Election Day holiday

Con 1: Making Election Day a national holiday will disadvantage low-income and blue-collar workers.

Federal law doesn’t require private employers to give employees paid federal holidays. A part-time hourly worker is more likely to have multiple jobs, none of which are likely to offer time off for a federal holiday. [20] [21] [22] [23]

Annie McDonald, editor of the Berkeley Public Policy Journal, noted that the workers who are least likely to get paid holidays are those who already have less of a voice in the political process: “Americans working in retail, hospitality, and service jobs, for example, would most likely not receive the benefit of a paid holiday to vote. In fact, these voters may be more likely to have to work as a result of a federal election holiday, where they may have had time off previously on a random Tuesday in November. Additionally, many of these individuals rely on school days as childcare for their children. An additional day off school would prove to be problematic for individuals who may not have other readily accessible forms of childcare.” [24]

People who have already suffered significant disenfranchisement, such as women and people of color, are more likely to be working those low-income jobs that wouldn’t get the time off to vote even on a national holiday. In fact, holidays usually mean more work hours for retail workers, because stores run promotions and sales. [24] [25]

Con 2: Changing state laws and company policies would be more effective ways to encourage voting.

According to the AFL-CIO, 30 states require employers to allow employees time off for voting. Arizona, for example, allows employees who do not have three consecutive hours before or after work when the polls are open to take paid time off to vote at the start or end of their work days. Passing laws in all states that let people vote before or after work would be more effective than a national holiday, which would quickly be viewed as just another day off to enjoy. [26] [27]

Companies including Abercrombie & Fitch Co., Farmers Insurance, Kaiser Permanente, Patagonia, and Walmart have joined Make Time to Vote campaign, which encourages employers to provide paid time off, schedule no meetings on Election Day, and give information on mail-in ballots and early voting. [28] [29]

Patagonia, an outdoor clothing retailer, paused operation on Nov. 6, 2018 so that all employees could vote. Rose Marcario, CEO, stated, “demonstrating your company’s commitment to voting will reinforce how essential it is that every eligible voter shows up. And it will, in turn, help strengthen the idea that businesses can and will come together for a worthy common purpose: protecting our democracy by empowering all American workers to be good citizens.” [30]

Con 3: Other solutions would more reliably increase voter turnout than a national holiday.

Solutions such as automatic voter registration, same-day registration, early voting, no-excuse absentee voting, restoring voting rights to former felons, improved civics education, and voter outreach would all improve voter participation more reliably than a national holiday. Trying one of these alternatives would avoid the negative economic impact of closing businesses for Election Day. [31] [32] [33]

Henry Farber, Hughes-Rogers Professor of Economics at Princeton University, conducted an analysis of states that made Election Day a holiday for state employees. He concluded that “having an election holiday, by itself, is not an effective strategy to increase voter turnout.” [34]

Automatic voter registration, by contrast, could register an additional 22 million people and create 7.9 million new voters nationwide within a year. [31]

Same-day registration boosts turnout by 5%, and universal implementation of it would have added as many as 4.8 million voters in the 2016 election, according to Danielle Root and Liz Kennedy from the Center for American Progress. [31]