How did absentee voting affect the 2020 U.S. election?

The 2020 U.S. election saw a record turnout, saw a huge increase in absentee voting, and brought unified national Democratic control­yet these facts alone do not imply that vote-by-mail increased turnout or benefited Democrats. Using new microdata on millions of individual voters and aggregated turnout data across all 50 states, this paper offers a causal analysis of the impact of absentee vote-by-mail during the COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) pandemic. Focusing on natural experiments in Texas and Indiana, we find that 65-year-olds voted at nearly the same rate as 64-year-olds, despite the fact that only 65-year-olds could vote absentee without an excuse. Being just old enough to vote no-excuse absentee did not substantially increase Democratic turnout relative to Republican turnout. Voter interest appeared to be more important in driving turnout across vote modes, neutralizing the electoral impact of Democrats voting by mail at higher rates during the historic pandemic.

Feasible Policy Evaluation by Design: A Randomized Synthetic Stepped-Wedge Trial of Mandated Disclosure in King County.

Evidence-based policy is limited by the perception that randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are expensive and infeasible. We argue that carefully tailored research design can overcome these challenges and enable more widespread randomized evaluations of policy implementation. We demonstrate how a stepped-wedge (randomized rollout) design that adapts synthetic control methods overcame substantial practical, administrative, political, and statistical constraints to evaluating King County's new food safety rating system. The core RCT component of the evaluation came at little financial cost to the government, allowed the entire county to be treated, and resulted in no functional implementation delay. The case of restaurant sanitation grading has played a critical role in the scholarship on information disclosure, and our study provides the first evidence from a randomized trial of the causal effects of grading on health outcomes. We find that the grading system had no appreciable effects on foodborne illness, hospitalization, or food handling practices but that the system may have marginally increased public engagement by encouraging higher reporting.