Cost and the calculus of voting

Downs's (1957) theory of voting maintains that individuals balance the costs of voting against anticipated benefits in deciding whether to vote. However, most empirical tests of his theory have concluded that costs play little role in individuals' decisions to vote or abstain, and that benefits are the determining factor. Unfortunately, the existing empirical tests of the theory have been inadequate, especially in regard to the measurement of the cost of voting. Using data from the Comparative State Elections Project, we develop an improved indicator of the cost of voting. When this measure of cost is used in a test of Down's theory, we find, contrary to most earlier research, that the cost of voting seems to be a more important determinant of participation than the factors associated with voting benefits in Downs's model.The authors shared equally in the research reported; the order in which they are listed was determined randomly.     

Who has standing in cost-benefit analysis?

The issues involved in deciding whose preferences are to be counted in cost-benefit analysis are often misunderstood or controversial. This paper attempts to resolve the issues in a number of particular cases by looking to the fundamental value assumptions underlying cost-benefit analysis. Cost-benefit analysis is useful only to the extent that there exists a general consensus that the value assumptions are legitimate. Certain implications of the value assumptions prove useful in deciding what preferences have standing.     

Changes in calls for police service with changes in routine activities and the arrival and passage of weather fronts

Proceeding on the assumptions that the day of the week is the best predictor of the levels of calls for police service, that calls for police service emanate from the pursuit of routine activities, and that weather influences routine activities, this paper examines how the expected change in the level of calls for service for a particular day of the week in Chicago is altered with the arrival and passage of weather fronts. Fronts taking 1 day to pass Chicago have a broader effect on the changes in calls across the days of the week than fronts taking 2 days in passage. On the whole, the 2-day fronts significantly alter calls for service during the weekdays but not on the weekend, while 1-day fronts significantly alter calls on both weekdays and weekends. In general, cold fronts decrease calls for service, and warm fronts increase calls for service.