Rural Population Analysis: Limited Attention Under the Status Quo
Authored by Katie Kelly // Published September 21, 2011
Some National Popular Vote plan opponents argue that rural voters will be ignored because campaign focus would shift to more populated areas of the country. They argue that the current “winner-take-all” system is advantageous to the general population and rural voters because the candidates have to visit small and rural states. It’s just not true.
Previous reports from FairVote have detailed the growing inequalities of our current, “winner-take-all” system (see our 2006 Presidential Inequality Report and our recent analysis of how different states have been competitive, showing that candidates are not visiting nor addressing the concerns of a vast majority of citizens and states).
We’ve looked specifically into the rural population distribution of our country and its states. It turns out that most of our heavily rural states are ignored in presidential elections and that the majority of the rural population lives in clear, “spectator” states.
The Numbers
Results show that swing states, which generally receive almost all of a candidate’s attention and spending, typically have fewer rural voters. Of the nine swing states coming out of the 2008 elections (Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Minnesota, Nevada, New Hampshire, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia), more than half contain a below average representation of rural voters. On the flip side, of the30 states in the nation with a rural population of 20% or more, only three are among the all-important swing states. Meanwhile, seven states (Wyoming, Vermont, Montana, Mississippi, North Dakota, South Dakota, West Virginia) have a rural population of 44% or higher – none of which are swing states.
Not only are most of the heavily rural states not "swing" – they in fact are among the many “landslide states” that are least likely to have a chance of getting attention for years to come. 19 of the 30 most rural states in the country have a partisanship gap of more than 14%, meaning that, in a nationally competitive year, one party’s nominee is likely to win by more than 57% to 43% in that state. In other words, rural dwellers make up over 16% of the entire population in the United States, and almost 40 million of these 51 million people live in “safe” or “predictable” non-swing states. Since these states are not competitive, candidates have no incentive to cater to the vast amounts of rural voters in those states.
Furthermore, of the 15 lowest populated states in the country (comprised of two million residents or less); only one state is represented in the “super swing” for the 2012 election and was seen as a battleground in 2008: New Hampshire. That means that 14 states and over 15 million people are ignored under the current Electoral College system simply because they are “predictable” and low in population (therefore offering few electoral votes); this secondarily leaves over six million rural voters ignored in these small states. The current system does not advantage small and rural states, as traditionally believed.
Contrast these numbers with a national popular vote for president. If we had a “swing nation” with every vote equal, 16% of the population living in rural areas would be a significant group of voters. A candidate would only dismiss their concerns at their peril – winning and keeping 51% in a competitive environment requires looking hard for votes wherever you can find them.
It’s clear that, like the majority of the voting population in general, the majority of the rural population is not helped by the current status quo in the same way they would be if every vote were equal.
Below is a table containing the data for each state and a flash map, which displays each state’s rural population and partisanship numbers. You can also download a spreadsheet with more information.
States listed in yellow are swing states. Red lines indicate a state leaning Republican in the 2008 election. Blue lines indicate a state leaning Democrat in the 2008 election.
State Rural Population Total Population % Rural Population 2008 Votes Cast Overall Partisanship (GOP Centric) Alabama 1,364,306 4,779,136 28.55% 2,099,819 64.42% Alaska 231,829 710,231 32.64% 326,197 64.40% Arizona 677,662 6,392,017 10.60% 2,293,475 57.90% Arkansas 1,158,551 2,915,918 39.73% 1,086,617 63.56% California 845,229 37,253,956 2.27% 13,561,900 41.61% Colorado 687,293 5,029,196 13.67% 2,401,462 49.16% Connecticut 308,355 3,574,097 8.63% 1,646,797 42.45% Delaware 197,145 897,934 21.96% 412,412 41.14% District of Columbia 0 601,723 0.00% 265,853 10.67% Florida 1,207,042 18,201,310 6.63% 8,390,744 52.23% Georgia 1,839,995 9,687,653 18.99% 3,924,486 56.24% Hawaii 407,094 1,360,301 29.93% 453,568 31.00% Idaho 539,446 1,567,582 34.41% 655,122 66.35% Illinois 1,679,801 12,830,632 13.09% 5,522,371 41.07% Indiana 1,405,057 6,483,802 21.67% 2,751,054 53.12% Iowa 1,324,641 3,046,355 43.48% 1,537,123 48.87% Kansas 1,031,070 2,853,118 36.14% 1,235,872 61.12% Kentucky 1,815,597 4,339,367 41.84% 1,826,620 61.75% Louisiana 1,152,634 4,533,372 25.43% 1,960,761 62.95% Maine 552,638 1,328,361 41.60% 731,163 44.98% Maryland 310,365 5,773,552 5.38% 2,631,596 40.91% Massachusetts 26,707 6,547,629 0.41% 3,080,985 40.73% Michigan 1,850,574 9,883,640 18.72% 5,001,766 45.40% Minnesota 1,429,114 5,303,925 26.94% 2,910,369 48.52% Mississippi 1,636,272 2,967,297 55.14% 1,289,865 60.22% Missouri 1,613,417 5,988,927 26.94% 2,925,205 53.70% Montana 640,739 989,415 64.76% 490,302 54.77% Nebraska 754,973 1,826,341 41.34% 801,281 61.10% Nevada 268,591 2,431,960 11.04% 967,848 47.39% New Hampshire 497,383 1,316,470 37.78% 710,970 48.83% New Jersey 786,237 8,791,894 8.94% 3,868,237 45.85% New Mexico 688,655 2,059,179 33.44% 830,158 46.07% New York 1,563,219 19,378,102 8.07% 7,640,931 40.21% North Carolina 2,831,125 9,535,483 29.69% 4,310,789 53.47% North Dakota 347,173 672,591 51.62% 316,621 57.95% Ohio 2,237,079 11,536,504 19.39% 5,708,350 51.34% Oklahoma 1,344,013 3,751,351 35.83% 1,462,661 69.28% Oregon 852,523 3,831,074 22.25% 1,827,864 45.46% Pennsylvania 2,016,644 12,702,379 15.88% 6,013,272 48.48% Rhode Island 137,818 1,052,567 13.09% 471,766 39.73% South Carolina 1,089,270 4,625,364 23.55% 1,920,969 58.12% South Dakota 445,138 814,180 54.67% 381,975 57.84% Tennessee 1,686,343 6,346,105 26.57% 2,599,749 61.17% Texas 3,060,392 25,145,561 12.17% 8,077,795 59.52% Utah 314,923 2,763,885 11.39% 952,370 67.73% Vermont 414,480 625,741 66.24% 325,046 35.13% Virginia 1,113,515 8,001,024 13.92% 3,723,260 50.49% Washington 824,155 6,724,540 12.26% 3,036,878 45.05% West Virginia 820,244 1,852,994 44.27% 713,451 60.20% Wisconsin 1,544,904 5,686,986 27.17% 2,983,417 46.68% Wyoming 396,438 563,626 70.34% 254,658 69.75%