<p>Polling is expensive so only issues that a lot of people feel strongly about will get polled.</p>

<p>You can imagine that every citizen $i$ would pay $r_i$ monetary units to have a certain policy changed. This number may also be negative to reflect that some people like the current policy better than the proposed change.<br>
Ideally the government would like to know $\sum r_i$, if its positive or negative. But I am sure there are also a lot of practical political considerations. However polling itself has a significant cost. Let us denote this by $C$. The government probably has some vague idea about $\sum r_i$. E.g. most people don't care about the color of chewing gum wraps, so the $\sum r_i$ for banning silver coloring is likely negligable. In this case a poll to determine the exact value would be wasteful as 
$$
\sum r_i - C &lt; 0.
$$
So when you pick something to poll it is probably a salient issue, something that a lot of people know about and have strong opinions about. As I said, I am sure that these considerations are usually secondary to political ones. </p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-09-19T09:40:05.300Z
+1. How costly is polling? I assume that online surveys have dramatically decreased $C$, at least the cost of collecting data.
emeryville
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-09-19T10:20:10.297Z
Great answer! I would just change slightly the Ri from "would pay to have a policy changed" to "would pay to have a say on a certain policy". Because the parliament can and should decide on most topics, that's their job. Polling make sense, in my opinion, when a topic might not be fairly represented in the parliament.
JoaoBotelho
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-09-19T10:23:22.647Z
@emeryville most countries still use the postal voting. This is the case in Australia. Besides the vote material costs (paper, post, etc.), you have the cost of advertising and explaining the voting issue through public media. And you need to pay to the polling commission for counting and controlling the results.
JoaoBotelho
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-09-19T10:39:13.323Z
@emeryville I am not at all an expert on polling but I imagine the self-selection of online polling creates a very distorted sample, so while it is the cheapest, it may not be the best type of poll.
Giskard
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-09-19T10:41:16.857Z
@JoaoBotelho Not sure what you mean by "to have a say on". I usually would not pay any significant amount to have my opinion be known to the government because they are likely to find my opinion insignificant.
Giskard
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-09-19T12:25:51.473Z
@denesp By "have a say on something" i mean the possibility to voice your preference for a topic through a vote, such as allowing same-gender marriage, allowing abortion, etc.
When you say how many would pay to have it changed you are only considering one half of the voters. In your case, only the pro same-gender marriage would pay for changing it, because the law currently doesnt allow it.
JoaoBotelho
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-09-19T13:05:15.230Z
@JoaoBotelho I think you perhaps read my answer to hastily? It is a crucial part of it that the people who prefer the status quo are also accounted for via the negative $r_i$ values.
Giskard
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-09-19T16:13:34.373Z
@denesp I couldn't agree more with you on the self-selection issue but I am afraid that this also applies to the postal voting. At least, I would not use it!
emeryville
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-09-20T04:10:30.707Z
@denesp you're right, my bad. I still feel a bit unease with the solution as this doesn't allow the government to easily decide... the answer to the model is already the answer to the referendum itself, and ideally we could get a way to decide or predict which topics are worth to poll and which are not.
JoaoBotelho
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-09-20T04:40:49.423Z
Not without a poll you can't...
Giskard
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-09-20T04:41:48.173Z
But you are free to rescind the accept and wait for other answers.
Giskard
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-09-19T09:20:48.307Z
2017-09-19T09:20:48.307Z
Giskard
<p>Australia is now conducting <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-09-19/ive-sent-back-my-marriage-survey-forms-now-what/8943048" rel="nofollow noreferrer">a survey on same sex marriage</a>, to decide if they take the vote to the parliament or not. Although it is called a survey, the population is treating it as a referendum. The government could decide on its own to legalize the same-sex marriage, the same way it decides on topics such as immigration laws. </p>

<p>Are there any economic arguments that help a government to decide which topics are polled from the population and which are not?</p>

<government><political-economy>
What are the Economic reasons and explanations to make a referendum?
JoaoBotelho
# What are the Economic reasons and explanations to make a referendum?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2017-09-19)

Australia is now conducting [a survey on same sex marriage](http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-09-19/ive-sent-back-my-marriage-survey-forms-now-what/8943048), to decide if they take the vote to the parliament or not. Although it is called a survey, the population is treating it as a referendum. The government could decide on its own to legalize the same-sex marriage, the same way it decides on topics such as immigration laws.

Are there any economic arguments that help a government to decide which topics are polled from the population and which are not?

**Tags:** government, political-economy

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2017-09-19. Score: 2 | Accepted answer

Polling is expensive so only issues that a lot of people feel strongly about will get polled.

You can imagine that every citizen $i$ would pay $r\_i$ monetary units to have a certain policy changed. This number may also be negative to reflect that some people like the current policy better than the proposed change.  
Ideally the government would like to know $\sum r\_i$, if its positive or negative. But I am sure there are also a lot of practical political considerations. However polling itself has a significant cost. Let us denote this by $C$. The government probably has some vague idea about $\sum r\_i$. E.g. most people don't care about the color of chewing gum wraps, so the $\sum r\_i$ for banning silver coloring is likely negligable. In this case a poll to determine the exact value would be wasteful as
$$
\sum r\_i - C < 0.
$$
So when you pick something to poll it is probably a salient issue, something that a lot of people know about and have strong opinions about. As I said, I am sure that these considerations are usually secondary to political ones.

> **Comments:**
> **username_2**: +1. How costly is polling? I assume that online surveys have dramatically decreased $C$, at least the cost of collecting data.  
> **username_0**: Great answer! I would just change slightly the Ri from "would pay to have a policy changed" to "would pay to have a say on a certain policy". Because the parliament can and should decide on most topics, that's their job. Polling make sense, in my opinion, when a topic might not be fairly represented in the parliament.  
> **username_0**: @emeryville most countries still use the postal voting. This is the case in Australia. Besides the vote material costs (paper, post, etc.), you have the cost of advertising and explaining the voting issue through public media. And you need to pay to the polling commission for counting and controlling the results.  
> **username_1**: @emeryville I am not at all an expert on polling but I imagine the self-selection of online polling creates a very distorted sample, so while it is the cheapest, it may not be the best type of poll.  
> **username_1**: @JoaoBotelho Not sure what you mean by "to have a say on". I usually would not pay any significant amount to have my opinion be known to the government because they are likely to find my opinion insignificant.  
> **username_0**: @denesp By "have a say on something" i mean the possibility to voice your preference for a topic through a vote, such as allowing same-gender marriage, allowing abortion, etc. When you say how many would pay to have it changed you are only considering one half of the voters. In your case, only the pro same-gender marriage would pay for changing it, because the law currently doesnt allow it.  
> **username_1**: @JoaoBotelho I think you perhaps read my answer to hastily? It is a crucial part of it that the people who prefer the status quo are also accounted for via the negative $r_i$ values.  
> **username_2**: @denesp I couldn't agree more with you on the self-selection issue but I am afraid that this also applies to the postal voting. At least, I would not use it!  
> **username_0**: @denesp you're right, my bad. I still feel a bit unease with the solution as this doesn't allow the government to easily decide... the answer to the model is already the answer to the referendum itself, and ideally we could get a way to decide or predict which topics are worth to poll and which are not.  
> **username_1**: Not without a poll you can't...  
> **username_1**: But you are free to rescind the accept and wait for other answers.  

---

