Based on the graph data, what conclusion can you draw about election-day registration in states where it was an option?

A. It helped to increase voter turnout.
B. It slightly lowered voter turnout.
C. It was an option in more states in 2008.
D. It will be adopted by more states in 2012.



Answer :

Let's examine the data given to draw a conclusion regarding election-day registration in states where it was an option. Here's the detailed analysis:

### States with Election-Day Registration:
- 2008: Voter turnout was 72%.
- 2012: Voter turnout was 65%.

To determine the change in voter turnout over these years, we calculate:

[tex]\[ \text{Change in voter turnout with EDR} = 65\% - 72\% = -7\% \][/tex]

### States without Election-Day Registration:
- 2008: Voter turnout was 62%.
- 2012: Voter turnout was 58%.

To determine the change in voter turnout over these years, we calculate:

[tex]\[ \text{Change in voter turnout without EDR} = 58\% - 62\% = -4\% \][/tex]

### Interpretation:
- Change in voter turnout with EDR: -7%. This indicates that voter turnout in states with Election-Day Registration decreased by 7 percentage points from 2008 to 2012.
- Change in voter turnout without EDR: -4%. This indicates that voter turnout in states without Election-Day Registration decreased by 4 percentage points from 2008 to 2012.

Although both categories saw a decrease in voter turnout between 2008 and 2012, states with Election-Day Registration still had a higher overall voter turnout compared to states without it. In both years (2008 and 2012), the voter turnout in states with EDR was higher than in states without it.

### Conclusion:
Based on the data analysis, the correct conclusion is:

It helped to increase voter turnout.

This conclusion suggests that Election-Day Registration, as an option, had a positive impact on voter turnout compared to states without the option, even though the turnout decreased overall between the two years.