Canvassing

The origin of the term is an older spelling of "canvas", to sift by shaking in a sheet of canvas, hence to discuss thoroughly.[5]

An organized canvass can be seen as early as the elections in the Roman Republic. In those campaigns candidates would shake the hands of all eligible voters in the Forum. Whispering into the ear of some candidates would be a nomenclator, a slave who had been trained to memorize the names of all the voters, so that the candidate could greet them all by name.[6]

Modern canvassing can be traced back to the rise of contested elections in England. For the first centuries of the English Parliament elections were rarely contested. Losing an election was considered a dishonor to oneself, and to friends and family. Campaigning thus involved quiet sounding out of the small pool of voters. Only once this process had convinced a candidate that he had enough votes to win would he declare his interest in the seat.[7]

Beginning in the Elizabethan era, and expanding during the conflicts under the Stuarts, elections began to be openly contested. Canvassing was a controversial strategy. In both 1604 and 1626 canvassing for votes was banned. It was seen as a violation to free elections, as votes would be won by persuasion rather than a voter making up his own mind.[8] Despite this, by the late 17th century, canvassing was standard practice in English elections. Rival campaigns would attempt a full canvass of all voters, which even in the largest districts would only be a few thousand people.

There were many reasons why candidates invested much time and money in canvassing. As in the previous tradition of sounding out supporters before announcing, many candidates would use the canvass to determine their level of support, and would drop out before election day if it proved insufficient. Part of the concern would be financial. Campaigning was expensive in an era when voters expected to be plied with food and drink. In this period the candidates had to cover the costs of the election itself. If candidates did not find enough votes during their canvass they would drop out before wasting more money on a losing campaign.[10]

Building the list of voters was also important, as only some districts kept full poll books. Legal wrangling over who met the property requirements to vote was important in many campaigns, and canvassing was used to add supporters to the rolls, while investigating the claims of opponents. The growing list of supporters would also be essential to an election day operation. In early elections all voters had to travel to a central town, often some distance from their home, and polling could last several days. During this time voters would be away from their work and their fields. As an example of the challenges, one losing candidate had identified 639 supporters in Kent for the Short Parliament election of 1640, but only 174 voted, most going home after finding out the polling would take three days.[11]

A candidate would also make sure to knock on as many doors as possible to win over the voters. Speaking to as many voters as possible was seen as an essential tool to win the "wavering multitudes."[8]

William Hogarth's 1754 depiction of the sordid and disreputable job of canvassing for votes.

By the 18th century canvassing was standard practice, but this was also an era of gross electoral corruption, and canvassing was used to bribe and threaten voters,[12] as famously depicted in William Hogarth's Humours of an Election series of paintings. Most directly this would take the form of direct bribes to voters. This was the practice in only a minority of districts, but in some areas large bribes had become habitual. In areas without direct bribery, candidates were expected to provide food, drink and banquets. These various costs added up to the equivalent of several million modern pounds for the priciest campaigns, causing financial hardship even for wealthy candidates.[13]

In the first elections held in the United States, canvassing was rare. Most elections were uncontested, and even in races with multiple candidates it was considered improper for a candidate to campaign on his own behalf.[14] In the early 19th century as the party system developed, elections became more contested and voluntary associations developed to work on candidates' behalf. As in the United Kingdom, canvassing became an important part of their operations, and they would attempt to visit each voter in a district.[14]

George Caleb Bingham's positive portrayal of a candidate canvassing in the United States in 1852

This system soon became a venue for gross corruption. Machine politics developed in the large eastern cities. Elected officials would reward their supporters with patronage appointments if they won, and direct bribery was also common with one estimate that 20% of New York voters were compensated for their votes during Gilded Age elections.[14]

In the United Kingdom, the Reform Act of 1832 attacked corruption and expanded the franchise. This, combined with the growing strength of the national parties, transformed canvassing. There were no lists of who was eligible to vote under the new law, and it was up to the individual voter to register themselves. The parties launched mass canvasses with the goal of adding all of the party's supporters to the electoral roll. As an example, in Norwich the 1874 saw 3000 Liberal and 2000 Conservative paid workers engaged in voter registration.[15] The massive paid canvassing came to an end with the Corrupt and Illegal Practices Prevention Act 1883, which limited campaign spending. Thus the armies of paid canvassers were replaced with smaller volunteer efforts. Laws were also changed in the United Kingdom to make voter registration almost automatic, removing the need for the parties to expend efforts on it.[16]

As corruption faded, parties returned to using canvassing to win votes through persuasion and get-out-the-vote (GOTV) efforts. This was especially true of the new socialist parties such as the Labour Party in the United Kingdom, and the CCF in Canada who had little money but enthusiastic volunteer bases who could be deployed to door steps.

The years after the Second World War saw a general decline in canvassing. Political scientists began to question the utility of traditional campaigns. The Michigan model of voter behaviour became the accepted wisdom. It argued that voters had deep-set partisan loyalties, and that changes in such loyalties take years to develop. A simple knock on the door will do nothing to change a voter's opinion. Parties thus switched their canvassing resources away from persuading voters, focusing only on identifying their supporters and making sure they voted.[15] The British Labour Party adopted the Reading System developed by Ian Mikardo to win the Reading constituency in 1945. It was based on concentrating exclusively on pro-Labour areas and boosting their turnout, while ignoring non-supporters.[17]

Even these approaches were found wanting. David Butler in his Nuffield Model of UK elections found that during the 1950s and 1960s, local campaigns had no effect on the results. With the rise of television, resources were shifted from the ground to mass market advertising, with canvassing seen as a relic of the past. Ivor Crewe argued that "constituency organizing counts for next to nothing in the television age."[15] One political scientist wrote there was a belief that canvassing was an "elaborate ritual bringing some sense of gratification to the participants, but making no difference to election results."[16]

An AFL-CIO canvasser in the 2008 American election

Two members of the Boise chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America canvass in early May 2018 to gather signatures to get the Medicaid coverage gap addressed on the ballot. The notable initiative drive succeeded,[18][19] and Idaho Proposition 2 is now up to the midterm election voters.[20]

In the United States, canvassing hit its all-time low during the 1996 election, with the lowest reported rates of political volunteering, and the lowest recorded voter turnout.[21] Political scientists began to reassess the effects of canvassing. In Britain new studies found that unlike in earlier decades, a strong field campaign was having an effect on the result. In the United States Alan S. Gerber and Donald Green launched a series of controlled experiments, and demonstrated that foot canvassing was one of the most effective tools available to boost voter turnout.[22]

The years since 2000 have seen a widespread revival of election canvassing. An intensive effort by the Al Gore campaign of 2000 was credited with gaining several points on election day in the 2000 election, enough to win the popular vote despite being down several points in the polls the day before. Subsequently, the Republicans launched their 72 Hour Program of get out the vote efforts over the last three days of a campaign, and also found demonstrable proof that it gained them several points in key races.[23] The Obama campaigns of 2008 and 2012 were especially noted for dedicating resources to a field program.[24]

New technologies changed how canvassing was conducted. While door-to-door blockwalking has been prior to COVID-19 been the most common canvassing technique, canvassing can also be done via phone, texting, and social media. Expansive databases of the electorate, such as the Democrats' NGP VAN, pulled together canvassing data, consumer information, and demographic profiles to allow precise targeting of voters. No longer would campaigns knock on all the doors in a district, rather voters who would most be persuaded to support the candidate or come out to vote could be targeted. Large campaigns incorporated A/B testing into their canvassing, to further hone and improve its effectiveness.[24]