Did Lack of “Early Voting” Affect Pennsylvania’s 2024 Vote?
Data analysis shows success of Michigan’s in-person early voting vs. PA’s procedure
March 19, 2025
No Comments
Data analysis shows success of Michigan’s in-person early voting vs. PA’s procedure
From the time the 2020 presidential election was decided, it was clear that Pennsylvania would once again be “The Battleground State” in 2024.
With the passage of Act 77 in 2019, no-excuse mail balloting finally came to the Commonwealth and none to soon, as the COVID-19 crisis severely limited those who wanted to go to their polls in person.
Even with the wearing of masks, Pennsylvanians still turned out to the polls and many opted for the state’s version of “early voting” – going to their county election office, requesting and completing an application for a mail ballot, and completing the ballot onsite.
The nonpartisan, multistate organization, “All Voting Is Local,” released a report on Wednesday, analyzing data that showed how the addition of an in-person early voting option made a major difference in early voter turnout in 2024.
“The Effects of Early In-Person Voting in Michigan vs. Pennsylvania,” displayed how Michigan’s addition of an in-person early voting option made a major difference in early voter turnout compared to the Keystone State, a demographically similar state where no such option exists.
In 2022, Michigan voters passed Proposal 2, a pro-voter initiative that altered state law and ushered in a series of voter rights, including early voting sites, mail-in ballots, and voter ID. For the 2024 presidential election, Michigan established early voting sites across the state to allow voters nine (9) days to cast their ballots in person before election day.
On the other side, Pennsylvania did not make significant changes to its voting procedures, spending court time haggling over signatures on mail ballots.
Michigan cast 5.66 million votes in the 2024 presidential election – nearly 60 percent (58.6%) which were case in that nine-day early voting period.
Pennsylvania continued to deal with long lines during its “early voting” period which saw 1.88 million of its 7.03 million votes cast or nearly 27%. With three-quarters of the vote remaining to be cast on Election Day, it should come as no surprise that state voters felt the impacts of long lines due to volume and the expected problems with machines and ballots throughout the day.
Philadelphia saw more than one-half million votes or 70 percent (71.9%) of its ballots cast on Election Day, versus 202,713 (28.1%) during “early voting.”
Compare those numbers to Detroit in Wayne County, Michigan. Motor City voters cast nearly 500,000 ballots in early voting (57.6%) to just over 367.000 on Election Day.
It doesn’t take a keen political eye to see that the convenience of early in-person voting had a material effect on the proportion of voters who cast their ballots in the two metro areas.
“Pennsylvania voters want more options when it comes to early voting so that they can securely cast their ballots while avoiding long lines,” said All Voting is Local Pennsylvania State Director Deborah Hinchey. “Some Pennsylvania voters, particularly those from marginalized communities, had fewer opportunities to cast their ballots before Election Day with no option for in-person early voting. And some voters could not cast ballots at all due to there being no accessible voting methods available that worked for them. As we just saw in nearby Michigan, there are simple solutions to ensuring that we put the infrastructure in place so that more people can vote early. The state’s inability to do that is failing voters in the Commonwealth, especially those who have been historically disenfranchised.”
According to the analysis, it was not just metro areas that told the story. All Voting Is Local also compared two of the states’ “Big 10” municipalities – Ann Arbor and State College.
More than two-thirds (67.4%) of Ann Arbor voters cast their ballots early, compared to just more than 1 in 4 (27.3%) in Penn State’s hometown. One could naturally assume that lines on November 5 were shorter for Wolverines and that more headaches faced Nittany Lions on decision day.
In 2024, Michigan had the third-highest voter turnout in the country at 74.7 percent, while Pennsylvania was five places behind at 71.2%.
Voting-Eligible Population Turnout Rate
source: University of Florida Election Lab
Will Pennsylvania make a change to its “early voting” procedure? It will if one Democratic representative has her way.
Rep. Jennifer O’Mara (D-Delaware) has introduced House Bill 669 that calls for early voting to start 30 days before an election and end on the day before Election Day. Early voting would take place at the county board of elections and at designated polling places chosen by the county board.
“Over the past several years our state learned a few things about its election laws, including that significant delays and confusion can occur at polling locations when counties are unprepared for big turnouts,” wrote O’Mara in her co-sponsorship memo. “Large voter turnout is a wonderful thing to have, but it exposed that, compared to many other states, Pennsylvania lags behind in terms of modern election reform.”
H.B. 669 calls for at least one permanent polling place within each of the three largest municipalities in a county with a population of more than 250,000, with the stipulation to add an additional permanent site if one of those municipalities is more than 80,000 in population.
Hours for early voting as outlined in the bill would be between 8:30-4:30 or 9-5 on weekdays, 9-noon on Saturdays and holidays, and 10-4 on Sundays. However, eight days prior to Election Day, a permanent polling place must remain open from 8:30-7 or 9-7.
The bill currently resides with the State Government Committee, chaired by Rep. Carol Hill-Evans (D-York) with Rep. Brad Roae (R-Crawford/Erie) as the ranking Republican member.
“Early voting empowers people to carry out their civic duty in a way that works best for them,” O’Mara told PoliticsPA. “Whether you’re a health care worker or a first responder scheduled to work on Election Day or you’ll just be out of town away from your polling place – nothing should get in the way between you and the ballot box. Your right to vote should never depend on your schedule.”
From the time the 2020 presidential election was decided, it was clear that Pennsylvania would once again be “The Battleground State” in 2024.
With the passage of Act 77 in 2019, no-excuse mail balloting finally came to the Commonwealth and none to soon, as the COVID-19 crisis severely limited those who wanted to go to their polls in person.
Even with the wearing of masks, Pennsylvanians still turned out to the polls and many opted for the state’s version of “early voting” – going to their county election office, requesting and completing an application for a mail ballot, and completing the ballot onsite.
The nonpartisan, multistate organization, “All Voting Is Local,” released a report on Wednesday, analyzing data that showed how the addition of an in-person early voting option made a major difference in early voter turnout in 2024.
“The Effects of Early In-Person Voting in Michigan vs. Pennsylvania,” displayed how Michigan’s addition of an in-person early voting option made a major difference in early voter turnout compared to the Keystone State, a demographically similar state where no such option exists.
In 2022, Michigan voters passed Proposal 2, a pro-voter initiative that altered state law and ushered in a series of voter rights, including early voting sites, mail-in ballots, and voter ID. For the 2024 presidential election, Michigan established early voting sites across the state to allow voters nine (9) days to cast their ballots in person before election day.
On the other side, Pennsylvania did not make significant changes to its voting procedures, spending court time haggling over signatures on mail ballots.
Michigan cast 5.66 million votes in the 2024 presidential election – nearly 60 percent (58.6%) which were case in that nine-day early voting period.
Pennsylvania continued to deal with long lines during its “early voting” period which saw 1.88 million of its 7.03 million votes cast or nearly 27%. With three-quarters of the vote remaining to be cast on Election Day, it should come as no surprise that state voters felt the impacts of long lines due to volume and the expected problems with machines and ballots throughout the day.
Philadelphia saw more than one-half million votes or 70 percent (71.9%) of its ballots cast on Election Day, versus 202,713 (28.1%) during “early voting.”
Compare those numbers to Detroit in Wayne County, Michigan. Motor City voters cast nearly 500,000 ballots in early voting (57.6%) to just over 367.000 on Election Day.
It doesn’t take a keen political eye to see that the convenience of early in-person voting had a material effect on the proportion of voters who cast their ballots in the two metro areas.
“Pennsylvania voters want more options when it comes to early voting so that they can securely cast their ballots while avoiding long lines,” said All Voting is Local Pennsylvania State Director Deborah Hinchey. “Some Pennsylvania voters, particularly those from marginalized communities, had fewer opportunities to cast their ballots before Election Day with no option for in-person early voting. And some voters could not cast ballots at all due to there being no accessible voting methods available that worked for them. As we just saw in nearby Michigan, there are simple solutions to ensuring that we put the infrastructure in place so that more people can vote early. The state’s inability to do that is failing voters in the Commonwealth, especially those who have been historically disenfranchised.”
According to the analysis, it was not just metro areas that told the story. All Voting Is Local also compared two of the states’ “Big 10” municipalities – Ann Arbor and State College.
More than two-thirds (67.4%) of Ann Arbor voters cast their ballots early, compared to just more than 1 in 4 (27.3%) in Penn State’s hometown. One could naturally assume that lines on November 5 were shorter for Wolverines and that more headaches faced Nittany Lions on decision day.
In 2024, Michigan had the third-highest voter turnout in the country at 74.7 percent, while Pennsylvania was five places behind at 71.2%.
Voting-Eligible Population Turnout Rate
source: University of Florida Election Lab
Will Pennsylvania make a change to its “early voting” procedure? It will if one Democratic representative has her way.
Rep. Jennifer O’Mara (D-Delaware) has introduced House Bill 669 that calls for early voting to start 30 days before an election and end on the day before Election Day. Early voting would take place at the county board of elections and at designated polling places chosen by the county board.
“Over the past several years our state learned a few things about its election laws, including that significant delays and confusion can occur at polling locations when counties are unprepared for big turnouts,” wrote O’Mara in her co-sponsorship memo. “Large voter turnout is a wonderful thing to have, but it exposed that, compared to many other states, Pennsylvania lags behind in terms of modern election reform.”
H.B. 669 calls for at least one permanent polling place within each of the three largest municipalities in a county with a population of more than 250,000, with the stipulation to add an additional permanent site if one of those municipalities is more than 80,000 in population.
Hours for early voting as outlined in the bill would be between 8:30-4:30 or 9-5 on weekdays, 9-noon on Saturdays and holidays, and 10-4 on Sundays. However, eight days prior to Election Day, a permanent polling place must remain open from 8:30-7 or 9-7.
The bill currently resides with the State Government Committee, chaired by Rep. Carol Hill-Evans (D-York) with Rep. Brad Roae (R-Crawford/Erie) as the ranking Republican member.
“Early voting empowers people to carry out their civic duty in a way that works best for them,” O’Mara told PoliticsPA. “Whether you’re a health care worker or a first responder scheduled to work on Election Day or you’ll just be out of town away from your polling place – nothing should get in the way between you and the ballot box. Your right to vote should never depend on your schedule.”
From the time the 2020 presidential election was decided, it was clear that Pennsylvania would once again be “The Battleground State” in 2024.
With the passage of Act 77 in 2019, no-excuse mail balloting finally came to the Commonwealth and none to soon, as the COVID-19 crisis severely limited those who wanted to go to their polls in person.
Even with the wearing of masks, Pennsylvanians still turned out to the polls and many opted for the state’s version of “early voting” – going to their county election office, requesting and completing an application for a mail ballot, and completing the ballot onsite.
The nonpartisan, multistate organization, “All Voting Is Local,” released a report on Wednesday, analyzing data that showed how the addition of an in-person early voting option made a major difference in early voter turnout in 2024.
“The Effects of Early In-Person Voting in Michigan vs. Pennsylvania,” displayed how Michigan’s addition of an in-person early voting option made a major difference in early voter turnout compared to the Keystone State, a demographically similar state where no such option exists.
In 2022, Michigan voters passed Proposal 2, a pro-voter initiative that altered state law and ushered in a series of voter rights, including early voting sites, mail-in ballots, and voter ID. For the 2024 presidential election, Michigan established early voting sites across the state to allow voters nine (9) days to cast their ballots in person before election day.
On the other side, Pennsylvania did not make significant changes to its voting procedures, spending court time haggling over signatures on mail ballots.
Michigan cast 5.66 million votes in the 2024 presidential election – nearly 60 percent (58.6%) which were case in that nine-day early voting period.
Pennsylvania continued to deal with long lines during its “early voting” period which saw 1.88 million of its 7.03 million votes cast or nearly 27%. With three-quarters of the vote remaining to be cast on Election Day, it should come as no surprise that state voters felt the impacts of long lines due to volume and the expected problems with machines and ballots throughout the day.
Philadelphia saw more than one-half million votes or 70 percent (71.9%) of its ballots cast on Election Day, versus 202,713 (28.1%) during “early voting.”
Compare those numbers to Detroit in Wayne County, Michigan. Motor City voters cast nearly 500,000 ballots in early voting (57.6%) to just over 367.000 on Election Day.
It doesn’t take a keen political eye to see that the convenience of early in-person voting had a material effect on the proportion of voters who cast their ballots in the two metro areas.
“Pennsylvania voters want more options when it comes to early voting so that they can securely cast their ballots while avoiding long lines,” said All Voting is Local Pennsylvania State Director Deborah Hinchey. “Some Pennsylvania voters, particularly those from marginalized communities, had fewer opportunities to cast their ballots before Election Day with no option for in-person early voting. And some voters could not cast ballots at all due to there being no accessible voting methods available that worked for them. As we just saw in nearby Michigan, there are simple solutions to ensuring that we put the infrastructure in place so that more people can vote early. The state’s inability to do that is failing voters in the Commonwealth, especially those who have been historically disenfranchised.”
According to the analysis, it was not just metro areas that told the story. All Voting Is Local also compared two of the states’ “Big 10” municipalities – Ann Arbor and State College.
More than two-thirds (67.4%) of Ann Arbor voters cast their ballots early, compared to just more than 1 in 4 (27.3%) in Penn State’s hometown. One could naturally assume that lines on November 5 were shorter for Wolverines and that more headaches faced Nittany Lions on decision day.
In 2024, Michigan had the third-highest voter turnout in the country at 74.7 percent, while Pennsylvania was five places behind at 71.2%.
Voting-Eligible Population Turnout Rate
source: University of Florida Election Lab
Will Pennsylvania make a change to its “early voting” procedure? It will if one Democratic representative has her way.
Rep. Jennifer O’Mara (D-Delaware) has introduced House Bill 669 that calls for early voting to start 30 days before an election and end on the day before Election Day. Early voting would take place at the county board of elections and at designated polling places chosen by the county board.
“Over the past several years our state learned a few things about its election laws, including that significant delays and confusion can occur at polling locations when counties are unprepared for big turnouts,” wrote O’Mara in her co-sponsorship memo. “Large voter turnout is a wonderful thing to have, but it exposed that, compared to many other states, Pennsylvania lags behind in terms of modern election reform.”
H.B. 669 calls for at least one permanent polling place within each of the three largest municipalities in a county with a population of more than 250,000, with the stipulation to add an additional permanent site if one of those municipalities is more than 80,000 in population.
Hours for early voting as outlined in the bill would be between 8:30-4:30 or 9-5 on weekdays, 9-noon on Saturdays and holidays, and 10-4 on Sundays. However, eight days prior to Election Day, a permanent polling place must remain open from 8:30-7 or 9-7.
The bill currently resides with the State Government Committee, chaired by Rep. Carol Hill-Evans (D-York) with Rep. Brad Roae (R-Crawford/Erie) as the ranking Republican member.
“Early voting empowers people to carry out their civic duty in a way that works best for them,” O’Mara told PoliticsPA. “Whether you’re a health care worker or a first responder scheduled to work on Election Day or you’ll just be out of town away from your polling place – nothing should get in the way between you and the ballot box. Your right to vote should never depend on your schedule.”
From the time the 2020 presidential election was decided, it was clear that Pennsylvania would once again be “The Battleground State” in 2024.
With the passage of Act 77 in 2019, no-excuse mail balloting finally came to the Commonwealth and none to soon, as the COVID-19 crisis severely limited those who wanted to go to their polls in person.
Even with the wearing of masks, Pennsylvanians still turned out to the polls and many opted for the state’s version of “early voting” – going to their county election office, requesting and completing an application for a mail ballot, and completing the ballot onsite.
The nonpartisan, multistate organization, “All Voting Is Local,” released a report on Wednesday, analyzing data that showed how the addition of an in-person early voting option made a major difference in early voter turnout in 2024.
“The Effects of Early In-Person Voting in Michigan vs. Pennsylvania,” displayed how Michigan’s addition of an in-person early voting option made a major difference in early voter turnout compared to the Keystone State, a demographically similar state where no such option exists.
In 2022, Michigan voters passed Proposal 2, a pro-voter initiative that altered state law and ushered in a series of voter rights, including early voting sites, mail-in ballots, and voter ID. For the 2024 presidential election, Michigan established early voting sites across the state to allow voters nine (9) days to cast their ballots in person before election day.
On the other side, Pennsylvania did not make significant changes to its voting procedures, spending court time haggling over signatures on mail ballots.
Michigan cast 5.66 million votes in the 2024 presidential election – nearly 60 percent (58.6%) which were case in that nine-day early voting period.
Pennsylvania continued to deal with long lines during its “early voting” period which saw 1.88 million of its 7.03 million votes cast or nearly 27%. With three-quarters of the vote remaining to be cast on Election Day, it should come as no surprise that state voters felt the impacts of long lines due to volume and the expected problems with machines and ballots throughout the day.
Philadelphia saw more than one-half million votes or 70 percent (71.9%) of its ballots cast on Election Day, versus 202,713 (28.1%) during “early voting.”
Compare those numbers to Detroit in Wayne County, Michigan. Motor City voters cast nearly 500,000 ballots in early voting (57.6%) to just over 367.000 on Election Day.
It doesn’t take a keen political eye to see that the convenience of early in-person voting had a material effect on the proportion of voters who cast their ballots in the two metro areas.
“Pennsylvania voters want more options when it comes to early voting so that they can securely cast their ballots while avoiding long lines,” said All Voting is Local Pennsylvania State Director Deborah Hinchey. “Some Pennsylvania voters, particularly those from marginalized communities, had fewer opportunities to cast their ballots before Election Day with no option for in-person early voting. And some voters could not cast ballots at all due to there being no accessible voting methods available that worked for them. As we just saw in nearby Michigan, there are simple solutions to ensuring that we put the infrastructure in place so that more people can vote early. The state’s inability to do that is failing voters in the Commonwealth, especially those who have been historically disenfranchised.”
According to the analysis, it was not just metro areas that told the story. All Voting Is Local also compared two of the states’ “Big 10” municipalities – Ann Arbor and State College.
More than two-thirds (67.4%) of Ann Arbor voters cast their ballots early, compared to just more than 1 in 4 (27.3%) in Penn State’s hometown. One could naturally assume that lines on November 5 were shorter for Wolverines and that more headaches faced Nittany Lions on decision day.
In 2024, Michigan had the third-highest voter turnout in the country at 74.7 percent, while Pennsylvania was five places behind at 71.2%.
Voting-Eligible Population Turnout Rate
source: University of Florida Election Lab
Will Pennsylvania make a change to its “early voting” procedure? It will if one Democratic representative has her way.
Rep. Jennifer O’Mara (D-Delaware) has introduced House Bill 669 that calls for early voting to start 30 days before an election and end on the day before Election Day. Early voting would take place at the county board of elections and at designated polling places chosen by the county board.
“Over the past several years our state learned a few things about its election laws, including that significant delays and confusion can occur at polling locations when counties are unprepared for big turnouts,” wrote O’Mara in her co-sponsorship memo. “Large voter turnout is a wonderful thing to have, but it exposed that, compared to many other states, Pennsylvania lags behind in terms of modern election reform.”
H.B. 669 calls for at least one permanent polling place within each of the three largest municipalities in a county with a population of more than 250,000, with the stipulation to add an additional permanent site if one of those municipalities is more than 80,000 in population.
Hours for early voting as outlined in the bill would be between 8:30-4:30 or 9-5 on weekdays, 9-noon on Saturdays and holidays, and 10-4 on Sundays. However, eight days prior to Election Day, a permanent polling place must remain open from 8:30-7 or 9-7.
The bill currently resides with the State Government Committee, chaired by Rep. Carol Hill-Evans (D-York) with Rep. Brad Roae (R-Crawford/Erie) as the ranking Republican member.
“Early voting empowers people to carry out their civic duty in a way that works best for them,” O’Mara told PoliticsPA. “Whether you’re a health care worker or a first responder scheduled to work on Election Day or you’ll just be out of town away from your polling place – nothing should get in the way between you and the ballot box. Your right to vote should never depend on your schedule.”
What Should Happen With the U.S. Department of Education?
Total Voters: 62
Loading ...