To:

From:
Re:
Date:

Interested Parties
Davit Avagyan, Philip Muller
CA June 2016 Over-Vote Analysis
8/17/2016

Ballot Design Issues Lead to Almost 250,000 Over-Votes

in California, June 2016 US Senate Election
In the 2016 California June Primary election, thirty-four candidates ran for the United
States Senate seat. The large number of candidates created a problem for county elections
officials around the state. With such a large number of candidates, voter confusion became a
serious problem that led to almost a quarter million Californians having their votes for United
States US Senate candidates tossed-out.
In June, at least1 235,821 voters had their votes disqualified in the US Senate race
because of over-voting. Although many ballots
contained instructions reminding people to vote for
only one candidate, the ballot designs and the
overwhelming number of candidates proved to be
confusing for many voters. As each county designs its
own ballot, there were several different ballot design
Figure 1

variations used around the state.

We have grouped the different ballot designs together to analyze the effect of the ballot
design on the number of over-votes. In comparison to the US Senate race, there were only 5,833
1

All data is reflective of the County Clerks official results report. Over Vote Data from five counties were not
available. Mendocino, Plumas, Trinity and Tulare counties do not tabulate the number of over-votes. Napa County
did not have the data readily available.
Copyright 2016 YourVoterGuide, Inc.

1017 L Street, #202 * Sacramento, CA 95814 * 916-235-3282 * Philip@YourVoterGuide.com

total over-votes for Republican and Democratic candidates in the Presidential primary. The
discrepancy between the two races is striking; in the US Senate race, approximately 230,000
more people had their votes disqualified due to over-voting. It appears the reason the Presidential
races did not have the same over-voting problem is because there were only seven and five
candidates running for the Democratic and Republican nominations respectively. Elections
Officials listed Presidential candidates in one column and on one page. Although it is true that
not every voter is eligible to cast a vote in the Republican and Democratic presidential primaries,
7,400,520 people voted for the Democratic and Republican nominees and 7,512,322 people
voted in the US Senate race making the two races voter turnout comparable.
Looking at the difference between the ballot types we see that the more complicated the
design is the more over-votes there were.
Designs with two ballot columns on two
pages (CO2-CA2) accounted for 157,492
(67%) of the over-votes. Designs with two
columns on one page (CO1-CA2)
accounted for 41,463 (18%) and ballots
Figure 2

with a single column on the same page

(CO1-CA1) accounted for only 21,490 (9%) of the over-votes. Finally, a three column, same
page ballot design (CO3-CA1) and one column two page ballot design (CO1-CA2) accounted for
7,401 (3%) and 7975 (3%) of the over votes. It is important to understand that the number of

Copyright 2016 YourVoterGuide, Inc.

1017 L Street, #202 * Sacramento, CA 95814 * 916-235-3282 * Philip@YourVoterGuide.com

counties and the number of voters in each group varies dramatically. For the rest of this analysis
the ballot designs will be referred to by their legend in Figure 2.

The population by group type can be seen on the right. When comparing figures 2 and 3
it is clear that although ballot types CO1-CA1 encompassed 27.76% of the overall voters, this
ballot type only contributed to 9% of
the total over-votes. On the other hand,
group CO2-CA2 contributed to 67% of
the over-votes while it was used by
only 34.51% of the voter population.
Similarly, group CO2-CA1 contained

Figure 3

26.96% of the population, almost the same as group CO1-CA1, but contributed to twice the
amount of over-votes or 18%. Clearly voters in counties using CO2- CA2 ballots were almost
six times more likely to over-vote than voters in counties using in CO1-CA1 ballots.
We can also see the distinct
difference between the percentages of
voters over-voting. In the counties using
CO1-CA1 ballots, arguably the least
confusing design type, only 0.93% of the
voters over-voted. In CO2-CA2, which
arguably had the most confusing ballot

Figure 4

Copyright 2016 YourVoterGuide, Inc.

1017 L Street, #202 * Sacramento, CA 95814 * 916-235-3282 * Philip@YourVoterGuide.com

type, the percentage of the population over-voting was 5.43%. Although it is true that this
research cannot prove causation, there is a strong correlation between a higher proportion of
over-votes received and a more complicated ballot design. Other factors, such as campaigns to
educate voters and the availability of electronic voting systems which prevent over-voting could
be contributing elements as well.
Nonetheless, almost a quarter of a million voters had their votes disqualified by overvoting. This is the equivalent of tossing out all of votes of the approximately 200,000 voters in
Sacramento County who voted in the June primary election, fewer voters than the number of
disqualified votes because of over-voting.
Prior to the June election, voting rights activists raised concerns about how many people
might over-vote due to ballot design issues. Research by ballot design experts and election
officials showed worrying signs prior to the election as reported by the LA Times. Although it is
fortunate for Californians that the actual over-votes were fewer than in the trial runs, and the
difference between the number of votes received by the US Senate candidates who came in
second and third and the US Senate election results were not in doubt, when so many citizens
had their votes disqualified because of ballot designs, clearly elections officials need to look at
electronic alternatives to paper ballots and voter guides.

Copyright 2016 YourVoterGuide, Inc.

1017 L Street, #202 * Sacramento, CA 95814 * 916-235-3282 * Philip@YourVoterGuide.com

Over-Vote Data by County

CNUM

CNTY

VOTES

OV SENATE

COLUMNS - SENATE PAGES - SENATE

01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58

Alameda
Alpine
Amador
Butte
Calaveras
Colusa
Contra Costa
Del Norte
El Dorado
Fresno
Glenn
Humboldt
Imperial
Inyo
Kern
Kings
Lake
Lassen
Los Angeles
Madera
Marin
Mariposa
Mendocino
Merced
Modoc
Mono
Monterey
Napa
Nevada
Orange
Placer
Plumas
Riverside
Sacramento
San Benito
San Bernardino
San Diego
San Francisco
San Joaquin
San Luis Obispo
San Mateo
Santa Barbara
Santa Clara
Santa Cruz
Shasta
Sierra
Siskiyou
Solano
Sonoma
Stanislaus
Sutter
Tehama
Trinity
Tulare
Tuolumne
Ventura
Yolo
Yuba

411,347
525
12,836
66,578
15,629
4,329
278,127
6,185
64,279
169,333
6,171
41,993
23,897
5,651
138,893
19,761
16,712
7,179
2,026,068
26,941
103,012
6,430
28,056
38,867
2,623
3,668
87,021
43,450
45,167
691,802
115,266
7,281
403,828
340,360
13,637
339,754
775,930
264,993
129,051
95,236
190,133
118,974
430,779
94,928
50,634
1,517
16,667
100,181
164,926
97,511
20,220
15,577
4,488
63,702
17,546
213,914
53,779
14,959

3,933
4
100
228
56
24
2,326
57
192
675
29
318
358
24
2,049
1,229
2,469
12
149,852
850
291
150

Total

8,548,301

235,821

OV DEM - PRES

OV REP - PRES

STATUS

1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
1
1
2
2
2
1
2
2
1
1
2
1
1
2
3
2
2
1
2

1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

272
2
6
5
5
1
103
2
7
27
1
2
14
0
20
17
15
0
1,616
22
5
1

43
0
5
6
1
1
31
1
12
16
1
5
3
2
12
19
8
3
249
10
6
1

8
1
0
53

3
0
0
14

1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
1
1

4
88
17

2
71
17

4,407
7,401
435
16,419
6,441
2,378
985
331
2,592
264
6,137
615
250
5
123
193
4,602
1,199
1,125
152

2
2
1
1
1
3
2
2
2
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
2
2
2

301
111
12
204
95
125
24
12
27
12
798
40
11
0
1
21
301
15
7
0

144
33
4
51
47
18
8
8
10
11
217
9
14
0
0
6
123
12
3
2

62
4,790
458
287

2
1
2
2
2

1
1
1
1
1

4
67
10
4
4,516

2
49
1
3
1,317
5,833

825
63
0
963
308
6,407
378

Copyright 2016 YourVoterGuide, Inc.

1017 L Street, #202 * Sacramento, CA 95814 * 916-235-3282 * Philip@YourVoterGuide.com

Offical
Offical
Offical
Offical
Offical
Offical
Offical
Offical
Offical
Offical
Offical
Offical
Offical
Offical
Offical
Offical
Offical
Offical
Offical
Offical
Offical
Offical
Not available
Offical
Offical
Offical
Offical
Not made available
Offical
Offical
Offical
Not available
Offical
Offical
Offical
Offical
Offical
Offical
Offical
Offical
Offical
Offical
Offical
Offical
Offical
Offical
Offical
Offical
Offical
Offical
Offical
Offical
Not available
Not available
Offical
Offical
Offical
Offical