Dan Hopkins sends along this article:

[Hopkins] uses regression discontinuity design to estimate the turnout and election impacts of Spanish-language assistance provided under Section 203 of the Voting Rights Act. Analyses of two different data sets – the Latino National Survey and California 1998 primary election returns – show that Spanish-language assistance increased turnout for citizens who speak little English. The California results also demonstrate that election procedures an influence outcomes, as support for ending bilingual education dropped markedly in heavily Spanish-speaking neighborhoods with Spanish-language assistance. The California analyses find hints of backlash among non-Hispanic white precincts, but not with the same size or certainty. Small changes in election procedures can influence who votes as well as what wins.

Beyond the direct relevance of these results, I find this paper interesting as an example of research that is fundamentally quantitative. The qualitative finding–“Spanish-language assistance increased turnout for citizens who speak little English”–reaches deep into dog-bites-man territory. What makes the paper work is that the results are quantitative (for example, comparing direct effect to backlash).

P.S. I love love love that Hopkins makes his points with graphs that display data and fitted models.

P.P.S. The article is on a SSRN website that advertises “*NEW* One-Click Download.” Huh? You click on a pdf and it downloads. That’s standard, no? What would be the point of “two-click download”? Screening out the riff-raff?