P20-568

Issued May 2013

Population Characteristics

The Diversifying Electorate—Voting Rates by 

Race and Hispanic Origin in 2012 

(and Other Recent Elections)

Thom File

U.S. Department of Commerce

Economics and Statistics Administration

U.S. CENSUS BUREAU

census.gov

This report provides analysis of the 

increasingly diverse American electorate, specifically for presidential 

elections since 1996, with particular focus given to the patterns of 

voter turnout by race and Hispanic 

origin. Overall voting rates have 

fluctuated in recent presidential 

races, from a low of 58.4 percent of 

the citizen population in 1996 to a 

high of about 64.0 percent in both 

2004 and 2008 (Table 1).1 In 2012, 

the overall voting rate was 61.8 

percent. By examining these overall changes by race and Hispanic 

origin, this report provides a better 

understanding of the social and 

1 The estimates for 2004 and 2008 are not 

statistically different.

demographic factors that have influenced recent American elections.2

2 Federal surveys now give respondents 

the option of reporting more than one race. 

Therefore, two basic ways of defining a race 

group are possible. A group such as Asian 

may be defined as those who reported Asian 

and no other race (the race-alone or singlerace concept) or as those who reported Asian 

regardless of whether they also reported 

another race (the race-alone-or-in-combination 

concept). The body of this report (text, figures, and tables) shows data for people who 

reported they were the single race White and 

not Hispanic, people who reported the single 

race Black, and people who reported the single 

race Asian. Use of the single-race populations 

does not imply that it is the preferred method 

of presenting or analyzing data. 

Because Hispanics may be any race, data in 

this report for Hispanics overlap slightly with 

data for the Black population and the Asian 

population. 

The data in this report come from 

the November 2012 Current 

Population Survey (CPS) Voting and 

Registration Supplement, which surveys the civilian noninstitutionalized 

population in the United States. The 

estimates presented in this report 

may differ from those based on 

administrative data or exit polls. For 

more information, see the sections 

on Source and Accuracy of the 

Data and Measuring Voting and 

Registration in the Current 

Population Survey. 

Table 1. 

Reported Rates of Voting: 1996 to 2012

(Numbers in thousands)

Presidential election year

Total

Citizens

Total

Voted

Number Percent 90 percent confidence interval

2012. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 235,248 215,081 132,948 61.8 61.5 62.1

2008. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225,499 206,072 131,144 63.6 63.3 63.9

2004. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 215,694 197,005 125,736 63.8 63.5 64.1

2000. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202,609 186,366 110,826 59.5 59.2 59.8

1996. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193,651 179,935 105,017 58.4 58.1 58.7

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, November Select Years.

Current Population Survey
2 U.S. Census Bureau

OVERALL VOTER TURNOUT 

(1996–2012)

Since 1996, the number of citizens 

eligible to vote has increased in 

every presidential election, as has 

the number of citizens who have 

reported voting. Table 2 displays 

these relative increases by race and 

Hispanic origin over the five most 

recent election cycles.3 Overall, 133 

million people reported voting in 

2012, a turnout increase of about 

2 million people since the election of 2008. Between 1996 and 

2008, turnout increases varied but 

were always larger than in 2012, 

reaching a high of about 15 million 

additional voters in 2004.4

In comparison to the election of 

2008, about 1.7 million additional 

Black voters reported going to the 

polls in 2012, as did about 1.4 

million additional Hispanics and 

about 550,000 additional Asians.5

The number of non-Hispanic White 

voters decreased by about 2 million 

between 2008 and 2012. Since 

1996, this is the only example of 

a race group showing a decrease 

in net voting from one presidential 

election to the next, and it indicates that the 2012 voting population expansion came primarily from 

minority voters.6, 7

3 Because of changes in the Current 

Population Survey race categories beginning 

in 2003, data in this report from 2004–2012 

are not directly comparable with data from 

earlier years. 4 Data for the American Indian and Alaska 

Native and the Native Hawaiian and Other 

Pacific Islander populations are not shown in 

this report because of their small sample size 

in the November 2012 Current Population 

Survey. 5 The 2012 increases for Black voters and 

Hispanic voters were not statistically different. 6 Race is a self-reported concept in the 

CPS. In this report, we take race as it is 

reported at the time of survey, even though 

respondents can change the way they identify 

or report their race over time. 7 In this report, the term minority means 

any group other than non-Hispanic White.

ABOUT THIS REPORT

Voting and registration rates are historically higher in years with 

presidential elections than in congressional election years. For 

this report, we compare 2012 election data only with data from 

other recent presidential election years. While the Census Bureau 

has collected voting and registration data since 1964, the CPS has 

gathered consistent citizenship data in presidential elections only 

since 1996. Because this analysis focuses solely on the voting eligible citizen population, the discussion that follows will be limited 

to 1996, 2000, 2004, 2008, and 2012.

Table 2. 

Voter Turnout, by Race and Hispanic Origin: 1996 to 2012

(Numbers in thousands)

Year and race and Hispanic origin

Total votes cast

Net change from 

previous presidential 

election

2012

 Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132,948 1,804

White, non-Hispanics. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98,041 –2,001

Blacks. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,813 1,680

Asians. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,904 547

Hispanics. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,188 1,443

2008

 Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131,144 5,408

White, non-Hispanics. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100,042 475

Blacks. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16,133 2,117

Asians. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,357 589

Hispanics. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,745 2,158

2004

 Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125,736 14,910

White, non-Hispanics. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99,567 10,098

Blacks. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,016 1,099

Asians. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,768 723

Hispanics. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,587 1,653

2000

 Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110,826 5,809

White, non-Hispanics. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89,469 2,865

Blacks. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,917 1,531

Asians. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,045 304

Hispanics. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,934 1,006

Notes: Federal surveys now give respondents the option of reporting more than one race. Therefore, 

two basic ways of defining a race group are possible. A group such as Asian may be defined as those 

who reported Asian and no other race (the race-alone or single-race concept) or as those who reported 

Asian regardless of whether they also reported another race (the race-alone-or-in-combination concept). 

The body of this report (text, figures, and tables) shows data for people who reported they were the single 

race White and not Hispanic, people who reported the single race Black, and people who reported the 

single race Asian. Use of the single-race populations does not imply that it is the preferred method of 

presenting or analyzing data. 

 Data for the American Indian and Alaska Native and the Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander 

populations are not shown in this report because of their small sample size in the November 2012 Current 

Population Survey.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, November Select Years.
U.S. Census Bureau 3

TRENDS IN VOTING RATES 

(1996–2012)

Voting rates by race and Hispanic 

origin have also varied across 

recent election cycles (Figure 1). In 

2012, Blacks voted at a higher rate 

(66.2 percent) than non-Hispanic 

Whites (64.1 percent) for the first 

time since the Census Bureau 

started publishing voting rates by 

the eligible citizenship population 

in 1996.8 Both these groups had 

voting rates higher than Hispanics 

and Asians (about 48 percent each) 

in 2012.9

8 The estimates in this report (which 

may be shown in text, figures, and tables) 

are based on responses from a sample of 

the population and may differ from actual 

values because of sampling variability or 

other factors. As a result, apparent differences between the estimates for two or more 

groups may not be statistically significant. 

All comparative statements have undergone 

statistical testing and are significant at the 

90 percent confidence level unless otherwise 

noted. 9 The estimates for Hispanics and Asians 

were not statistically different. 

Voting rates for Blacks were higher 

in 2012 than in any recent 

Presidential election, the result of 

a steady increase in Black voting 

rates since 1996. Voting rates also 

increased among Hispanics and 

Asians across some of the elections 

addressed in this analysis, although 

these gains were not nearly as consistent as for Blacks. Non-Hispanic 

White voting rates dropped in both 

Figure 1.

Voting Rates in Presidential Elections, by Race and 

Hispanic Origin: 1996–2012

Differences Between Shares of the Voting Population and 

Eligible Electorate, by Race and Hispanic-Origin: 1996–2012 

Note: The top portion of this graphic shows voting rates over time by race groups and Hispanics. The bottom portion shows these

subpopulation’s shares of the eligible electorate compared to their shares of the actual voting population. For example, in 2012 the nonHispanic White share of the voting population was 2.7 percentage points higher than the non-Hispanic White share of the eligible electorate. 

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, November Select Years.

Non-Hispanic White

Black

Asian

Hispanic

53.0

44.0

45.0

60.7

61.8

56.8

43.4

45.1

44.2

47.2

60.0

67.2 66.1

64.7

64.1

66.2

49.9

48.0

-1.1

-0.5

-1.5

3.1

4.0

2.9

-2.0

2.7

0.2

-0.9

0.9

-0.9

-2.1

-2.4

-1.0 -0.7 -0.7

-1.7

-0.6

3.2

47.3 47.6

1996 2000 2004 2008 2012

1996 2000 2004 2008 2012

Non-Hispanic White

Black

Asian

Hispanic
4 U.S. Census Bureau

2008 and 2012, after reaching a 

high of 67.2 percent in 2004.10

Overall, Black turnout rates 

increased by about 13 percentage 

points between 1996 and 2012. 

Notably, among all race groups 

and Hispanics, only Blacks showed 

a significant increase between 

2008 and the most recent election 

in 2012. 

Since 1996, Black voting rates 

have gone from trailing those of 

non-Hispanic Whites by about 8 

percentage points to surpassing 

them in 2012 (Figure 2). There are 

differences in voting rates between 

non-Hispanic Whites and both Hispanics and Asians across elections, 

10 Additional historical voting and registration data, as well as detailed tables addressing each of the topics discussed in this 

report, are available at <www.census.gov

/population/www/socdemo/voting.html>.

with the largest disparities occurring in 2004, when non-Hispanic 

Whites voted at higher rates than 

Hispanics by about 20 points and 

Asians by about 23 points. 

ABOUT THIS REPORT

The following section of this report discusses two additional 

populations: the eligible electorate and the voting population. 

The eligible electorate refers specifically to citizens 18 years of 

age and older—or the citizen voting age population. 

The voting population refers to the number of voting age citizens who actually reported casting ballots.

This section also introduces measurements of voting relative to 

eligibility. It is important to note that these concepts refer only 

to two voting-related measures for a specific group and do not 

compare one group with either another group or with national/

overall measures. 

Figure 2.

Voting Rate Gap Between non-Hispanic Whites and Other Race and 

Hispanic-Origin Groups: 1996–2012

Note: The numbers in this graphic show the differences between voting rates for race groups and Hispanics in comparison to 

non-Hispanic Whites. For example, in 2012, Black voting rates were 2.1 points higher than non-Hispanic Whites, while Hispanic voting 

rates were 16.1 points lower than non-Hispanic Whites. 

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, November Select Years

Hispanic

-7.7

-16.7

-15.7

2.1

-16.1

-16.8

-24

-21

-18

-15

-12

-9

-6

-3

0

3

1996 2000 2004 2008 2012

Percentage points

Black

Asian
U.S. Census Bureau 5

THE ELIGIBLE ELECTORATE 

AND THE VOTING 

POPULATION 

One useful strategy for assessing 

electoral behavior is to compare 

a subpopulation’s share of the eligible electorate to their share of the 

population that actually voted. If a 

group accounts for 50 percent of 

the eligible electorate (i.e., citizens 

18 years of age and older) and 50 

percent of the voting population 

(i.e., citizens who actually reported 

casting ballots), then we can say 

this group is voting evenly with 

their eligibility. However, if a 

subgroup reports voting in either 

higher or lower percentages than 

their share of the eligible electorate indicates, we can say that these 

groups are not voting evenly relative to their eligibility.

Table 3 shows race groups and 

Hispanics by both their percentage 

share of the eligible electorate 

and their percentage share of the 

voting population. “Percentage of 

the eligible electorate” means the 

portion of the total citizen population who could have voted in a 

given election, and “Percentage of 

the voting population” refers to the 

percentage of all voters who were 

non-Hispanic White, Black, Asian, or 

Hispanic.11

Between 1996 and 2012, the Black 

population, the Asian population, 

and the Hispanic population all 

saw their shares of the eligible 

electorate and the voting population increase. Non-Hispanic Whites 

were the only race group whose 

shares of the eligible electorate 

and the voting population did not 

increase. Between 1996 and 2012, 

the non-Hispanic White share of the 

eligible electorate dropped from 

79.2 percent to 71.1 percent, and 

their share of the voting population 

decreased from 82.5 percent to 

73.7 percent. 

Overall, in the last five presidential 

elections, the non-Hispanic White 

share of total votes cast dropped 

by about 9 percentage points. In 

comparison, between 1996 and 

2012, the Hispanic share of total 

votes cast increased by about 4 

percentage points, while the Black 

share increased by about 3 percentage points. 

During the same period, nonHispanic White voting rates have 

been higher than the group’s proportion of the eligible electorate in 

every election, from a high differential of 4.0 percentage points in 

2004 to 2.7 percentage points in 

2012.12 Figure 1 shows the percentage of race groups and Hispanics 

11 People in the military, U.S. citizens living 

abroad, and people in institutionalized housing, such as correctional facilities and nursing 

homes, were not included in the survey. 12 The 2012 differential for non-Hispanic 

Whites was not statistically different from 

either 2008 or 2000. 

Table 3. 

Composition of the Voting Population and Eligible 

Electorate, by Race and Hispanic Origin: 1996 to 2012

Year and race and Hispanic origin Percentage of eligible 

electorate1

Percentage of voting 

population2

2012

White, non-Hispanics. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71.1 73.7

Blacks. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12.5 13.4

Hispanics. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.8 8.4

Asians. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.8 2.9

2008

White, non-Hispanics. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73.4 76.3

Blacks. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12.1 12.3

Hispanics. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.5 7.4

Asians. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.4 2.6

2004

White, non-Hispanics. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75.2 79.2

Blacks. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.9 11.1

Hispanics. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.2 6.0

Asians. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.2 2.2

2000

White, non-Hispanics. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77.7 80.7

Blacks. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12.2 11.7

Hispanics. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.1 5.4

Asians. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.5 1.8

1996

White, non-Hispanics. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79.2 82.5

Blacks. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.9 10.8

Hispanics. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.1 4.7

Asians. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1 1.7

Notes: Federal surveys now give respondents the option of reporting more than one race. Therefore, 

two basic ways of defining a race group are possible. A group such as Asian may be defined as those 

who reported Asian and no other race (the race-alone or single-race concept) or as those who reported 

Asian regardless of whether they also reported another race (the race-alone-or-in-combination concept). 

The body of this report (text, figures, and tables) shows data for people who reported they were the single 

race White and not Hispanic, people who reported the single race Black, and people who reported the 

single race Asian. Use of the single-race populations does not imply that it is the preferred method of 

presenting or analyzing data. 

 Data for the American Indian and Alaska Native and the Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander 

populations are not shown in this report because of their small sample size in the November 2012 Current 

Population Survey. 1 The eligible electorate refers specifically to citizens 18 years of age and older, or the citizen votingage population. 2

 The voting population refers to the number of voting-age citizens who actually reported casting ballots.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, November Select Years.
6 U.S. Census Bureau

that voted and that were eligible to 

vote from 1996 to 2012. 

Despite having an increased share 

of the voting population, in every 

presidential election since 1996, 

Hispanics have still accounted for a 

smaller percentage of actual votes 

cast than their share of the eligible 

electorate would indicate. Blacks, 

meanwhile, had voting deficits in 

1996, 2000, and 2004. In 2008, 

however, they voted in numbers 

not statistically different from their 

eligibility for the first time, and in 

2012, Blacks accounted for a larger 

percentage of votes cast (13.4 percent) than their share of the eligible 

electorate (12.5 percent). 

RACE, HISPANIC ORIGIN, 

AND THE GENDER VOTING 

GAP

In addition to the differences by 

race and Hispanic origin discussed 

above, voting rates have also 

historically varied according to 

gender. In every presidential election since 1996, women have voted 

at higher rates than men. Most 

recently in 2012, the spread was 

about four percentage points. Data 

by race and Hispanic origin provide 

a more detailed picture of this gender voting gap (Figure 3). 

Since 1996, the gender voting gap 

has been consistently present for 

Black voters, with Black women 

voting at higher rates than Black 

men by a range of 7 to 8 percentage points through 2008. In 2012, 

Black women voted at higher rates 

than Black men by about 9 percentage points, approximately 6 percentage points greater than each of 

the other race groups.13

13 The Black voting rate differences by 

gender discussed in this paragraph are not 

statistically different. 

For non-Hispanic Whites, the gap 

has been smaller than for Blacks 

but consistently present across 

elections. For Hispanics, the gender 

voting gap has been present in 

every election except for 2000. In 

no election since 1996 have gender 

voting rates statistically differed for 

Asians. 

AGE AND ELECTION CYCLES 

Voting rates have also traditionally varied according to age. In 

every presidential election since 

1996, voting rates have tended to 

increase with age. In 2012, voting 

rates ranged from a low of 41.2 

percent for 18- to 24-year-olds, to 

a high of 71.9 percent for those 65 

years and older.

After accounting for race and 

Hispanic origin, these observed age 

disparities become more complex. 

Figure 4 shows how voting turnout 

has changed from one election to 

Figure 3.

Gender Voting Gap Over Time, By Race and Hispanic Origin

(Female voting rates in comparison to male voting rates)

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, November Select Years.

5.3

1.9

-0.5

7.0

Female Voting Rates In Comparison to Males

3.8

8.7

3.0

2.5

Percentage points

-2

0

2

4

6

8

10

1996 2000 2004 2008 2012

Hispanic

Black

Non-Hispanic White

Asian
U.S. Census Bureau 7

the next by age for non-Hispanic 

Whites, Blacks, and Hispanics.14 For 

example, voting rates for nonHispanic Whites between the 

ages of 25 to 44 increased about 

2 points in 2000, increased about 

an additional 6 points in 2004, 

decreased about 1 point in 2008, 

and then decreased about an additional 3 points in 2012.

In 2000, overall voter turnout rates 

increased in comparison to 1996. 

14 Due to sample size constraints, the 

following sections do not include analysis of 

Asian voting rates. 

This increased engagement was 

primarily seen in non-Hispanic 

Whites and Blacks between the 

ages of 25 and 44. 

In 2004, overall turnout rates 

increased in comparison to 2000. 

This increased engagement was 

seen in every age-based breakdown 

for non-Hispanic Whites and also 

for Blacks between the ages of 18 

to 24 and 25 to 44. Young 

Hispanics between 18 to 24 years 

also showed a statistically significant voting rate increase. 

Overall voting rates remained high 

in 2008, the combined effect of 

increased minority turnout and 

decreased non-Hispanic White 

turnout.15 Blacks between the ages 

of 18 to 24, 25 to 44, and 45 to 

64 showed voting rate increases 

in 2008, as did young Hispanics 

between 18 to 24 years of age. 

Non-Hispanic Whites, meanwhile, 

showed statistically significant 

voting rate decreases for those 

15 Overall voting rates in 2004 and 2008 

were not statistically different. 

18 to 24 years

25 to 44 years

45 to 64 years

65 years and older

Figure 4.

Voting Rate Changes By Age and Race and Hispanic Origin: 

1996–2012

(In percentage points)

* Not a statistically significant change.

Note: Between 2000 and 2004 there was no observable statistical difference in voting rates among Blacks between the ages of 45 and 64 

(the difference rounds to zero).

This figure presents voting rate changes by election for various race groups and Hispanic origin. For example, voting rates for non-Hispanic 

Whites between the ages of 25 and 44 increased about 3 points in 2000, increased about an additional 6 points in 2004, decreased about 

1 point in 2008, and then decreased about an additional 3 points in 2012.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, November Select Years.

Non-Hispanic White

Hispanic

Black

1996 to 2000 2000 to 2004

2004 to 2008 2008 to 2012

18 to 24 years

25 to 44 years

45 to 64 years

65 years and older

10.8

2.8

0.0*

0.2*

7.4

2.0*

0.4*

-3.3*

11.7

5.6

3.5

2.2

2.5*

5.9

1.1*

1.0*

1.6*

2.1*

-2.2*

-3.1*

0.4*

1.7

-0.1*

0.8*

8.3

4.7

3.4

2.1*

5.8

2.5*

1.9*

-1.0*

-0.4*

-1.4

-2.0

-0.5*

-6.7

1.0*

3.6

6.7

-4.6

-1.1*

-2.5*

3.9*

-7.4

-3.3

-1.7

0.8*
8 U.S. Census Bureau

between the ages of 25 to 44 and 

45 to 64. 

In 2012, overall turnout rates 

decreased in comparison with both 

2004 and 2008, a drop in voting 

characterized by large decreases 

in youth voting rates for all race 

groups and Hispanics. The only 

subgroups showing voting rate 

increases in 2012 were Blacks 

between the ages of 45 to 64 and 

65 years of age and over. NonHispanic Whites between 18 to 24, 

25 to 44, and 45 to 64 showed 

statistically significant voting rate 

decreases, as did young Blacks and 

young Hispanics between 18 to 24 

years of age. 

REGIONAL VOTING 

PATTERNS BY RACE AND 

HISPANIC ORIGIN 

Although the CPS is a state representative survey, the sample sizes 

for voting statistics at the state 

level, when combined with estimates of race and Hispanic origin, 

result in margins of error for voting 

rates in many states that are so 

large that the estimates become 

unreliable. 16 In this section, we 

discuss voting rates for census 

divisions, where standard errors 

are smaller and voting rates are 

therefore more dependable. 

Although Blacks voted at higher 

rates than non-Hispanic Whites 

nationally in 2012, this result 

was not geographically uniform. 

Figures 5–7 allow comparisons of 

the voting rates of race groups and 

Hispanics across nine census geographic divisions. 

In the eastern part of the country, 

Blacks tended to vote at higher 

rates than non-Hispanic Whites 

(Figure 5). The New England division was an exception, as voting 

16 State level estimates of voting and 

registration are available in the 2012 detailed 

tables, available at <www.census.gov/hhes

/www/socdemo/voting/>.

rates for Blacks and non-Hispanic 

Whites were not statistically different in that part of the country. 

Voting disparities were high in 

the East South Central division, 

where Blacks voted at higher rates 

than non-Hispanic Whites by 7.6 

percentage points.17 In the middle 

part of the country voting rates for 

Blacks and non-Hispanic Whites 

were generally not statistically different from one another, but in the 

two most western census divisions, 

the rates for non-Hispanic Whites 

were higher than those of Blacks by 

margins of 12.8 percentage points 

in the Mountain division and 5.9 

percentage points in the Pacific 

division.18

Non-Hispanic Whites, meanwhile, 

voted at higher rates than 

Hispanics across most of the 

country, with the lone exception 

being in the South Atlantic division, 

where voting rates were not statistically different from one another 

(Figure 6). 

Blacks also tended to vote at higher 

rates than Hispanics, with the 

exception of the Mountain and New 

England divisions, where voting 

rates were not statistically different 

from one another (Figure 7). Across 

the rest of the country, Black voting rates were consistently higher, 

particularly in the West South Central Division, where Blacks voted 

at higher rates than Hispanics by 

more than 20 percentage points.19

CONCLUSION

Voting rates have historically varied 

by an array of demographic factors, 

17 The margin of 7.6 percentage points for 

East South Central is not significantly different from the margins for East North Central, 

Middle Atlantic, South Atlantic, and West 

South Central. 18 The differences for the Mountain and 

Pacific divisions are not statistically different. 19 The West South Central Division margin 

is not significantly different from the margins 

of the West North Central, East North Central, 

and East South Central divisions.

including race and Hispanic origin. 

In 2012, Blacks voted at a higher 

rate than non-Hispanic Whites for 

the first time since the Census 

Bureau started reported voting 

rates for the eligible citizen population in 1996. In 2012, Blacks also 

voted at a higher percentage than 

their percentage of the eligible 

electorate.

A gender voting gap also existed 

among non-Hispanic White, 

Hispanic, and Black voters in 2012, 

although this divide was most 

pronounced among Black men and 

women. Voting rates by age categories also varied according to race 

and Hispanic origin and according 

to the specific election. 

Finally, in 2012, certain voting 

differences by geographic location 

were observed for race groups and 

Hispanics. Compared with nonHispanic Whites, Blacks tended to 

vote at higher rates in the eastern 

part of the United States and at 

lower rates in the West. With the 

exception of the Mountain Division 

and New England, Blacks voted 

at higher rates than Hispanics, 

while non-Hispanic Whites voted at 

higher rates than Hispanics in every 

division of the country except the 

South Atlantic. 

SOURCE AND ACCURACY OF 

THE DATA

The population represented (the 

population universe) in the Voting and Registration Supplement 

to the November 2012 CPS is the 

civilian noninstitutionalized population living in the United States. The 

excluded institutionalized population is composed primarily of individuals in correctional institutions 

and nursing homes. 

The November CPS supplement, 

which asks questions on voting 

and registration participation, 

provides the basis for estimates in 
U.S. Census Bureau

9

AK

HI

Non-Hispanic White Voting Rates Compared to Black Voting Rates: 2012

Figure 5.

0 100 Miles

0 100 Miles

0 500 Miles

Voting rate comparison

by census division

TX

OK

AR

LA

MS

TN

AL

GA

FL

SC

NC

KY

WV

VA

MD

DE DC

ME

RI

CT

NH

MA

VT

NJ

NY

PA

ND

SD

NE

KS MO

IL IN

OH

MI

WI

IA

MN

WA

OR

CA

AZ

NM

CO

WY

UT

NV

ID

MT

Pacific

Pacific

Pacific

WEST

Mountain

West

South 

Central

West North

Central East

North

Central

Middle

Atlantic

East

South

Central

South

Atlantic

New

England

MIDWEST

NORTHEAST

SOUTH

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, November 2012.

5.9 or less

6.0 or more

White > Black Black > White

Not statistically 

different

 CENSUS 

REGION

Census

Division
10 U.S. Census Bureau AK HI Non-Hispanic White Voting Rates Compared to Hispanic Voting Rates: 2012 Figure 6. 0 100 Miles 0 100 Miles 0 500 Miles Voting rate comparison by census division 10.0 to 14.9 15.0 to 19.9 Less than 10.0 Not statistically different TX OK LAAR MS TNAL GA FL SC NC KY WV VA MD DE DC MERI CNMA TH VT NJ NY PA NDSDNE KS MO IL IN OH MI WI IA MN WA OR CA AZ NMCO WY UT NV ID MT Pacific Pacific Pacific WEST Mountain West South Central West North Central East North Central Middle Atlantic East South Central South Atlantic New England MIDWEST NORTHEAST SOUTH CENSUS REGION Census Division 20.0 or more Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, November 2012.
U.S. Census Bureau 11 AK HI Black Voting Rates Compared to Hispanic Voting Rates: 2012 Figure 7. 0 100 Miles 0 100 Miles 0 500 Miles Voting rate comparison by census division 10.0 to 14.9 15.0 to 19.9 Less than 10.0 Not statistically different TX OK LAAR MS TNAL GA FL SC NC KY WV VA MD DE DC MERI CNMA TH VT NJ NY PA NDSDNE KS MO IL IN OH MI WI IA MN WA OR CA AZ NMCO WY UT NV ID MT Pacific Pacific Pacific WEST Mountain West South Central West North Central East North Central Middle Atlantic East South Central South Atlantic New England MIDWEST NORTHEAST SOUTH CENSUS REGION Census Division 20.0 or more Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, November 2012.
12 U.S. Census Bureau

this report. The first question in the 

2012 supplement asked if respondents voted in the election held 

on Tuesday, November 6, 2012. If 

respondents did not respond to the 

question or answered “no” or “do 

not know,” they were then asked if 

they were registered to vote in the 

election. 

Statistics from sample surveys 

are subject to sampling error and 

nonsampling error. All comparisons 

presented in this report have taken 

sampling error into account and 

are significant at the 90 percent 

confidence level. Nonsampling 

error in surveys is attributable to a 

variety of sources, such as survey 

design, the respondent’s interpretation of a question, the respondent’s 

willingness and ability to provide 

correct and accurate answers, and 

post survey practices like question 

coding and response classification. 

To minimize these errors, the 

Census Bureau employs quality 

control procedures in sample selection, the wording of questions, 

interviewing, coding, data processing, and data analysis.

The CPS weighting procedure uses 

ratio estimation to adjust sample 

estimates to independent estimates 

of the national population by age, 

race, sex, and Hispanic origin. 

This weighting partially corrects 

for bias due to undercoverage, but 

biases may still be present when 

people are missed by the survey 

who differ from those interviewed 

in ways other than age, race, sex, 

and Hispanic origin. We do not 

precisely know the effect of this 

weighting procedure on other 

variables in the survey. All of these 

considerations affect comparisons 

across different surveys or data 

sources.

Further information on the source 

of the data and accuracy of the estimates, including standard errors 

and confidence intervals, can be 

found at <www.census.gov/apsd

/techdoc/cps/> or by contacting 

the Demographic Statistical 

Methods Division via Internet e-mail 

at <dsmd.source.and.accuracy

@census.gov>.

MEASURING VOTING AND 

REGISTRATION IN THE 

CURRENT POPULATION 

SURVEY

The Current Population Survey 

(CPS) Voting and Registration Supplement is a nationally representative sample survey that collects 

information on voting shortly after 

an election in November. The CPS 

supplement estimates the number 

of people who registered to vote 

and who voted based on direct 

interviews with household respondents. The CPS estimates are an 

important analytic tool in election 

studies because they identify the 

demographic and socioeconomic 

characteristics of people who 

report that they do, or do not, vote.

Each state’s board of elections 

tabulates the vote counts, while 

the Clerk of the U.S. House of 

Representatives reports the official 

results. These tallies show the number of votes counted for specific 

offices. In a presidential election, 

the official count of comparison is 

the national total number of votes 

cast for the office of the President.

Discrepancies occur in each election between the CPS estimates 

and the official counts. In previous 

years, the disparity in the estimates 

in presidential elections has varied 

between 3 percent and 12 percent 

of the total number of votes shown 

as cast in the official tallies, with 

official tallies typically showing 

lower turnout.20

Differences between the official 

counts and the CPS may be a combination of an understatement of 

the official numbers and an overstatement in the CPS estimates as 

described below.

UNDERSTATEMENT OF 

TOTAL VOTES CAST 

Ballots are sometimes invalidated 

and thrown out during the counting process and therefore do not 

appear in the official counts. Official vote counts also frequently do 

not include mismarked, unreadable, 

and blank ballots. Additionally, 

when the total number of votes 

cast for U.S. President represents 

the official count, voters who do 

not vote for this office are not 

included in the reported tally, even 

though they may report voting during their CPS interview. 

REPORTS OF VOTING IN 

THE CPS 

Some of the error in estimating 

turnout in the CPS is the result of 

population controls and survey 

coverage. Respondent misreporting is also a source of error in the 

CPS estimates. Previous analyses 

based on reinterviews showed 

that respondents and proxy 

respondents are consistent in their 

reported answers and thus misunderstanding the questions does 

not fully account for the difference 

between the official counts and the 

CPS. However, other studies that 

matched survey responses with 

voting records indicate that part 

of the discrepancy between survey 

estimates and official counts is the 

20 The official count of votes cast can be 

found on the Web page of the Clerk of the 

House of Representatives at <http://clerk

.house.gov/member_info/electionInfo>.
U.S. Census Bureau 13

result of respondent misreporting, 

particularly vote over reporting for 

the purpose of appearing to behave 

in a socially desirable way. 

As stated above, the definition of 

“official count” can provide another 

source of disparity. The CPS gathers 

information on whether respondents voted in the November election, not whether they voted for a 

specific office. The CPS estimates 

include respondents who voted 

in only state or local elections, 

but these individuals would not 

be included in official vote tallies 

based on ballots cast for a 

U.S. presidential candidate.

VOTING NOT CAPTURED IN 

THE CPS 

The CPS covers only the civilian 

noninstitutionalized population 

residing in the United States, while 

the official counts list all votes cast 

by this universe plus citizens residing in the United States who were 

in the military or living in institutions and citizens residing outside 

the United States, both civilian 

and military, who cast absentee 

ballots.21

21 Demographic information for Armed 

Forces members (enumerated in off-base 

housing or on-base with their families) is 

included on the CPS data files. No labor force 

information is collected of Armed Forces 

members in any month. In March, supplemental data on income are included for Armed 

Forces members. This is the only month that 

nondemographic information is included for 

Armed Forces members.

MORE INFORMATION

Detailed tabulations are available 

that provide demographic characteristics of the population on 

voting and registration. The Census 

Bureau also provides a series of 

historical tables and graphics, in 

addition to an interactive “Voting 

Hot Report.” Electronic versions 

of these products and this report 

are available on the Internet at the 

Census Bureau’s Voting and Registration Web site <www.census.gov

/hhes/www/socdemo/voting>.

CONTACT

Contact the U.S. Census Bureau 

Customer Services Center toll 

free at 1-800-923-8282 or visit 

<ask.census.gov> for further 

information.

SUGGESTED CITATION

File, Thom. 2013. “ The Diversifying Electorate—Voting Rates by 

Race and Hispanic Origin in 2012 

(and Other Recent Elections).” 

Current Population Survey Reports, 

P20-569. U.S. Census Bureau, 

Washington, DC.

USER COMMENTS

The Census Bureau welcomes the 

comments and advice of users of 

our data and reports. Please send 

comments and suggestions to:

Chief, 

Social, Economic, and 

Housing Statistics Division

U.S. Census Bureau

Washington, DC 20233-8500