Alphabet Rights

Of all the congressional candidates out there, Dan Grant is certainly the one with whom I've had the most fun drinking. On top of that, he has an impressive record of experience and level of knowledge with the key foreign policy issues the country's facing. In short, very much the kind of guy who I would have liked to see take a seat. But he lost the primary campaign and failed to secure the Democratic nomination in Texas' 10th congressional district. Kriston Capps explains that he was done-in in part by having the alphabetically-determined second spot on the ballot.

It's become cliché to describe something or other as the last acceptable prejudice, but discrimination against the alphabetically challenged isn't even a prejudice. It's just a brute fact of life that some of us need to put up with. I feel bad for Dan, but frankly a "Grant" doesn't know squat about drawing the short end of the alphabetical stick compared to an "Yglesias." Back in grade school, poor Rachel Zabarkes was at least behind me in line for everything, but a few years back she got married and traded up to "Friedman." For generations, Yglesiases have considered abandoning our gallego roots and switching to the more orthodox "Iglesias" but for everyone else suffering at the end of the alphabet I chose to stand my ground and fight for justice.

Comments

If you abandon a few more layers of roots, you may even be able to trade up to the alphabetically superior and waspy "Church".

Posted by phil | March 13, 2008 10:01 AM

This is an issue that's not considered or studied nearly enough -- an effect so subtle it might not exist. (I'm serious; I'd like to see some studies.) I used to put it forward under the name of "W rights," but Bush has spoiled that name completely, and he's a beneficiary of alphabetical discrimination. He ruins everything.

[OTOH, though I think it's a real issue, claiming that you lost because ignorant first-time voters checked the first name on the ballot is kind of lame. Did the first name on the ballot win the other nineteen races?]

Posted by Matt Weiner | March 13, 2008 10:13 AM

whatever

Posted by Aron Abernathy | March 13, 2008 10:26 AM

Word. I have been pissed about this since kindergarten, when I learned that last names trumped first names.

Posted by Aaron S. Veenstra | March 13, 2008 10:28 AM

The Galicia wiki really gets down with the subtleties of language politics: Is Gellego a dialect of Portuguese? In independent language? One of the two (or three) languages of Gallego-Portuguese? And then, if you get to the back pages, there's the dialect of Leon. And then:

"Please, be careful with this people from Asturias and León. They only try to manipulate information for their fascist interest against Catalans, Basques and specially Galicians. They are activists of the Spanish neo-nazism. They hate Galicians."

It goes on....

Posted by John J Emerson | March 13, 2008 10:28 AM

Matt, I'm pretty sure I've read this is a real effect. When people don't know anything about a race, it helps to be marked "incumbent." Then at least, if you were majorly screwing up, people theorize they would have heard of you. (I use this philosophy when voting for things like "water board member," though I'm usually honest enough to leave blank anything I know nothing about.)

Barring an "incumbent," the next best thing is to be at the top of the list. It's a real effect, and why some ballots (like the ones in NY this year) randomize the order--because it is statistically advantageous to be (physically) the leftmost NY primary candidate. (This year that was Clinton.)

Over at Ben's blog someone had a post quoting Winston Churchill to the effect that nothing shakes your faith in democracy like a 5 minute conversation with an average voter.

The only Mallard Duck cartoon I ever loved: Please, if you had no idea an election was taking place today until you read it in the funny pages: Stay home.

Posted by Deborah | March 13, 2008 10:31 AM

Matt, I'm pretty sure I've read this is a real effect. When people don't know anything about a race, it helps to be marked "incumbent." Then at least, if you were majorly screwing up, people theorize they would have heard of you. (I use this philosophy when voting for things like "water board member," though I'm usually honest enough to leave blank anything I know nothing about.)

Barring an "incumbent," the next best thing is to be at the top of the list. It's a real effect, and why some ballots (like the ones in NY this year) randomize the order--because it is statistically advantageous to be (physically) the leftmost NY primary candidate. (This year that was Clinton.)

Over at Ben's blog someone had a post quoting Winston Churchill to the effect that nothing shakes your faith in democracy like a 5 minute conversation with an average voter.

The only Mallard Duck cartoon I ever loved: Please, if you had no idea an election was taking place today until you read it in the funny pages: Stay home.

Posted by Deborah | March 13, 2008 10:31 AM

They also get into the Galicia (Poland) / Galicia (Spain) disambiguation, though without mentioning that Galatea (Turkey, New Testament) is a dialect version of the same name.

Some say that the three Galicias will be unified one day, and control all the intervening territory.

Posted by John J Emerson | March 13, 2008 10:32 AM

My family's original surname was 'Zlotnik'-- I'm grateful that my immigrant grandparents changed it to 'F'.

Posted by MattF | March 13, 2008 10:43 AM

My mother once lost a school board primary election for being a "W."

This is one area where Ohio, of all states, has the best voting policy. The list of names is randomized, and each precinct gets a ballot with the candidate list in a different random order. On average, each candidate will be on top of the list on a roughly equal number of ballots cast.

Posted by Spike | March 13, 2008 11:00 AM

Try being at the top of the alphabet in Catholic schools -- year after year, class after class, sitting in the first seat of the first row right in front of the teacher. Never a break from the scrutiny of Big Brother.

Plus the other guy with an "A" name sat immediately behind me, and kept poking me in the back with sharpened pencils. He later became a dentist (true story!).

Posted by Greg Abbott | March 13, 2008 11:00 AM

The first-on-the-ballot effect is definitely real. Remember how in 2000 we all learned that in Florida, one of the perks of being governor is that the Presidential candidate of your party gets to be first on the ballot? They wouldn't have that rule if it didn't make a difference.

Posted by DonBoy | March 13, 2008 11:01 AM

...for everyone else suffering at the end of the alphabet I chose to stand my ground and fight for justice.

Bull. You're just choosing to revel in your victimization, like a typical liberal pinko America-hating scum. >ptoooie!

If your name began with an "I," you probably wouldn't even have this blog.

Posted by FearItself | March 13, 2008 11:05 AM

As beneficiary of the system, I resent your bringing this up. Why do you hate meritocracy? You are asking for the downfall of western civilization. Don't you know back when they were handing out last names they had an IQ/aptitude test? Don't you know that intelligence is heritable? (Just ask Charles Murray, whose family was in the middle of the pack.) Ergo we with names at the top DESERVE our priviledge.

Posted by Mr. B | March 13, 2008 11:10 AM

I don't mean to be a wanker, but there may be a bit of a substantive point here. If the hordes of first-time voters and independents that Obama brings to the polls don't pay attention to down-ballot races, that's a serious problem. Obviously we can't make apples-to-apples comparisons between now and the fall, but this is still slighty worrying.

Posted by Zeke | March 13, 2008 11:16 AM

Also, I agree. Alphabetism nust be stopped.

Posted by Zeke (W.) | March 13, 2008 11:18 AM

Also, I agree. Alphabetism nust be stopped.

Posted by Zeke (W.) | March 13, 2008 11:20 AM

Hence the reason that, for each contest in each election, the California Secretary of State does a random drawing of the candidates to determine ballot position. A candidate may suffer due to bad luck; but not due to a spelling choice centuries ago.

Posted by wj | March 13, 2008 11:23 AM

Wow this Zabarkes chick is an editor at National Review! She's the opposite of Matt! Eerie coincidence.

Posted by Random Dude | March 13, 2008 11:23 AM

In fact, we at the front of the alphabet really are innately superior. There's empirical evidence: for several decades, the first baseball player of all time alphabetically was also the career home run leader (Aaron), AND the first basketball of all time alphabetically was also the career scoring leader (Abdul Jabbar).

Posted by Abbott | March 13, 2008 11:33 AM

When I was a professor, I routinely called the roll in reverse alphabetical order. It wasn't much, but it was what I could do.

Posted by low-tech cyclist | March 13, 2008 11:45 AM

Actually, though the end of the alpahbet did have disadvantages in elementary school, it also bred solidarity. Me and K. Zanella and a few others were always together, and we could revel in or victimization. Meanwhile, all the losers with "M" and "P" were just part of the amorphous middle, without organization and without any sense of their identity.

Posted by D. Young | March 13, 2008 11:48 AM

Yglesias? Zabarkes? Ha! I post on behalf of a friend with the surname Zola. Try that on for alphabetically-determined suffering! Although it does get literary points, I suppose.

Posted by Jim | March 13, 2008 12:08 PM

As a resident of CD-10 and Grant supporter, I should point out that his opponent (Larry Joe Doherty) had a significant monetary advantage from his personal wealth. He was able to run tons of commercials, while I do not remember seeing a single commercial for Grant. I would like to think that the money advantage plus name recognition were the more significant reasons for Larry Joe's victory, but sadly being first on the ballot does factor in as well.

Posted by M. Tech | March 13, 2008 12:11 PM

What about a nameless ballot? Since we're using electronic voting machines, why not make the voter actually type the name of their candidate in? That way the people who are actually following the lesser-known local elections will be the only ones who can vote in those elections, and the "incumbent vs. unknown" and alphabetical advantages would mostly disappear? And if a voter can't type or is illiterate they can have a polling assistant help them just as they would with anyone else who had a special need.

Posted by Gabriel K. | March 13, 2008 12:16 PM

What about a nameless ballot? Since we're using electronic voting machines, why not make the voter actually type the name of their candidate in? That way the people who are actually following the lesser-known local elections will be the only ones who can vote in those elections, and the "incumbent vs. unknown" and alphabetical advantages would mostly disappear? And if a voter can't type or is illiterate they can have a polling assistant help them just as they would with anyone else who had a special need.

Posted by Gabriel K. | March 13, 2008 12:18 PM

Actually, there have been studies of this very effect for academics. There was a pretty good summary of some of this research on this effect over at Overcoming Bias about this. Wroth a read.

Posted by Shane | March 13, 2008 12:28 PM

I once was in a feminist bookstore in a university town. There was no clear order to the volumes. I asked the clerk why that was, and she said (with no humor, it goes without saying), "Alphabetizing is a patriarchal invention." So join the Sisters here too, dude.

Posted by JimA | March 13, 2008 12:38 PM

"Alphabetism" is a myth. Ballot order in Texas counties are determined by a random drawing. The original blogger got it wrong. Grant just had bad luck that day in Travis County. There's rarely a single, all encompassing explanation for an election loss. There are often several contributing factors, and they probably have more to do with the actual candidates and campaigns than fickle chance.

Posted by AAA Wrong | March 13, 2008 1:48 PM

"Alphabetism" is a myth. Ballot order in Texas counties is determined by random drawing. The original blogger got it wrong. Grant just had bad luck that day in Travis County. There's rarely a single, all encompassing explanation for an election loss. There are often several contributing factors, and they probably have more to do with the actual candidates and campaigns than fickle chance.

Posted by AAA Wrong | March 13, 2008 1:48 PM

Thanks for pointing out the multiplicity of "last acceptable prejudice"s---I've heard this used with regard to prejudice against White Men, Southern White Men, Christians, Catholics (quotes implicit in all these), German-Americans, and probably more I can't summon.

(Whereas, in fact, it's Hippies.)

Posted by Michael | March 13, 2008 1:52 PM

Thanks for pointing out the multiplicity of "last acceptable prejudice"s---I've heard this used with regard to prejudice against White Men, Southern White Men, Christians, Catholics (quotes implicit in all these), German-Americans, and probably more I can't summon.

(Whereas, in fact, it's obviously Hippies.)

Posted by Michael | March 13, 2008 1:53 PM

Gabriel K - God help California if they ever have to spell out the governor's name. ;)

Posted by Tel | March 13, 2008 2:15 PM

Say it brother. I am one letter ahead of you. But really, I have only myself to blame for marrying in Italy. If we had married in the USA I could have taken my wife's name -- Addis.

Posted by Robert Waldmann | March 13, 2008 6:52 PM

Thank you, AAA. Here I was thinking I was going to be the informed Texan to enlighten Matt and Kriston (who should really know better). Doherty may have been listed first on the ballot, but it wasn't because of alphabetism. Here's a study about how ballot order can affect the outcomes of races: http://www.burntorangereport.com/upload/pdfs/RMA_KYCourier-Journal_11-18-06.pdf

Posted by Alex | March 13, 2008 11:37 PM

Hey, Matt!

Try carrying around the name "Dick Hack"!

Makes me sound like a Lorena Bobbitt survivor!

Why do you think I refer to myself as Richard Steven Hack? It eliminates the "Dick" and distances the "Richard" from the "Hack" a bit.

Not only that, back in the computer BBS days, I used to get banned from boards because they thought the name was a phony from some hacker!

The only problem with your name is the difficulty of typing it. That "Yg" finger movement is not easy.

Posted by Richard Steven Hack | March 14, 2008 4:13 AM