Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-8r8nv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-07T11:06:34.449Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Delivering the Vote: The Political Effect of Free Mail Delivery inEarly Twentieth Century America

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 August 2016

Elisabeth Ruth Perlman
Affiliation:
Elisabeth Ruth Perlman is Ph.D. Candidate, Department of Economics, Boston University, 270 Bay State Road, Boston, MA 02215. E-mail: perlmane@bu.edu.
Steven Sprick Schuster
Affiliation:
Steven Sprick Schuster is Assistant Professor, Department of Economics, Colgate University, 13 Oak Drive, Hamilton, NY, 13346. E-mail: ssprickschuster@colgate.edu.
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The rollout of Rural Free Delivery (RFD) in the early twentieth centurydramatically increased the frequency with which rural voters receivedinformation. This article examines the effect of RFD on voters' andRepresentatives' behavior using a panel dataset and instrumentalvariables. Communities receiving more routes spread their votes to more parties;there is no evidence it changed turnout. RFD shifted positions taken byRepresentatives in line with rural constituents, including increased support forpro-temperance and anti-immigration policies. These results appear only incounties with newspapers, supporting the hypothesis that information flows playa crucial role in the political process.

“As the whole world has been drawn closer together by theinventions and uses of steam and electricity, so farmers may bedrawn closer together by the universal practice of freedelivery.”

—Matthew Williams of Verndale, Minnesota as quoted in the 1900Yearbook of the United States Department of Agriculture

Information

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © The Economic History Association 2016 
Figure 0

Table 1 SUMMARY STATISTICS: MEANS OF COUNTY LEVEL VARIABLES BY YEAR

Figure 1

Table 2 FIXED EFFECTS RESULTS FOR VOTER OUTCOMES

Figure 2

Figure 1 VOTER OUTCOMES VS. NUMBER OF RFD ROUTES IN 1908

Sources: RFD routes from the 1908 United States Official Postal Guide; voting data are from Clubb, Flanigan, and Zingale (2006); county characteristics are from Haines (2010) (county boundaries fixed at 1890 values as in Hornbeck (2010)).
Figure 3

Figure 2 FIRST DIFFERENCES OF VOTER OUTCOMES VS. NUMBER OF RFD ROUTES IN 1908

Sources: RFD routes from the 1908 United States Official Postal Guide; voting data are from Clubb, Flanigan, and Zingale (2006); county characteristics are from Haines (2010) (county boundaries fixed at 1890 values as in Hornbeck (2010)).
Figure 4

Table 3 DETERMINANTS OF ROUTE ALLOCATION

Figure 5

Table 4 FIRST STAGE REGRESSION

Figure 6

Figure 3 TRENDS, SPENDING

Sources: Voting data are from Clubb, Flanigan, and Zingale (2006); spending are collected from the “Report on Wealth, Debt, and Taxation” (Upton 1895).
Figure 7

Table 5 IV REGRESSION FOR VOTER OUTCOMES

Figure 8

Table 6 EFFECTS BY NEWSPAPER PRESENCE FOR VOTER OUTCOMES

Figure 9

Figure 4 DW-NOMINATE SCORES VS. PERCENT URBAN

Sources: Data about elected officials from the DW-Nominate project; county characteristics are from Haines (2010).
Figure 10

Table 7 POLICY DECISIONS AND ROUTE ALLOCATION

Figure 11

Appendix Table 1 IV REGRESSION FOR VOTER OUTCOMES: ALL ELECTION LAWS

Figure 12

Appendix Table 2 IV REGRESSION FOR VOTER OUTCOMES SPLIT BY REGION

Supplementary material: PDF

Perlman and Schuster supplementary material

Online Appendix

Download Perlman and Schuster supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 105.9 KB