• HOME
  • NEWS
  • EXPLORE
    • CAREER
      • Companies
      • Jobs
    • EVENTS
    • iGEM
      • News
      • Team
    • PHOTOS
    • VIDEO
    • WIKI
  • BLOG
  • COMMUNITY
    • FACEBOOK
    • INSTAGRAM
    • TWITTER
Monday, August 25, 2025
BIOENGINEER.ORG
No Result
View All Result
  • Login
  • HOME
  • NEWS
  • EXPLORE
    • CAREER
      • Companies
      • Jobs
        • Lecturer
        • PhD Studentship
        • Postdoc
        • Research Assistant
    • EVENTS
    • iGEM
      • News
      • Team
    • PHOTOS
    • VIDEO
    • WIKI
  • BLOG
  • COMMUNITY
    • FACEBOOK
    • INSTAGRAM
    • TWITTER
  • HOME
  • NEWS
  • EXPLORE
    • CAREER
      • Companies
      • Jobs
        • Lecturer
        • PhD Studentship
        • Postdoc
        • Research Assistant
    • EVENTS
    • iGEM
      • News
      • Team
    • PHOTOS
    • VIDEO
    • WIKI
  • BLOG
  • COMMUNITY
    • FACEBOOK
    • INSTAGRAM
    • TWITTER
No Result
View All Result
Bioengineer.org
No Result
View All Result
Home NEWS Science News Biology

Relative restrictiveness of each state’s voting environment in 2020

Bioengineer by Bioengineer
October 19, 2020
in Biology
Reading Time: 3 mins read
0
Share on FacebookShare on TwitterShare on LinkedinShare on RedditShare on Telegram

IMAGE

Credit: Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., publishers

New Rochelle, NY, October 19, 2020–Texas has the most restrictive electoral environment in 2020, and Oregon has the least restrictive voting practices of the 50 states. This is based on a study of the relative “cost of voting” in each of the 50 states, as described in the peer-reviewed Election Law Journal. Click here (http://doi.org/10.1089/elj.2020.0666) to read the Issue now.

Many states have gone out of their way to reduce the cost of voting and make it more hassle free, for example, by adopting automatic voter registration processes. Other states have failed to innovate and adopt technological advances that could make it easier for the public to vote. A few states, such as Texas, have increased the restrictiveness of voting mainly by reducing the number of polling stations.

“What is abundantly clear from the examples of Virginia and Michigan is that if a state wishes to make voting more accessible it is entirely possible to do so. Particularly interesting is the fact that some of the reforms, such as online voter registration, are found to come with a reduced monetary cost for states,” say Scot Schraufnagel, Northern Illinois University, and coauthors.

“The ease of voting varies tremendously across the 50 states and the political battles over access to the polls have never been more intense. This timely article provides an updated comparison of the costs of voting in the states,” says Election Law Journal Editor-in-Chief David Canon, University of Wisconsin.

###

About the Journal

Election Law Journal (https://home.liebertpub.com/publications/election-law-journal/101) is an authoritative peer-reviewed journal published quarterly online with open access options and in print that provides global, interdisciplinary coverage of election law, policy, and administration. Led by Editor-in-Chief David Canon, University of Wisconsin, the Journal covers the field of election law for practicing attorneys, election administrators, political professionals, legal scholars, and social scientists, and covers election design and reform on the federal, state, and local levels. Complete tables of contents and a sample issue are available on the Election Law Journal (https://home.liebertpub.com/publications/election-law-journal/101) website.

About the Publisher

Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., publishers (https://home.liebertpub.com/) is known for establishing authoritative peer-reviewed journals in many promising areas of science and biomedical research and law. A complete list of the firm’s 90 journals, books, and newsmagazines is available on the Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., publishers (https://home.liebertpub.com/) website.

Media Contact
Kathryn Ryan
[email protected]

Original Source

https://home.liebertpub.com/news/relative-restrictiveness-of-each-states-voting-environment-in-2020/3769

Related Journal Article

http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/elj.2020.0666

Tags: Animal Research/RightsClimate ChangeGuidelines/Treaties/AgreementsLaw EnforcementPolicy/EthicsScience/Health and the Law
Share12Tweet8Share2ShareShareShare2

Related Posts

Pollinator Patterns and Phenology in Hohenbergia Species

Pollinator Patterns and Phenology in Hohenbergia Species

August 25, 2025
blank

Unveiling Archaeoniscus brodiei: Early Cretaceous Isopod Insights

August 25, 2025

Assessing Runting Causes and Impacts in Poultry Hatcheries

August 25, 2025

Post-Fire Growth Insights of Cyathea Mexiae in Brazil

August 25, 2025
Please login to join discussion

POPULAR NEWS

  • blank

    Molecules in Focus: Capturing the Timeless Dance of Particles

    141 shares
    Share 56 Tweet 35
  • Breakthrough in Computer Hardware Advances Solves Complex Optimization Challenges

    134 shares
    Share 54 Tweet 34
  • New Drug Formulation Transforms Intravenous Treatments into Rapid Injections

    115 shares
    Share 46 Tweet 29
  • Neuropsychiatric Risks Linked to COVID-19 Revealed

    81 shares
    Share 32 Tweet 20

About

We bring you the latest biotechnology news from best research centers and universities around the world. Check our website.

Follow us

Recent News

Pollinator Patterns and Phenology in Hohenbergia Species

Unveiling Archaeoniscus brodiei: Early Cretaceous Isopod Insights

Assessing Runting Causes and Impacts in Poultry Hatcheries

  • Contact Us

Bioengineer.org © Copyright 2023 All Rights Reserved.

Welcome Back!

Login to your account below

Forgotten Password?

Retrieve your password

Please enter your username or email address to reset your password.

Log In
No Result
View All Result
  • Homepages
    • Home Page 1
    • Home Page 2
  • News
  • National
  • Business
  • Health
  • Lifestyle
  • Science

Bioengineer.org © Copyright 2023 All Rights Reserved.