Widening our perspective and percentages to consider the larger number of registered voters in these precincts (79,158) rather than the turnout figures, we find that Roberts received the votes of only 25.83% of those who were registered to vote in the 31 precincts relevant to this race.
City of Portland Mayor
In the 93 precincts relevant to the City of Portland Mayor race, 56,366 votes were cast for Tom Potter, while 45,771 votes were cast for Jim Francesconi (the next closest candidate) -- that's 42.26% to 34.32%.
But 139,459 ballots were turned in. Of the remainder, there were 384 over votes and 5,708 under votes. The latter figure means that 4.09% of those in these 93 precincts who cast ballots in the May 18 primary did vote vote in the City of Portland Mayor race.
Put another way, while Potter received 42.26% of the votes cast, he only received 40.42% of the potential votes, based upon the overall voter turnout in the precincts relevant to this race. Francesconi, who received 34.32% of the votes cast, only received 32.82% of the potential votes.
Widening our perspective and percentages to consider the larger number of registered voters in these precincts (295,424) rather than the turnout figures, we find that Potter received the votes of only 19.08% of those who were registered to vote in the 93 precincts relevant to this race. Francesconi received the votes of only 15.50% of those who were registered to vote in the 93 precincts relevant to this race.
City of Portland Commissioner, Position 1
In the 93 precincts relevant to the City of Portland Commissioner, Position 1 race, 56,244 votes were cast for Nick Fish, while 43,745 votes were cast for Sam Adams (the next closest candidate) -- that's 47.72% to 37.11%.
But 139,459 ballots were turned in. Of the remainder, there were 323 over votes and 21,266 under votes. The latter figure means that 15.29% of those in these 93 precincts who cast ballots in the May 18 primary did not vote in the City of Portland Commissioner, Position 1 race.
Put another way, while Fish received 47.72% of the votes cast, he only received 40.33% of the potential votes, based upon the overall voter turnout in the precincts relevant to this race. Adams, who received 37.11% of the votes cast, only received 31.37% of the potential votes.
Widening our perspective and percentages to consider the larger number of registered voters in these precincts (295,424) rather than the turnout figures, we find that Fish received the votes of only 19.04% of those who were registered to vote in the 93 precincts relevant to this race. Adams received the votes of only 14.81% of those who were registered to vote in the 93 precincts relevant to this race.
City of Portland Commissioner, Position 4
In the 93 precincts relevant to the City of Portland Commissioner, Position 4 race, 61,201 votes were cast for Randy Leonard, while 9,743 votes were cast for Mark Lloyd Lakeman (the next closest candidate) -- that's 52.67% to 8.38%.
But 139,459 ballots were turned in. Of the remainder, there were 352 over votes and 22,907 under votes. The latter figure means that 16.43% of those in these 93 precincts who cast ballots in the May 18 primary did not vote in the City of Portland Commissioner, Position 4 race.
Put another way, while Leonard received 52.67% of the votes cast, he only received 43.88% of the potential votes, based upon the overall voter turnout in the precincts relevant to this race. Lakeman, who received 8.38% of the votes cast, only received 6.99% of the potential votes.
Widening our perspective and percentages to consider the larger number of registered voters in these precincts (295,424) rather than the turnout figures, we find that Leonard received the votes of only 20.72% of those who were registered to vote in the 93 precincts relevant to this race. Lakeman received only 3.30% of those who were registered to vote in the 93 precincts relevant to this race.
Addendum
Readers who want to be further disturbed by the general lack of participation in our elections might want to hurt themselves by doing the above calculations based upon the total voting-age population rather than upon registration figures or turnout numbers. We didn't have the heart.
Update
We forgot one of the races to which we had been paying attention. Plus, we have some bonus information, but we'll get to that after.
Measure 26-53 City of Portland
In the 93 precincts relevant to the Measure 26-53 race, 75,545 votes were cast for Yes, while 47,957 votes were cast for No -- that's 61.17% to 38.83%.
But 139,459 ballots were turned in. Of the remainder, there were 204 over votes and 15,753 under votes. The latter figure means that 11.30% of those in these 93 precincts who cast ballots in the May 18 primary did not vote in the Measure 26-53 race.
Put another way, while Measure 26-53 received 61.17%% of the votes cast in this race, it only received 54.17% of the potential votes, based upon the number of total ballots cast in the precincts relevant to this race.
Widening our perspective and percentages to consider the larger number of registered voters in these precincts (295,424) rather than the turnout figures, we find that Measure 26-53 received the votes of only 25.57% of those who were registered to vote in the 93 precincts relevant to this race.
Voting-Age Population
We said we didn't have the heart for it, but here we go anyway. First of all, this is the least certain aspect of the analysis, because in order to do these calculations, we're simply going to use the numbers of people 18 years and over in Multnomah County (513,236) and the City of Portland (417,667) as of the 2000 Census.
This does not necessarily (and, in fact, certainly does not) exactly reflect the voting-age population for the May 10 primary, but it's close enough to make the point. It does mean, however, that when we say "received the votes of X percent of the voting-age population," it's more of a hypothetical illustration rather than a literal. But as we said, these figures are close enough to make the point.
Additionally, since we don't have in front of us such demographics by electoral precinct, we can only do these calculations for races that were either countywide or citywide.
In the Multnomah County District Attorney race, Schrunk received the votes of only 19.16% of the voting-age population of Multnomah County.
In the City of Portland Mayor race, Potter received the votes of only 13.50% of the voting-age population of the City of Portland. Francesconi received the votes of only 10.96% of the voting-age population of the City of Portland.
In the City of Portland Commissioner, Position 1 race, Fish received the votes of only 13.47% of the voting-age population of the City of Portland. Adams received the votes of only 10.47% of the voting-age population of the City of Portland.
In the City of Portland Commissioner, Position 4 race, Leonard received the votes of only 14.65% of the voting-age populatio of the City of Portland. Lakeman received the votes of only 2.33% of the voting-age population of the City of Portland.
In the Measure 26-53 City of Portland race, Measure 26-53 receive the votes of only 18.09% of the voting-age population of the City of Portland.
See? We told you it would be disturbing.
Comments (10)
nader on 04 Jun 2004
Very nice analysis, especially the % of potential votes based on the number of ballots cast.
I don't put much weight on the % of registered voter stat, because there are too many variables explaining why a registered voter doesn't vote in an election. But when a voter bothers to submit a ballot, but refuses to vote for any candidate that means the voter either: (a) didn't feel informed enough to make a reasoned decision, (b) didn't like any of the candidates in the running, (c) felt their vote was superfluous, or (d) made a mistake.
Looking at the D.A. race, the fact that 40.27% of those who voted refused to vote for Schrunk, even though he was unopposed is a very significant fact to me.
pdxkona on 04 Jun 2004
nader-
I think you might be reading into that particular stat. I have two close yet lazy friends that registered to vote and for the Mayor, but had no idea nor cared about all the judges and D.A. races; hence they left it blank. (I found out all this afterwards by the way, otherwise I might have given them some input and a kick in the ass to do research)
Mark on 04 Jun 2004
I notice that there are considerably more registered voters in county commissioner district 1 (105,325) than in district 3 (84,725) or district 4 (79,158). Is this indicative of a need for some redrawing of the district boundaries? (I admit to having no clue what the process is.)
James on 05 Jun 2004
While indicative of the disengagement of the general public with the political process, it's not surprising to see a lot of drop-off on down-ballot races.
More interesting in the final election numbers was a race for Metro Council in which the numbers changed significantly from when the Oregonian published them. The day after, the Monroe-Liberty race was something like 41% to 42%, and in the final numbers, Liberty opened up more than a 5-point lead on the incumbent (39.5% Monroe to 44.7% Liberty).
Vanessa on 05 Jun 2004
I did not vote for some categories, as I could find no info about the people. Granted I waited till the almost the last minute to vote, but both googling and a call to the democratic headquarters were of no help. How are we supposed to make a decision for people and positions that we have no info about?
Chris on 05 Jun 2004
b!X,
Nice job with the breakdown of votes earned vs. potential votes. There is a lot of value in having those figures. I might also encourage your readers to look at the geographical breakdown of what precincts went to which candidates (precinct maps can be downloaded from the Mult. Co. Elections website: http://www.co.multnomah.or.us/dbcs/elections/map/precinct_maps.pdf). Cheers.
Gary Marschke on 05 Jun 2004
Just another in a long litany supporting the age-old adage that decisions are made by those who show up.
Nothing new about it, nothing particularly disturbing about it considering that all that's required to change it is for more people to participate. The opportunity is there.
Sally on 07 Jun 2004
Decisions are made by those who show up, sure; but the candidates and parties available are generally uninspiring at best.
I wonder if one could design an "instant runoff" type of local polling style that would offer more votes to each voter; and though no more winners overall, more 'winners' for any potential voter. The representation figures could hardly get lower than those b!X has so wonderfully calculated for us all.
Do you follow this logic, b!X? At any rate, instant runoff voting cuts into the usual two-person races and stops forcing voters into such narrow (and often reluctantly chosen) ruts.
The One True b!X on 07 Jun 2004
As a general principle, I support instant runoff voting, although like with most things one would need to see a specific proposal.
For what it's worth, Portland had a form of instant runoff voting in the first election it held after adopting the current commission-style form of government.
nader on 08 Jun 2004
pdxkona -
I think that I accounted for your close, but lazy friends. They would probably fit under "(a) didn't feel informed enough to make a reasoned decision".
Presumably if they had known more about the other candidates they would have formed some opinion.