■J '/_>. . TJ State and Local Government Special Studies No. 74 STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT EXPENDITURE FOR ELECTION ADMINISTRATION FISCAL YEARS 1970 T0 1973 United States General Accounting Office U. S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Social and Economic Statistics Administration BUREAU OF THE CENSUS Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2012 with funding from LYRASIS Members and Sloan Foundation http://archive.org/details/statelocalgovernOOunit State and Local Government Special Studies No. 74 4 STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT EXPENDITURE FOR ELECTION ADMINISTRATION FISCAL YEARS 1970 TO 1973 Issued July 1975 United States General Accounting Office Elmer B. Staats, Comptroller General United States Department of Commerce Rogers C. B. Morton, Secretary UNITED STATES GENERAL SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC STATISTICS ACCOUNTING OFFICE ADMINISTRATION Elmer B. Staats Edward D. Failor Comptroller General Administrator OFFICE OF FEDERAL ELECTIONS BUREAU OF THE CENSUS Phillip S. Hughes Vincent P. Barabba Acting Director Director Shirley Kallek Associate Director for Economic Fields GOVERNMENTS DIVISION Sherman Landau Chief ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This report was prepared jointly by the Bureau of the Census and the U.S. General Accounting Office. In the General Accounting Office general supervision was supplied by Gary Greenhalgh and Jack Brock. In the Bureau of the Census general supervision was provided by William C. Fanning and Alan Jones. The project staff at various times consisted of Joel Miller, David Nikkei, Dennis Gozier, and Leah Baker Paulson. Table preparation and other clerical assistance was provided by Betty Stark and Queen Ware. Computer operations were directed by Robert Bloomberg and carried out by the Computer Services Division. Helen D. Files of the Governments Division, Bureau of the Census, and the staff of the Publications Services Division, Social and Economics Statistics Administration, provided advice and services in the preparation of copy for publication. The generous assistance of State, and local government officials in providing the basic data for this report is gratefully acknowledged. For further information regarding the data in this report contact William C. Fanning, Governments Division, Bureau of the Census, Washington, D.C. 20233 (301-763-5094) Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: SUGGESTED CITATION U.S. General Accounting Office and U.S. Bureau of the Census, State and Local Government Expenditure for Election Administration: Fiscal Years 1970 to 1973 Series: GSS No. 74 U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 1975 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, Government Printing Office Washington, D.C, 20402, and U.S. Department of Commerce district office. Price 65 cents CONTENTS Page Introduction ..»,..,.,...,..,. ....„ o ... , . ,..„,,,...... ................ 1 Table 1. Four -Year Summary of Election Administration Direct Expenditure of State and Local Governments by Level of Government: Fiscal Years 1970, 1971, 1972 and 1973 5 2. Election Administration Direct Expenditure of State and Local Govern- ments by Level of Government: Fiscal Years 1970, 1971, 1972 and 1973 7 3. Election Administration Expenditure of State Governments: Fiscal Years 1970, 1971, 1972 and 1973 10 4. Election Administration Expenditure of Selected Large County Governments: Fiscal Years 1970, 1971, 1972 and 1973 12 5„ Election Administration Expenditure of Selected Large City Governments: Fiscal Years 1970, 1971, 1972 and 1973. 14 INTRODUCTION During the 4 fiscal years 1970 through 1973, State and local governments directly expended an estimated $813 million for administering elec- tions. Of this total $744 million was for current expenditure and $69 million was for capital out- lay. The fiscal year distribution of this total expenditure was $217 million in 1973, $231 mil- lion in 1972, $183 million in 1971, and $182 mil- lion in 1970. Direct expenditure of the 50 State governments, 54 selected large counties, and 47 selected large cities presented individually in this report amounted to $401 million or 49. 3 per- cent of the total. government fiscal years end in all months, with predominant ending dates of December 31 and June 30; accordingly, the local data span the 54 months from July 1, 1969 through December 31, 1973. The 4-year reference period accommodates the cyclical nature of elections in that it includes a Presidential election, two congressional elec- tions, and covers most State and local general elections. Data collection These figures are the results of a sample survey conducted by the Bureau of the Census for the Office of Federal Elections, U.S. General Accounting Office. The purpose of the survey was to provide benchmark estimates of public expenditure for election administration. Detailed tabulations of the survey results begin on page 5. SURVEY METHODOLOGY-SOURCES AND LIMITATIONS OF DATA Survey coverage The survey covered all State governments and a scientifically selected, stratified, random sam- ple of approximately 3,500 counties, cities, and townships. From the universe of governments established in the 1972 Census of Governments, 2 local governments within each State were selec- ted for the survey on the basis of population, responsibility for administering elections, and expenditure for general control purposes. Survey reference period The figures in this report reflect govern- mental expenditure during the 4 fiscal years 1970, 1971, 1972, and 1973. For State govern- ments this generally covers the 12 -month period ending on June 30 of the respective years. 3 Local 1 Counties presented are those with a 1970 pop- ulation of 500,000 or more; cities are those with a 1970 population of 300,000 or more. 2 The Bureau of the Census is required, by law, to conduct a Census of Governments every 5 years in years ending in "2" and "7." An overview of the statistical output of the 1972 Census is found in Volume 8, Guide to the 197 2 Census of Govern- ment s . 3 For New York State, the fiscal year ends March 31^ for Texas, August 31; and for Alabama, September 30. The data for this report were obtained mainly through a mail canvass, supplemented by compi- lation of data from financial documents available at the Bureau of the Census, and extensive writ- ten and telephone communication with State and local officials. Each questionnaire was reviewed by Bureau professional staff and subjected to intensive examination for completeness, consis- tency, and accuracy. Any discrepancies detected were clarified and resolved through direct tele- phone contact with individual respondents. Limitations of data The sample selected to develop election ex- penditure figures is one of all possible samples of the same size that could have been chosen using the same sampling design. Estimates de- rived from these different samples would differ from each other, and also from the result of a complete census using the same data collection procedures. This variation among all possible estimates is sampling error. To provide a measure of how closely the statewide estimates approximate the expected results from a census, a single statewide rela- tive standard error was developed for each State (except Hawaii in which a local sample was un- necessary). Table A below shows that the rela- tive standard error ranged from less than 2 per- cent to 7.5 percent, with 45 of the 49 States presented reflecting a relative standard error of 3. 9 percent or less. The implication of these calculations is that there is a two out of three probability that the estimated election administration expenditure total in a given State is within the percent indica- ted (plus or minus) of the total that would be ob- tained from a complete census. The data presented in tables 3, 4, and 5 for individual States, large counties, and large cities are not subject to sampling error. INTRODUCTION Table A. Relative Standard Error of Statewide Aggregate Election Administration Expenditure Estimates, by State 2 percent 2.0 percent to 4 percent to or less 3.99 percent 7 . 5 percent Alaska Alabama Iowa Arkansas Arizona Minnesota California Connecticut Mississippi Colorado Georgia North Dakota Delaware Illinois Florida Indiana Idaho Kansas Maryland Kentucky Missouri Louisiana Nevada Maine New Jersey Massachusetts Michigan New Mexico Montana New York Nebraska North Carolina New Hampshire Ohio Oklahoma Oregon South Carolina Pennsylvania South Dakota Rhode Island Texas Tennessee Vermont Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming Wisconsin The estimated data are also subject to the inaccuracies in classification, response, and processing that would occur if a complete census had been conducted under the same conditions as the sample. Every effort was made to keep such errors to a minimum through care in examining, editing, and tabulating the data submitted by government officials. Followup procedures were used extensively to clarify inadequate and incon- sistent survey returns. In addition, for the governments for which data were compiled at the Bureau of the Census from financial documents, expenditure for em- ployee benefits was usually not available from the documents. Further, school and special dis- tricts, which may conduct and pay for their own elections, were excluded on the premise that the additional expenditure of these governments would be relatively insignificant. Moreover, since many of the activities com- prising election administration are components of larger governmental activities, respondents sometimes had to provide their best estimates of the share of costs attributable to elections and voter registration. Also worthy of note is the 4-year collection period which required a review of records dating back to July of 1969. While every effort was made to ensure accurate fiscal year reporting, it is reasonable to expect that some governments provided data covering other fiscal years. Definition of terms Election Administration for this survey in- cludes all State and local governmental activities related to registering voters and conducting all National, State, and local elections. It excludes selection of officials by appointment or other means not involving the general public. Voter registration includes preparation, maintenance, and distribution of lists of eligible voters; oper- ation of registration offices; publicity concern- ing registration times and places; and all other related activities. Conduct of elections consists of procurement of supplies and equipment; hiring, training, and assignment of personnel; tabula = tion of election results; challenge, recount, and certification procedures; statistical, publication, and reporting activities; and all other tasks re- lated to the conduct of elections. Expenditure includes money paid from all funds for election administration purposes (net of correcting transactions). Retirement of debt and dollar value of in -kind services are excluded. Included are the salaries of temporary personnel such as precinct workers, as well as appropriate shares of salaries of regular government em- ployee s (municipal and county clerks for example) who participate in the conduct of elections or voter registration. Intergovernmental Expenditure comprises payments from one government to another gov- ernment in connection with the conduct of elec- tions or voter registration. Included are rental fees paid to another government for use of facil- ities and payment to another government for services performed on a reimbursable or cost- sharing basis. Direct Expenditure comprises all expenditure other than intergovernmental expenditure. Current Expenditure includes all employee salaries, wages, fees and commissions; benefits paid on behalf of employees; reimbursement for travel; and other related costs. Also included are all costs relating to such office operations as rentals of voting machines, other equipment, and office space, purchase of supplies and ma- terials, and contracted services. Capital Outlay includes the purchase or lease - purchase of voting machines, computers, and other equipment with an expected life of more than 5 years. Also included are the purchase of land and buildings and construction of facilities used for elections. Fiscal Year refers to the 12-month govern- mental accounting period. General Control is that governmental func- tion which includes the governing body, the office of the chief executive, central staff services, INTRODUCTION and agencies concerned with personnel adminis- tration, law, zoning, recording and like activi- ties. This definition is presented only because of the relationship of general control expendi- tures to sample selection. The term is not otherwise involved in the conduct of the survey- or the presentation of data. GOVERNMENTAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR ELECTION ADMINISTRATION An analysis of State statutes, program and budget descriptions and survey findings indicate generally that responsibility for the actual oper- ations of registering voters and conducting elec- tions lies with the county or city, and in some States the town, which function within a legal, administrative and supervisory framework es- tablished by the State government. This general division of responsibility is marked by consid- erable interstate diversity in the particular type(s) of local government having the greatest degree of responsibility for election administra- tion and the degree of activity exercised by indi- vidual State governments. While the primary purpose of the survey was not to determine precisely the division of re- sponsibility for election administration between the State and local governments, the following gen- erally describes their respective roles based on information developed in the course of the survey. State governments Three State governments, Alaska, Hawaii, and Delaware have a major responsibility for fi = nancing and directly administering election ac- tivities. This direct participation takes place in different ways. The State of Alaska, for ex- ample, maintains a statewide voter registration system and is responsible for conducting all statewide elections. The State of Delaware ad- ministers all countywide elections and voter reg- istration programs through three regional offices located in the three counties in the State. In Hawaii, the State government purchases all elec- tion equipment, pays for statewide elections not held concurrently with county elections, shares the costs with counties when they are held con- currently, and administers special voter regis- tration programs. and Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Michigan, Mis- souri, Nevada, Ohio, and Oregon which compen- sated local governments for special statewide elections. Arkansas, Louisiana, Oregon, Rhode Island, and Tennessee reported expenditure for the purchase of voting machines; and Kentucky, Oregon, North Carolina, and Virginia maintain computerized State level voter registration systems. The unusually large current expenditure by the State of Texas in fiscal year 1972 reflects payments under a new law to the political parties for conducting primary elections. Prior to the passage of the law, political parties financed primary elections through candidates ' filing fees. A report of State election administration ex- penditure was not available for Arizona, Idaho, Iowa, North Dakota, and South Dakota. Supple- mentary research indicated that Arizona has specific election responsibilities, including printing and publicity for constitutional amend- ments and referendums , while the other States appear to have relatively few election-related responsibilities. Local governments In 3 1 States 4 the responsibility for conducting Federal, State, and other countywide elections generally lies with the counties. Municipalities and town(ship)s in these States usually conduct their own purely local elections, occasionally reimbursing the county for providing various election services or equipment; or may consoli- date their elections with counties on a cost- sharing basis. In some States town(ship) elec- tions are conducted and paid for by the counties. In nine States counties are responsible for conducting countywide elections andmost munic- ipal and town(ship) elections. Municipal and town(ship) expenditure in these States usually represents reimbursement to the county for elec- tion services. In some cases, particularly for townships, the county may assume all cost. In the six New England States 6 and the State of Michigan, the major responsibility for elec- tion administration lies with municipalities and towns. Several other States do not have direct re- sponsibility for administering elections but participate significantly by providing financial assistance or services to local governments. Alabama, Kentucky, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and South Carolina regularly provide financial as- sistance to local governments to defray the costs of voter registration and elections. Louisiana also assumes the costs of all statewide elections. Other States which reported intergovernmental payments include Pennsylvania, which reimburses counties for the processing of military ballots, Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colo- rado, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Louisi- ana, Maryland, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming. 5 Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky , Pennsylvania, Wash- ington and Ohio; and beginning in 1973, Iowa, North Carolina and Oregon. Connecticut , Maine, Massachusetts, New Hamp- shire, Rhode Island, and Vermont. SUMMARY 5 Table 1. Four- Year Summary of Election Administration Direct Expenditure of State and Local Governments by Level of Government: Fiscal Years 1970, 1971, 1972 and 1973 (Amounts in thousands of dollars. Because of rounding, detail may not add to totals) te and level of government Capital outlay 1970 to 1973 United States, total. State governments.. Local governments.. Alabama State government . . Local governments . State government.. Local governments . Arizona State government.. Local governments. State government.. Local governments . California State government . . Local governments. Colorado State government.. Local governments. Connecticut State government.. Local governments . Delaware State government.. Local governments. Florida State government.. Local governments. Georgia State government.. Local governments . Hawaii State government . . Local governments. Idalio State government . . Local governments. Illinois 3 State government.. Local governments . Indiana State government.. Local governments. State government.. Local governments. Kansas State government.. Local governments. Kentucky State government.. Local governments. Louisiana State government.. Local governments . Maine State government.. Local governments . Maryland State government.. Local governments . 812,646 42,228 770,417 7,732 7,732 2,274 1,800 474 5,638 (HA) 5,638 2,941 114 2,826 111,608 2,212 109,396 7,281 143 7,138 13,116 921 12,195 29,741 377 29,364 13,259 1,446 11,813 2,808 1,718 1,090 1,792 (NA) 1,792 68,287 181 68,106 16,563 234 16,329 9,226 (NA) 9,226 7,521 222 7,299 7,596 948 6,648 10,418 5,888 4,530 2,160 544 1,616 12,995 649 12,346 743,707 39,968 703,738 6,030 6,030 2,253 1,800 453 4,962 (NA) 4,'Jli2 102,701 2,212 100,489 6,152 130 6,022 24,519 363 24,156 11,152 1,446 9,706 1 , 500 (NA) 1 , 500 14,929 234 14,695 7,619 (NA) 7,619 7,304 222 7,082 6,437 945 5,492 9,226 4,758 4,468 11,828 649 11,179 68,938 2,260 66,678 1,702 1,702 676 (NA) 676 936 936 8,907 8,907 1,129 13 1,116 756 756 76 76 5,222 14 5,208 2,107 2,107 394 394 292 (NA) 292 5,427 5,427 1,607 (NA) 1,607 217 217 1,159 3 1,156 203,161 10,557 192,604 569 450 118 1,409 (NA) 1 , 409 27,902 553 27,349 3.279 230 3.048 1,167 1,167 702 429 273 448 (NA) 448 4,141 59 4,082 2,307 (NA) 2,307 1,880 55 1,824 1,899 237 1,662 2,605 1,472 1,132 540 136 404 3,249 162 3,086 Massachuset State gov. Local gov Michigan. . . State gov. Minnesota State government. Local governments Mississippi State government. Local governments Missouri State government. Local governments Montana State government. Local governments Nebraska State government. Local governments Nevada State government. Local governments New Hampshire State government. Local governments New Jersey State government. Local governments New Mexico State government. Local governments New York State government. Local governments North Carolina State government. Local governments North Dakota State government. Local governments Ohio State government. Local governments Oklahoma State government. Local governments Oregon State government. Local governments Pennsylvania State government. Local governments Rhode Island State government. Local governments South Carolina State government. Local governments South Dakota State government . Local governments State government. Local governments 23,295 3,646 19,649 27,111 882 26,229 5,839 5,839 19,369 706 18,663 3,124 16 3,108 1,419 227 1,192 102, 141 917 101,524 9,541 308 9,233 2,513 (NA) 2,513 6 , 040 1,072 4,968 9,732 2,209 7,523 52,636 689 51,947 5,174 2,114 3,060 4,509 2,028 2,481 1,704 (NA) 1,704 9,659 510 9,149 22, 170 3,646 18,824 24,178 882 23,296 6,313 210 6,103 5,419 5,419 18,741 706 18,035 2,824 16 2,808 5,774 74 5,700 2,300 35 2,265 39,121 170 38,951 98, 923 917 98,006 8,585 308 8,277 2,260 (NA) 2,260 60,659 934 59,725 5,567 1,070 4,497 8,668 1,981 6,687 47,678 688 46,990 5,147 2,107 3,040 3,733 2,028 1,705 1,599 (NA) 1,599 825 825 2,933 2,933 441 441 420 420 628 628 300 300 500 500 1,211 21 1,105 1,105 222 222 3,518 3,518 956 956 253 (NA) 253 2,312 2,312 473 2 471 1,064 228 836 4,958 1 4,957 See footnotes at end of table 6 ELECTION ADMINISTRATION EXPENDITURE Table 1. Four- Year Summary of Election Administration Direct Expenditure of State and Local Governments by Level of Government: Fiscal Years 1970, 1971, 1972 and 1973— Continued (Amounts in thousands of dollars. Because of rounding, detail may not add to totals) 1970 to 1973 Texas Local governments Utah State government. Local governments Vermont State gove Local governmi State governmi Local governmi Note: See text for informat - Represents zero or rounds NA Not available. 'Data on direct costs are no 2 Excludes personnel costs. 3 Current expenditure include 19.092 2,656 16,436 14,556 2,656 1 1 , 900 4,536 4,536 1,716 1,716 4,773 664 4,109 2,780 147 2,633 Washington State government West Virginia State government Local government: Wisconsin State government Local government: Wyoming State government Local government: 19,777 1,993 17,784 10,731 210 10,521 18,037 1,993 16,044 9,403 210 9,193 1,740 1,740 38 38 1,328 1,328 23G 236 4,944 498 4,446 1,126 14 1,112 2,683 53 2,630 341 14 available, only the Ele Law Revlslo STATE AND LEVEL OF GOVERNMENT 7 Table 2. Election Administration Direct Expenditure of State and Local Governments by Level of Government: Fiscal Years 1970, 1971, 1972 and 1973 (Amounts in thousands of dollars. Because of rounding, detail may not add to totals) State and level Capita] outlay United State Alabama State government 1 . Local governments. Arizona State government . Local governments Arkansas State government. Local governments Colorado State government. Local governments Connecticut State government . Delaware State government. . Local governments. District of Columbia Local governments. Georgia State government 2 Local governments Hawaii State government . Local governments State government . Local governments Illinois State government 3 Local governments Indiana State government . Local governments Iowa State government. Local governments State government . Local governments Kentucky State government . Local governments Louisiana State government . Local governments Maine State government . Local governments Maryland State government . Local governments Massachusetts State government . Local governments 915 145 ,404 (NA) ,404 ,075 876 ,199 ,578 263 ,315 745 726 ,096 105 ,991 759 461 298 ,264 ,344 ,516 ,397 ,119 528 148 380 ,469 202 ,267 ,779 ,739 ,040 193,699 13,515 180,184 1,060 915 145 2,186 (NA) 2,186 30,089 876 29,213 1,191 39 1,152 3.331 263 3,068 740 721 7,554 105 7,449 2,528 408 2,120 759 461 298 147 (NA) 147 9,356 954 1,943 (NA) 1,943 2,323 580 1,743 2,409 1,292 1,117 506 147 359 2,990 202 2,788 6,480 1,739 4.741 23,073 1,215 21,858 218 (NA) 218 307 3,986 3,986 478 4 474 247 1,542 1,542 908 390 390 346 479 479 231,101 10,785 220,314 378 246 132 1,055 (NA) 1,055 1,029 27,840 459 27,381 3,255 240 3,015 8,434 124 8,310 4,175 291 3,884 841 (NA) 8 ! 1 23,396 130 33,266 3,201 (NA) 3,201 2,509 30 2,479 1,758 192 1 56g 631 130 501 3,677 150 3,527 6,630 595 6,035 213,550 10,187 203 ,363 368 246 122 887 (NA) 887 26,018 459 25,559 2 , 800 396 7,140 112 7,028 3,763 291 3 , 472 689 (NA) 689 21,177 130 21,047 2,801 (NA) 2,443 1,432 192 1,240 2,438 617 130 487 3,395 150 3,245 6,336 595 5,741 17,5 49 598 16,95 2 (NA) I 68 242 1,822 1,282 412 152 (NA) 152 2,219 435 435 400 182,836 9,951 17 2,884 554 458 1,425 (NA) 1 ,425 28,620 530 28,090 3,296 221 3,075 529 516 396 ,206 2,322 405 1,917 844 518 326 240 15,123 20 15,103 4,182 1,183 (NA) 1,183 1,507 135 1,372 2,236 1,182 1,054 446 109 337 4,162 256 3,906 5,515 1,155 4,360 168,936 9,861 159,075 549 458 1,141 (NA) 1,141 26,664 530 26,134 ,131 221 ,910 396 4,958 1,980 405 1,575 8 I I 518 326 175 (NA) 175 3,688 54 3,634 816 (NA) 816 1,429 135 1,294 2,216 1,181 1,035 433 109 324 3,956 256 3,700 5,380 1,155 13,899 90 13,809 284 (NA) 284 212 1,956 1,956 138 3 135 165 1,248 1 1.247 (NA) 932 494 367 (NA) 367 308 308 181,938 6,762 175,176 754 (NA) 754 987 197 790 331 317 3,781 342 3,439 471 235 236 513 (NA) 513 19,473 5,009 2,553 (NA) 1,996 1 ,487 2,170 1,046 1,124 554 156 398 167,5 24 6,406 161,118 748 (NA) 748 ,931 348 ,583 , X5S 197 ,661 2,881 342 2,539 371 135 236 i na ; IS'I 2,059 (NA) 2,059 1,983 1,220 2,163 1,040 1,123 549 154 395 4,274 157 4.117 at end of table 8 ELECTION ADMINISTRATION EXPENDITURE Table 2. Election Administration Direct Expenditure of State and Local Governments by Level of Government: Fiscal Years 1970, 1971, 1972 and 1973— Continued (Amounts in thousands of dollars. Because of rounding, detail may not add to totals) State and level of government Capita] outlay seal year 1971 Capital outlay Capital outlay Capital outlay State gove Local gove State government. Local governments Mississippi State government. Local governments Missouri State government. Local governments Montana State government. Local governments Nebraska State government. Local governments New Hampshire State gover Local gover New Jersey . . . State gover Local gover New York State government . Local governments North Carolina State government . Local governments North Dakota State government. Local governments Local governments. Oklahoma State government. . Local governments. Oregon State government. . Local governments . Pennsylvania State government.. Local governments. Rhode Island State government . . Local governments. South Carolina State government . . Local governments. South Dakota State government . . Local governments. Tennessee State government.. Local governments. 791 5,375 221 1,167 87 87 134 1,080 432 1,366 432 1,366 057 2,774 641 123 518 1,342 233 1,109 2,810 126 2,684 588 (NA) 588 5,159 334 5,825 1,657 334 1,323 J, 532 550 1,982 5,644 109 5,535 1,475 680 ,-') ■, L,604 671 933 197 (NA) 197 ',880 107 2,773 5,854 370 5,484 68 1 1,517 20 1,497 846 846 276 13 263 10,958 2,573 126 2,447 514 (NA) 514 15,611 334 15,277 1,564 332 1,232 2,325 550 1,775 13,536 108 13,428 1,469 r,7'l 790 1,223 671 151 NA 15 I 3,745 370 3,375 1,246 237 (NA) 74 i 18 207 2,107 725 320 73 247 023 6 017 673 l'l 654 605 17 588 515 70 445 10,530 761 144 61 7 25,145 200 24,945 761 (NA) 761 18,340 211 18,129 1,598 245 1,353 2,656 728 1,928 12,767 222 12,545 1,277 457 820 I i'l 398 541 361 2,109 679 (NA) 7,805 2,218 5,587 7,883 254 7,629 2,228 55 2,173 1,445 1,445 6,150 73 6,077 'i. 'i'l 6 933 1,595 19 1,576 451 17 434 505 70 435 10,247 45 10,202 709 I I I 565 24,620 200 24,420 691 (NA) 691 17,742 211 17,531 1,509 245 1,264 2,373 500 1,873 12,272 222 12,050 1,272 457 815 850 3' 18 452 .-..7 (NA) 657 6,134 2,218 3,916 806 I 1 7 117 280 280 170 170 • :■ ■ 316 316 70 .NA 70 598 598 NA 276 1,671 ,015 205 ,810 1,304 1,683 1,683 3,642 84 3,558 709 707 1,304 1,573 276 76 200 9,372 40 9,332 513 93 420 23,994 274 23,720 2,193 595 (NA) 595 13,559 1,481 2,284 473 1,811 12,370 177 12,193 1,494 664 830 1,254 600 654 134 (NA) 134 2,524 121 2,403 2,309 27 2,282 4,459 205 4,254 1,122 1,621 1,621 3,536 84 3,452 680 678 1,296 18 1,278 720 1 719 274 9,292 457 93 364 23,078 544 M 544 13,148 203 12,945 1,335 271 1,064 1,944 473 1,471 11,453 177 11,276 1,489 664 825 1,031 600 431 1 1 7 N\ 1 117 2,155 2,116 61 1 1 lis 146 ! IN 340 917 7,368 175 7,193 1,816 rri 6,351 511 5,840 1,404 17 1,387 569 (NA) 569 14,710 186 14 ,524 2 ,260 458 1,802 11,854 181 11,673 ,,._. s 3 1 3 615 712 359 ! . I 691 NA 694 1,568 3,125 6,213 175 6,038 1,756 28 1,728 987 987 6,282 511 5,771 517 4 513 1,366 17 1,349 28 I 17 266 343 51 1 511 14,158 186 13,972 1,160 222 938 2,026 458 1,568 10,417 181 10,236 917 :n7 i.lii 629 i ,'i 270 674 (NA) 674 1,312 2,562 1,155 1 ,155 I 32 1 i'j 833 'A'S 198 58 NA 58 552 145 234 NA STATE AND LEVEL OF GOVERNMENT 9 Table 2. Election Administration Direct Expenditure of State and Local Governments by Level of Government: Fiscal Years 1970, 1971, 1972 and 1973— Continued (Amounts in thousands of dollars. Because of rounding, detail may not add to totals) Capita] outlay il year 1972 Capital outlay Capl l.il outlay Utah. . . State Local gove Virginia Washingt State I Local gove West Virgin! State gove Local gove Wyoming State govei Local govei Note: See - Represet NA Not avs 1 Data on c 2 Excludes 3 Current c 240 228 208 3,378 5,985 1,279 4,706 1,289 2,375 56 2,319 385 ,546 ,279 ,267 ,263 ,034 56 ,978 317 iniormati rounds t 961 295 6,120 1,406 ,383 ,340 31 estimated data 904 904 118 202 13 189 2,421 94 2,327 3,724 571 3,153 982 18 964 1,790 I 1 7 198 1,483 51 1,432 (NA) 226 803 226 1,976 3,867 62 3,805 821 19 802 2,838 197 225 292 292 10 ELECTION ADMINISTRATION EXPENDITURE Table 3. Election Administration Expenditure of State (Amounts in thousands of dollars. Because Expenditure, fiscal ye Capital outlay Intergov- ernmental Total. Alabama 1 Alaska Arkansas California. . Colorado Connecticut . Delaware .... Florida Georgia 2 .... Hawaii Idaho Illinois 3 . . . Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky .... Louisiana... Maine Maryland .... Massachusett: Michigan. . . . Minnesota . . . Mississippi . Missouri Montana Nebraska .... Nevada v Hampshin New Jersey . . New Mexico . . New York. . . . rth Caroli: North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma .... Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolii South Dakota Tennessee . . . Texas Utah Vermont 2 .... Virginia. .. . Washington . . West Virgini; Wisconsin . . . Wyoming - Represents zer NA Not available *Data on direct 2 Excludes person 3 Current expend i 3,069 1,805 (NAj 143 921 1 ,983 1 ,021 1 ,446 ] ,864 (NA) 10 ,358 234 (NA) 222 2 ,282 14 ,987 544 693 3 ,646 2 ,839 252 227 170 471 917 308 (NA) 1,917 3,092 2,809 729 2,113 2,898 ■ in 7,670 588 1,993 39,968 1,800 (NA) 114 2,212 130 921 1,907 363 1,446 1,324 (NA) 181 234 (NA) 222 945 4,758 540 649 3,646 882 210 471 917 308 (NA) i.l I 2,107 2,028 NA 122 2,656 1,993 NA NA 388 36,890 3,069 5 (NA) 146 (NA) 10,177 1,334 9,099 2,020 600 5,014 653 915 (NA) 263 726 105 408 537 NA I, V. 5,310 148 202 1,739 248 ',ii 123 233 126 (NA) 826 1,045 850 135 l.Si K<)1 NA 107 1 ,482 915 (NA) 461 NA 37 •>8(l 1,292 147 202 1,739 248 50 123 233 126 NA 334 332 550 lux i,7'l 671 (NA) 208 1,279 NA , 6,604 653 (NA) NA NA (NA) 76 '913 (NA) 71 1 300 26 220 1,112 /allable. lly the Election Law Revision Com STATE EXPENDITURE Governments: Fiscal Years 1970, 1971, 1972 and 1973 of rounding, detail may not add to totals) 11 Expenditure, f seal year 1972 Expenditure, fi seal year 1971 Expenditure, f seal year 1970 u Total Current Capital Intergov- Total Current Capital Intergov- Total Current Capital Intergov- £2 outlay ernmental outlay ernmental outlay ernmental id 20,262 10,187 598 9,477 20,326 9,861 90 10,375 17,196 6,406 356 10,435 i 1,105 _ - 1,105 471 _ _ 471 840 _ _ 840 2 249 246 - 3 458 458 - - 184 181 - 3 3 (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) 1 33 33 - - 26 26 - - 23 23 - - 5 459 459 " " 530 530 - " 348 348 - " 6 37 34 3 - 33 30 3 _ 31 28 3 _ 7 240 240 - - 221 221 - - 197 197 - - 8 425 382 42 - 516 510 7 - 317 294 23 - 9 768 112 12 644 58 57 1 - 90 90 - - 10 291 291 - " 405 405 " " 342 342 - " 11 503 209 294 _ 588 518 _ 70 235 135 100 _ 1? (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) 13 130 130 - - 3,680 20 - 3,660 6,529 11 - 6,517 14 54 54 - - 54 54 - - 49 49 - - 15 (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) 16 30 30 - - 135 135 - - 20 20 _ _ 17 599 192 - 407 520 94 - 426 504 79 - 425 18 3,945 1,245 18 2,682 3,556 1,181 1 2,374 2,176 1,040 6 1,130 19 130 130 - - 109 109 1 - 156 154 2 - 20 150 150 " " 300 256 " 44 41 41 " " 21 595 595 _ _ 1,155 1,155 - _ 157 157 . _ 22 2,212 254 - 1,957 205 205 - - 175 175 - - 23 55 55 - - 53 39 - 14 31 28 - 3 24 - - - - - - - - - - - - 25 73 73 - - 851 84 - 767 543 511 " 33 26 6 6 - - 2 2 - _ 4 4 _ _ 27 19 19 - - 18 18 - - 17 17 - - 28 36 17 - 19 28 1 - 27 17 17 - - 29 70 70 - - 76 76 - - 68 68 - - 30 45 45 " " 40 40 " " 35 35 " " 31 144 144 - - 93 93 _ _ 110 110 _ _ 32 200 200 - - 274 274 - - 210 210 - - 33 64 64 - - 62 62 - - 55 55 - - 34 (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) 35 702 211 ~ 492 203 203 " " 186 186 - " 36 563 245 - 318 989 271 _ 718 495 222 _ 273 37 1,028 500 228 300 473 4 73 - - 458 458 - - 38 225 222 - 3 185 177 - 8 184 181 - 3 39 457 457 - - 664 664 - - 313 307 6 - 40 618 398 " 220 815 600 " 215 574 359 " 215 41 (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) 42 40 40 - - 121 44 77 - 242 25 217 - 43 3,546 2,218 - 1,327 1,608 27 - 1,581 1,035 42 - 993 44 - - - - 5 5 - - - - - - 45 19 19 " " 13 13 " - 3 3 " " 46 232 232 - _ 94 94 _ _ 55 55 _ _ 47 81 81 - - 571 5J1 - - 62 62 - - 48 13 13 - - 18 18 - - 19 19 - - 49 53 53 - - 51 51 - - 50 50 - - 50 20 20 " " (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) 17 17 " - 51 12 ELECTION ADMINISTRATION EXPENDITURE Table 4. Election Administration Expenditure of Selected Large (Amounts in thousands of dollars. Because County and State Expenditure, fi 1970-1973 Capital outlay Capital outlay Total Alemeda, Calif Allegheny, Pa Baltimore, Md Bergen, N.J Bexar, Tex Broward, Fla Contra Costa, Calif Cook, 111 Cuyahoga, Ohio Dade, Fla Dallas, Tex Delaware, Pa Erie, N.Y Essex, N.J Franklin, Ohio Fulton, Ga Hamilton, Ohio Harris, Tex Hennepin, Minn Hudson, N.J Jackson, Mo Jefferson, Ala Jefferson, Ky King, Wash Lake, Ind Los Angeles, Calif Macomb, Mich Maricopa, Ariz Middlesex, N.J Milwaukee, Wis Monroe, N.Y Montgomery, Md * Montgomery, Ohio Mon tgomery, Pa Multnomah, Oreg Nassau, N.Y Oakland, Mich Oklahoma, Okla Orange, Calif Pinellas, Fla Prince Georges, Md Sacramento, Calif St. Louis, Mo San Bernardino, Calif... San Diego, Calif San Mateo, Calif Santa Clara, Calif Shelby , Tenn Suffolk, N.Y Summit, Ohio Tarrant, Tex Union, N.J Wayne, Mich Westchester, N.Y Note: The four Massachus since they do not conduct el 4,743 8,859 1,881 4,005 464 2,221 3,283 18,624 13,321 3,323 826 2,472 5,658 4,346 4,682 1,638 5,857 1,668 210 4,595 2,401 759 4,235 1,387 2,370 1,736 2,050 8,717 260 578 5,453 1,888 779 ] ,268 437 460 1,551 745 578 2,489 161 105 1,336 3,537 479 1,082 119 758 1,053 1,799 3,139 1,584 1,554 742 1,519 1,175 1,260 434 1,660 549 1,131 2,412 4 79 1,082 119 664 957 1,496 2,952 1,289 101 619 1,487 1,175 1,202 520 514 2 39 2 39 584 484 1,936 1,92 3 130 130 197 1,161 680 680 124 124 079 1,079 481 386 656 583 534 530 534 533 172 95 ,944 1,677 941 713 584 311 540 529 830 735 943 935 ,401 2,153 877 651 ,110 1,078 703 703 ,529 1,272 638 636 131 131 734 665 205 1,122 303 187 294 1,453 123 ing a 1970 populatic •) we - Represents rounds to zer COUNTY EXPENDITURE County Governments: Fiscal Years 1970, 1971, 1972 and 1973 of rounding, detail may not add to totals) 13 Expe nditure, fi seal year 1972 Expenditure, fi seal year 1971 Expenditure, fi seal year 1970 - Total Current Capital outlay Intergov- ernmental Total Current Capital outlay Intergov- ernmental Total Current Capital outlay Intergov- ernmental c 3 67,776 62,235 5,194 228 51,555 47,635 3,740 181 53,532 49,978 3,367 187 i 1,515 968 547 - 1,371 1,370 1 - 1,300 1,274 26 _ 2 2,325 2,206 116 3 2,235 2,217 16 3 2,041 2,024 14 3 3 528 525 2 - 689 684 4 - 194 192 2 - 4 1,023 1,023 - - 999 984 15 - 1,266 916 350 - 5 183 183 " " 59 59 - - 104 104 " " 6 612 548 64 _ 805 585 220 _ 482 425 57 _ 7 1,016 655 361 - 911 909 2 - 765 763 1 - 8 8,561 7,883 678 - 1,871 1,871 - - 7,942 7,373 569 - 9 4,014 3,825 189 - 3,138 2,952 185 - 3,776 3,593 184 - 10 1,012 844 167 " 591 517 74 " 715 672 43 " 11 1,455 457 998 - 76 76 _ _ 230 192 38 _ 12 739 739 - - 609 609 - - 543 505 38 - 13 1,595 1,572 23 - 1,454 1,432 22 - 1,195 1,167 28 - 14 1,172 1,172 - - 1,012 1,012 - - 987 987 - - 15 1,603 1,535 68 " 1,112 944 168 " 1,182 1,000 181 " 16 581 547 34 _ 225 223 2 _ 450 449 1 _ 17 1,656 1,619 37 - 1,317 1,285 32 - 1,407 1,353 54 - 18 589 579 10 - 253 244 9 - 463 302 161 - 19 75 75 - - 59 59 - - 71 71 - - 20 1,155 1,155 " " 1,088 1,088 - " 1,014 1,014 - " 21 543 531 11 - 749 744 5 _ 638 612 26 _ 22 228 228 - - 199 140 59 - 153 152 1 - 23 341 2 39 101 - 377 273 104 - 338 248 90 - 24 2,825 2,433 392 - 1,362 1,345 17 - 1,712 1,616 97 - 25 747 747 - - 745 631 114 " 399 399 " " 26 9,299 9,226 72 - 9,867 8,707 1, 160 _ 6,763 6,726 37 _ 27 124 124 - - I 4 - - 71 71 - - I'M 413 260 153 - 540 482 58 - 126 126 - - 29 801 629 172 - 528 528 - - 492 492 - - 30 272 272 " " 96 96 " " 171 171 " - 31 1,124 1,120 3 - 1,162 1,069 93 _ 966 965 _ _ 32 485 388 97 - 475 445 30 - 255 168 88 - 33 781 772 - 9 528 481 45 2 535 534 - 1 34 457 449 8 - 395 393 2 - 364 364 - - 35 630 630 " " 630 445 185 " 651 442 209 " 36 2,691 2,348 220 124 1,991 1,89 1 - 98 2,211 1,898 196 116 37 157 157 - - 3 3 - - 98 98 - - 38 310 233 76 - 206 130 77 - 196 120 76 - 39 1,522 1,512 10 - 1,372 1,367 5 - 922 898 24 - 40 506 506 " - 606 302 304 " 631 368 263 " 41 369 282 87 - 576 428 147 _ 197 118 79 _ 42 540 496 44 - 461 421 39 - 457 452 5 - 43 1,419 1,321 98 - 768 766 2 - 1,071 1,069 2 - 1 1 934 907 27 - 809 808 1 - 685 684 1 _ 45 2,292 2,070 222 " 1,815 1,707 108 - 1,953 1,785 168 " 46 680 675 5 - 694 686 8 _ 619 614 5 _ 47 866 840 26 - 919 918 1 - 896 896 - - 48 371 371 - - 573 573 - - 264 264 - - 49 1,253 1,163 - 91 1,161 804 280 78 883 818 - 65 50 871 868 2 1 559 557 1 1 642 640 " 2 51 192 123 69 - 2 32 94 139 _ 345 111 2 34 _ 52 703 703 - - 643 636 7 - 533 513 20 - 53 886 886 - - 85 85 - - 692 692 - _ 54 616 616 " " 552 552 - " 479 479 " " 55 14 ELECTION ADMINISTRATION EXPENDITURE Table 5. Election Administration Expenditure of Selected Large (Amounts in thousands of dollars. Because City and State Expenditure, fiscal years 1970-73 Capital outlay Intergov- ernmental Capital outlay Intergov- ernmental Total Atlanta, Ga Baltimore, Md rmingham, Ala Boston, Mass Buffalo, N.V Lcago, 111 lcinnati, Ohio sveland, Ohio Columbus, Ohio Dallas, Tex. 1 Denver, Colo Detroit, Mich El Paso, Tex Fort Worth, Tex Honolulu, Hawaii Houston, Tex. 2 Indianapolis, Ind :ksonville, Fla isas City, Mo. a Long Beach, Calif Los Angeles, Calif Louisville, Ky . 4 Memph i s , Tenn Miami, Fla Milwaukee, wis uieapolis, Minn Nashville, Tenn Newark, N.J New Orleans, La » York, N.Y Norfolk, Va Oakland, Calif Oklahoma City, Okla Omaha, Nebr Philadelphia, Pa Phoenix, Ariz Portland, Oreg St. Louis, Mo . Paul, Minn San Antonio, Tex i Diego, Calif i Francisco, Calif i Jose, Calif Seattle, Wash Toledo, Ohio Tulsa, Okla Washington, D.C - Represents zero or rounds to zero. NA Not available. 'intergovernmental expenditures for fis intergovernmental expenditures for fis 3 Reflects intergovernmental payments to Expenditures are for voter registratio 204 3,303 157 3,471 1,587 19,602 249 1,103 403 263 2,510 4,801 99 1 1 1 777 681 3,238 2,192 1,555 Tio 5,368 467 350 105 2,355 1,144 871 334 904 3,273 157 3,460 1,395 IK, 090 2 457 4 790 72 114 777 625 3 238 2 082 467 254 105 1,555 1,130 871 334 904 40,920 5,278 5,189 860 841 175 152 638 9 3,775 3,775 289 221 1,488 169 257 - 243 243 1,593 1,593 192 1,512 6,712 204 1 l'i 1,103 1,317 257 1970, 1971, 1972 1970 and 1973 are Clay, and Platte 193 106 139 530 1,578 442 373 522 12 1 369 361 276 275 39 39 179 179 14,191 13,983 174 4,701 816 155 472 H|'l 408 509 ,576 1 12 373 51 'i 1,946 201 CITY EXPENDITURE City Governments: Fiscal Years 1970, 1971, 1972 and 1973 of rounding, detail may not add to totals) 15 Expenditure, f iscal year 1972 Expenditure, i isoal year 1971 Expenditure, fi seal year 1970 u Total Current Capital outlay Intergov- ernmental Total Current Capital outlay Intergov- ernmental Total Current Capital outlay Intergov- ernmental 0> s 32,857 30,052 1,070 1,736 34, 566 32,472 7 36 1,357 29,481 25,835 1 ,975 1,672 1 3 - _ 3 _ . . _ _ _ _ . 2 1,232 1,201 - 30 998 998 - - 437 437 - - 3 58 58 - - - - - - 56 56 - - 4 1,075 1,07 5 - - 795 795 - - 7 51 740 11 - 5 408 315 93 " 423 331 91 - 347 340 7 " 6 5,356 4,594 762 _ 7,324 7, 187 138 _ 3,975 3,632 343 _ 7 76 - - 76 37 - - 37 95 - - 95 8 180 - - 180 395 - - 395 334 - - 334 9 128 - - 128 34 - - 34 136 - - 136 10 50 50 - - 74 74 " - " " - " 11 743 738 5 _ 613 613 - _ 625 597 28 _ 12 846 840 6 - 1,186 1,185 1 - 1,190 1,188 2 - 13 16 11 - 4 34 25 - 9 - - - - 14 19 19 - - 22 22 - - 29 29 - - 15 116 116 " " 270 270 " " 164 16 1 " " 16 2 2 _ _ 145 89 _ 56 92 92 . - 17 1,019 1,019 - - 912 912 - - 934 934 - - 18 599 595 4 - 554 554 - - 517 414 104 - 19 246 - - 246 580 - - 580 306 - - 30S 20 193 193 " " 115 115 " " 11 11 " " 21 500 480 _ 21 2,274 2,240 _ 34 212 198 _ 13 22 129 129 - - 138 138 - - 112 112 - - 23 213 160 - 53 56 42 - 14 28 21 - 7 24 45 44 - - - - - - 50 50 - - 25 696 499 197 - 520 316 203 " 618 408 210 " 26 27 7 275 - 2 275 273 _ 2 222 220 _ 2 27 279 279 - - 237 237 - - 80 80 - - 28 40 40 - - 34 34 - - 222 222 - - 29 201 201 - - 240 240 - - 283 283 - - 30 9,032 9,032 " • 9,421 9,421 " " 8,539 8,484 55 " 31 105 105 - - 101 101 _ _ 125 121 1 _ 32 19 13 - 6 110 76 - 34 -. - - - 33 18 - - 18 - - - - 46 - - 46 34 22 - - 22 - - - - 12 - - 12 35 3,783 3,783 " " 3,904 3,603 301 " 4,442 3,241 1,201 " 36 180 177 - 3 60 54 - 6 268 239 _ 29 37 49 3 - 46 10 1 - 8 13 2 - 11 38 1,911 1,908 3 - 899 899 - - 1,828 1,827 1 _ 39 281 277 1 4 27 5 275 - - 237 222 10 5 40 - - - - 91 79 - 12 2 2 - - 41 335 2 - 333 33 2 " 31 238 2 " 235 42 1,211 1,211 _ . 682 682 _ _ 1,067 1,067 _ _ 43 13 3 - 10 110 98 - 12 12 12 - - 44 428 - - 428 171 95 - 76 416 74 2 340 45 123 - - 123 17 - - 17 100 - - 100 46 100 100 - - - - - - 116 116 - - 47 504 504 " " 396 396 " - 194 194 " " 48 U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1975 — 582-655/1192 CURRENT CONSTRUCTION REPORTS CONSTRUCTION accounts for approximately 12 percent of the gross national product! To assist industry representatives, research specialists, market analysts, and government officials interested in this vital segment of the Nation's economy, the Bureau of the Census issues monthly, quarterly, and annual reports on the value of new construction put in place, building permits, housing starts, housing completions, housing sales, alterations and repairs and demolition of residential structures. Current Construction Reports include: C20 - Housing Starts C22 - Housing Completions C25 - Sales of New One-Family Houses C30 - Value of New Construction Put in Place C40 - Housing Authorized by Building Permits and Public Contracts C41 - Authorized Construction- Washington, D.C. Area C45 - Permits Issued for Demolition of Residential Structures in Selected Cities C50 - Expenditures on Residential Additions, Alterations, Maintenance and Repairs, and Replacements For further information and a Publications Order Form, free of charge, on all the above reports, write to the Subscriber Services Section (Publications), Social and Economic Statistics Administration Washington, D.C. 20233 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE SUPERINTENDENT OF DOCUMENTS Washington, D.C. 20402 OFFICIAL BUSINESS FIRST CLASS MAIL »,..»" "ililif A00QD7mL jl L j3fl 0\-UTIO^