[ad_1]
The lines in the first hours of the election have been protagonists and put at the center one of the great themes of the plebiscite: how many people will ultimately participate in the process, regardless of which option wins. At the beginning of the year, it was expected that the call would be massive; However, after the appearance of Covid-19 and the postponement of the referendum from April to October, a space of greater uncertainty opened.
But how will you know if the participation was really very massive? To get started, It is difficult for any vote to exceed the percentage of the plebiscite of Yes and No in 1988: 93.9% of the population of voting age participated there, a record that has remained unchanged since then. However, today’s election could be the highest percentage in a decade, considering that only in one election more than half of the electoral roll voted: the first presidential round of 2013 (50.9%).
Sign up for LT Conversations today: How to read the election data (Sunday 25, 18 hours)
In fact, it has been almost fifteen years since no election exceeds 60% participation of the total population, the last being the presidential ballot in January 2006 (63.1%), a time when another voting system was in place: voluntary registration, but with mandatory voting forever if someone decided to register. The lowest turnout figure? The municipal elections of 2016, where only 35.8% voted.
As for numbers, traditionally an election with less than six million votes has been considered one with low turnout; if, on the other hand, more than seven million people participate, the figure is estimated to be high. The election with the most voters in history is one 27 years ago: the 1993 presidential and parliamentary election, where 7,383,286 people voted. Considering that almost 15 million Chileans are entitled to vote, If today’s plebiscite repeats the percentage of participation of the second presidential round of 2017 – where 49% of the electorate voted -, it will probably exceed that figure; if it exceeds it, it will be easily registered as the one with the most voters.
It is a fact that influenced the election, from the first postponement to an unprecedented medical deployment in the premises. But the true dimension of the effect that Covid-19 may have on the election will be complex to assess. Although the figures have been improving, the restrictions remain: in fact, 51% of the population is this Sunday under a state of quarantine in their communes, since 112 municipalities are still in phases 1 and 2, which include limitation of travel on the of week.
However, there are some correlations that can complicate the reading of the figures. The data science firm Unholster published an article this week where it analyzes different points to consider in the face of the election. And in the case of Covid-19, a data crossing made by them to Third shows that the communes currently in phase 1 and 2 coincide in having higher rates of poverty and overcrowding, as well as lower figures for schooling.
Furthermore, these municipalities had lower participation in previous elections than their peers of communes that are currently in phases 3 and 4: While in those that are under the strictest quarantine, 45.64% of the people voted in the second round of 2017, in those that are in phase 3, 50.51% did so. A difference of almost five percentage points.
“It is noted that the communes in phase 3 are richer than the other communes, for something they are in phase 3. Whether you look at it in income or in percentage of people who have higher education,” says Cristóbal Huneeus, director of Data Science of Unholster.
Thus, the best comparison to make is on themselves: that is, see the variation of the communes themselves versus previous elections, and then see if there are large gaps between the groups. This will allow us to unravel, at least in part, the role of the pandemic.
The polls say so, without exception: the majority of young people are for the approval and in a much higher proportion than that of the older age groups. However, there is an element that complicates the analysis. The participation of those under 30 years of age in recent decades has been the lowest of all generational groups, while those over 60 consistently maintain figures above 60% of participation.
An analysis of the Servel on the second round of 2017 leaves it reflected in a figure. The age group that voted the most was the one between 65 and 69 years, with a participation of 67.16%; that is, more than two thirds. The one who did the least? Young people between 20 and 24 years old, with almost half of that figure (34.60%).
However, experts warn of a “double effect” that could be reflected today. The first, that the election in itself seems to have generated greater interest than the traditional one within the younger age groups, which could translate into an increase in participation in that bloc. And the second, that Covid-19 attacks older adults in a much more serious way, so it could be an incentive for voters of those ages not to go to vote or, at least, that there is not a jump in participation similar to that of other groups in the event of a very crowded election.
“According to the electoral roll that governs the October 25 plebiscite, 51% of the roll are new registrants and the remaining 49% are old registrants,” says the analysis made by Unholster. “Electoral participation has much more room to grow among new registrants, that is to say, the generation that turned 18 years after 1990, that saw the country grow and develop and that decided not to register ”, they add, taking as an example a commune: La Pintana, where 64% of those registered are new.
