New Research Estimates Cost of Closed Primary Elections, Implementing Partisan Voter Registration

Sixteen states have closed primary elections for congressional offices.

In a closed primary, only voters registered with a political party can participate. Independent voters are excluded from participating in these taxpayer-funded elections.

New analysis from The Elections Group estimates the cost of administering primary elections in three of the sixteen closed primary states through an analysis of available data and a novel methodological approach. This research helps quantify the cost to taxpayers — including independent voters — to hold primary elections that exclude certain voters. The topline? The administration of closed primary elections — including staffing costs, ballot production, and mail ballot services — comes at a considerable cost to taxpayers.

For example, in Pennsylvania, The Elections Group estimated that administering closed primary elections cost nearly $5.8M per cycle. There are currently 1.35M registered independents (15% of registered voters) in Pennsylvania who are prohibited from voting in primaries despite their tax dollars contributing to their cost.

While Pennsylvania is the largest population state covered in the report, the two other smaller states covered in the analysis are also spending significant money to run closed primary elections. 

• Oklahoma, which has nearly 500,000 independents (20% of registered voters), spends an estimate of over $1M to administer closed primary elections each cycle.  
• West Virginia, which has about 300,000 independents (25% of registered voters) spends an estimate of nearly $800,000 to run closed primaries each cycle.

The Elections Group’s research does not just address the cost of closed primaries. It also estimates the cost of implementing a partisan voter registration system in three states — a significant cost that states with open primaries would face if they were to implement closed primaries. 

Most states with open party primaries do not register voters with a party affiliation. To hold closed primaries, however, voters must register with a party to participate. While this may seem like a simple fix, the inner workings of state voter registration systems are complicated, and changing them to allow for party affiliations can come with significant costs. The report estimates these costs in three open primary states that considered (but ultimately did not) closing their primaries during the last legislative session.

• If Indiana implemented closed primaries and a partisan registration system, and half (2.25M) of voters chose to re-register with a party in order to vote in primaries, this process could cost up to $2.95 per voter in a paper-based system. This would cost the state over $6.6M.
  
  While some voters may be able to re-register online, which costs much less at about three cents per transaction, the paper forms would still need to be available. Further, these estimates do not even include education and outreach costs that would be necessary to inform voters about the new election system.
• Following the same methodology as above, if South Carolina were to implement closed primaries and partisan registration, re-registering just half of voters (1.65M) could cost up to $4.8M in a paper-based system. This estimate also excludes additional education and outreach costs. Further, the report noted that South Carolina’s existing voter registration infrastructure likely does not support the tracking of party affiliation. This means a significant and potentially costly software update would also be required.
• In Tennessee, re-registering half (2.06M) of voters via a paper-based system could cost up to $6.07M. This estimate also excludes additional education and outreach costs. The report also found that Tennessee’s voter database system was likely built in-house, meaning it is unlikely that the current system has the capability to track party registration. Updating the software would add additional one-time costs.

‍To summarize: In all three states, closing primaries would easily require a multi-million dollar expenditure.

Overall, the insights from The Elections Group are an excellent first step in estimating the costs associated with closed primary elections. However, there are minimal data publicly available to make these estimates, which underscores a lack of transparency nationwide in how much taxpayers pay to administer all types of elections. Nevertheless, this research does well to shine some light on this important element of our democracy. 

—

Carlo Marcomber is Senior Policy Manager at Unite America. He brings a background in nonpartisan election reform to his work with extensive experience in policy, research, and grassroots advocacy. Carlo conducts original research on primary elections, including the problems with party primaries and the evidence of reformed primary systems as solutions. He also consults with many internal and external stakeholders on best practices for primary election policy. Carlo was the researcher for Unite America Executive Director Nick Troiano's book The Primary Solution. Carlo previously worked for Fair Elections Portland, a nonpartisan electoral reform campaign that successfully expanded the use of ranked choice voting in Portland, ME, his hometown. He holds a bachelor’s degree in Government from Colby College.

‍