iiinova — where your digital self keeps evolving

Michael G. Miller

@michaelgmiller.bsky.social

4.1K followers 492 following 12 posts

Political Scientist, Barnard College. Elections, Voting Rights, and Political Behavior. Blue collar scholar. #SkolVikings 🇺🇦

Posts Replies Media

Reposted by Michael G. Miller

Princeton University Press @princetonupress.bsky.social · 17/09/2026

In their new book, An American Problem, @michaelgmiller.bsky.social & @kevintmorris.bsky.social offer a sweeping history of the Voting Rights Act & the attacks it has suffered. Available October 6 (1 December UK pub). Learn more: buff.ly/Y1UGOMl #PoliSci #History #USHistory

An American Problem: How the Country Built—and the Supreme Court Broke—the Voting Rights Act by Michael G. Miller and Kevin T. Morris. The rise and fall of the Voting Rights Act, from the triumph of its passage in 1965 to its evisceration by the Supreme Court in their 2013 decision in Shelby County v. Holder.

02711

Reposted by Michael G. Miller

Jake Grumbach @jakemgrumbach.bsky.social · 31/01/2025

This paper deserves more attention. Uses Keyssar and other data to compile the most comprehensive historical state disenfranchisement law dataset I've seen. Uses it to show which policies reduced turnout most (it was poll taxes) gated: www.cambridge.org/core/journal...

While it is commonly understood that the poll tax and literacy tests, among other measures, were used effectively in the South to disenfranchise Black voters from the late nineteenth through the mid-twentieth century, what is not well known is how much those disenfranchising laws mattered. Specifically, how much did the enactment of poll taxes or literacy tests affect turnout in federal and state elections? And how much did those disenfranchising provisions dampen vote totals for Republican candidates in the South? Using the staggered implementation and removal of several disenfranchising policies over a 101-year period, we answer these questions and provide some precision to our collective knowledge of the “disenfranchising era” in American electoral politics. Overall, we find that the poll tax was the main driver of disenfranchisement in Southern elections, with literacy tests and the Australian ballot providing some secondary effects. We also find that ex-felon disenfranchisement laws were considerably more important—both in reducing turnout as well as Republican vote share in Southern elections—than has been traditionally understood. Finally, we unpack the “South” and unsurprisingly find that racial politics drove these results: the disenfranchising institutions were more impactful in states with a larger Black population share. Our results show the powerful effects of disenfranchising policies on electorates and electoral outcomes. We discuss these results in both their historical context as well as with a mind to the continuing use of disenfranchising provisions in law today.

110237

Michael G. Miller @michaelgmiller.bsky.social · 01/03/2024

Did you know you can permanently edit the titles of your articles on Google Scholar so they're properly capitalized, thus eliminating the need for anyone who copies the citation to them from having to fix their bibliography?

141