Colombian Voters And Ballot Structure: Error, Confusion, And/Or “None Of The Above”

Abstract

COLOMBIAN VOTERS AND BALLOT STRUCTURE: ERROR, CONFUSION, AND/OR “NONE OF THE ABOVE” Steven L. Taylor∗ Troy University Prepared for the 2012 Meeting of SECOLAS. The point of interaction between the voter and the vote is the ballot. Therefore, it stands to reason that the format of the ballot matters in this interchange. Indeed, studies have demonstrated the significance of the ballot format.1 And while intuitive and empirical evidence confirm the importance of the piece of paper (or computer screen) upon which candidates and parties appear and voters vote, this is an understudied area, especially in Latin America. The Colombian case presents an intriguing example of the importance of ballot format as it is an electoral democracy with a long history of voting that has seen significant ballot (and electoral) reform over the last several decades. Specifically, the Colombian electoral system had a system of privately produced paper ballots from the early Twentieth Century until 1990, when it shifted to state-produced ballots with a new format. From 1990–2011 the system saw a shift in electoral rules (2003) as well as ballot format changes in 2003 and 2011. These changes provide a vehicle for studying the ways in which ballot format influences electoral outcomes. The specific focus of this study is the degree to which ballot formats have contributed to voter confusion and error in the Colombian case. Further, examination of voting patterns suggests some significant level of voter dissatisfaction in Colombia given the number of votes being cast for en blanco (effectively, “none of the above”). Not only is en blanco a legitimate choice on Colombian ballots, but it is a potential winner: should en blanco win the most votes in a given contest, then a new election will be run. Another possible indicator of voter dissatisfaction or confusion are unmarked ballots. The fundamental argument herein is two-fold: first that the shifts in the Colombia ballot and the electoral rules has created substantial confusion within the Colombian electoral, which warrants ballot reform (something that was attempted in 2011, but appears to have failed to achieve its goals) and that the shift in ballot production from private to public production helped reveal a fairly high level of motivated, yet dissatisfied or confused ∗I would like to thank the staffs at the Library of Congress and the Biblioteca Luis Ángel Arango in Bogotá, Colombia (with a special thanks to Tracey North of the LOC’s Hispanic Reading Room). Additional thanks to the Misión de Observación Electoral for the chance to observe the March 2010 elections and to Jeff Daniel for data organizational help. Funding provided by the Faculty Development Committee of Troy University for research trips to Washington, DC in July of 2009 and Bogotá, Colombia in March 2010. C 2012 Southeastern Council on Latin American Studies and Wiley Periodicals, Inc. 111 The Latin Americanist, December 2012 Table 1: Effective Number of Parliamentary Parties, Colombian Congress, 1974–2010 (Shaded to indicate changes to ballot) Chamber Senate 1974 2.28 2.17 1978 2.06 2.01 1982 1.98 2.04 1986 2.46 2.47 1990 2.20 2.24 1991 3.03 3.10 1994 2.82 2.90 1998 3.27 3.56 2002 7.39 9.19 2006 7.60 7.10 2010 5.15 5.57 voters (i.e., voters will to go to the polls and vote en blanco or deposit an unmarked ballot). The role of ballot design has practical saliency as the Colombian government is moving towards the adoption of electronic voting machines and so the lessons of recent ballot format changes would be useful as new choices are made. To accomplish the above the paper will provide basic background on the Colombia electoral and party systems, a review of the evolution of the Colombian ballot and then move to an analysis of error rates and “none of the above” voting. The main analytical focus of the paper, time-wise, is 1974–2011.2 Basic Background Some very basic information is needed about the Colombian electoral and party systems for the purpose of discussing the ballot. First, in terms of party system, from the mid-nineteenth century...