Does low voter turnout in Philadelphia highlight a need for reform?

Philadelphians aren’t voting in their local elections. In the 2023 mayoral and city council election, voter turnout consisted of only 31% of registered voters, following a meager 27% in the primaries as well. As Philadelphia is a heavily Democratic city, the mayoral race is effectively decided in the primary. In the last election, Cherelle Parker (D) secured the nomination with just 81,080 votes, representing less than 8% of registered voters. Additionally, in the 2021 municipal election for positions such as the city’s district attorney and city controller, only 21% of registered voters came out. This past May, these seats were once again up for election, and voter turnout fell even further with only 16.9 of voters turning out. But with such a low voter turnout, how much power do Philadelphians really give themselves?

Decisions about the mayor, city council, and district attorney are especially critical in a major city like Philadelphia. The mayor appoints several department heads, issues executive orders, and proposes the city’s annual budget. The District Attorney shapes criminal justice policy across the city, and voters also select judges at every level, from local courts to the state Supreme Court. Chairman Commissioner Omar Sabir (D) stresses that it’s “critical” for people to make their voices heard at the ballot box, stating that ” courts are going to make decisions that affect our country, much like they did 60 years ago during the civil rights movement.” Sabir also believes that higher voter participation could help Pennsylvania — a key swing state — secure more federal funding.

Therefore, it’s no understatement to say that local elections for mayor, city council, district attorney, and more are essential for the democratic structure of Philadelphia, and other communities across the country. And yet, participation in local elections remains low across America. In a 2024 study of 50 cities (including Philadelphia), the average turnout for mayoral elections was just 37.1% — far below the 64% average turnout for presidential elections that year.

However, low voter turnout is not the case in every city. One solution has led to a big jump in voter turnout, more than any other change researchers have studied. The solution is to adjust the timing of elections by placing local elections on the same day as federal elections in even-numbered years, a practice commonly referred to as “on-cycle.” By holding mayoral and city council elections along with federal elections, the burden of scheduling another trip to the polls around work or school is eliminated, as is the cost of holding additional elections. With a larger electorate, officials more closely represent voter demographics, and it saves public funding. Additionally, the reform is a popular option – almost every time voters are polled on whether or not they want to consolidate elections, they vote yes.

How elections take place varies across the county. Some states require on-cycle voting, some let cities decide for themselves, and 25 states — including Pennsylvania — require all local elections to be held in odd-numbered years. In Pennsylvania, this rule is built into the state constitution, making it particularly difficult to change. Altering it would require passing an amendment through two consecutive legislative sessions and then securing approval from voters in a statewide election. So, is it worth bringing up a concept that would require such a long, difficult challenge?

To determine whether on-cycle voting would be the best way to increase local turnout in Philadelphia, we must first address why citizens aren’t voting. As Chairman Omar Sabir notes, the causes vary by city. In Philadelphia, where more residents are lower on the socioeconomic ladder than in other large cities, low turnout reflects deeper structural issues. Sabir believes local voter participation won’t rise meaningfully until these broader conditions improve, and available research backs him up, showing strong links between higher socioeconomic status and voting rates.

Beyond these broader civic engagement issues, there are some solutions to voter turnout in Philadelphia that would be easier to achieve than changing the state constitution and beginning the years-long process of switching to on- cycle. The Committee of Seventy is a “nonpartisan civic leadership organization” that is dedicated to increasing voter education, and supports various election reforms to make voting easier. They’ve been focused on easier fixes, like adjusting the mail in ballot processes, and supporting legislation to create open primaries in Philadelphia. Both of these amendments would simply require a state law to pass, or less.

Given that these simple fixes haven’t seen movement in the state legislature, something as large as switching election timing is not top priority, said Andrew McGinley, vice president of external affairs at the Committee of Seventy. McGinley also worries that placing local elections, which are significantly less funded than federal ones, on-cycle could diminish the information getting to voters; “If you’re seeing 500 ads about, you know, who’s running for president…is the messaging going to break through about who’s running for City Council?”

Image of political mail ads via Shutterstock.

Conversely, Ben Weinberg, director of public policy at Citizens Union, a New York-based nonprofit dedicated to increasing voter accessibility, argued that switching to on-cycle voting would primarily benefit non-profit organizations seeking to boost local election turnout, as these groups often face funding shortages in odd-numbered years. Weinberg also emphasized that drawbacks related to campaigns having to adjust to compete for our attention are short-term, and could be figured out during the years-long process it would take to implement the change. Furthermore, studies surrounding this question of voter awareness of local officers on the same ballot as federal officers are inconclusive. Weinberg also stated that the point is somewhat moot, since “we don’t have knowledge or intelligence requirements” to vote in the U.S., meaning that whether voters fully understand who or what they are voting for is irrelevant to their right to vote.

Despite the daunting journey of amending the state charter, handling the logistics of the switch, and reforming the ballots themselves, blueprints exist because it’s been done before. In California, Arizona, and Nevada, state legislators began allowing cities to decide when to hold their elections. The lifting of the ban led to local movements to push for election consolidation, and over time, governments began supporting the change as more and more cities adapted. In New York City, which similarly has off-cycle elections mandated in its state constitution, there is currently a movement to switch to on-cycle, with the support of city council members and various groups like the Citizens Union, the Brennan Center, NYCLU, LDF, GOTV, disability rights groups, and more, said Weinberg. This solution grew with community support and citizens speaking up to their representatives.

The best way to start a movement, Weinberg stressed, is by framing it with the data.

In every case where a city has switched to on- cycle, local election participation doubles or more than doubles. Additionally, this change has widespread support. However, just to check, we ran a survey poll of Philly voters, when asked “If local elections (for mayor, city council, school board, etc.) were held on the same day as presidential elections, do you think you would vote in them more often?,” 71.4% said yes.

A graph of major cities’ mayoral election turnout after switching to on-cycle. Data courtesy of Zoltan Hajnal and Avi Green from the Yankelovich Center for Social Science Research at UC San Diego. Graph by Generocity contributor.

At a time when federal elections become increasingly partisan and polarizing, Americans have the opportunity to make their voices heard and contribute directly to their community by voting in important local elections. Furthermore, as local journalism that encourages and informs constituencies when and who to vote for is dying out, it is more important than ever that local voting is made easier. While consolidating elections doesn’t address the deeper systemic barriers that prevent many Philadelphians from voting, it is a straightforward way to increase voter turnout, save the city money, and potentially make the birthplace of America’s government more accurately reflect “we the people.”