There are relatively few who understand the science of exit polling that Warren Mitofsky and his colleagues (in particular Murray Edelman, former editorial director of the Voter News Service) developed and brought to maturity. I do not claim to understand fully the statistical underpinnings of how the exit poll data are used in the complex algorithms that have been relied upon by VRS, VNS, and now NEP for the past two decades. But from my personal experience of serving on the seven-person election night decision team at VNS from 1996 to 2002, I know of the very high standards for which Mitofsky and Edelman always strove in their data—including how the data were gathered, how they were analyzed, and how they were used by the media. These standards of excellence stemmed from what they learned under the tutelage of the legendary Morris Hansen at the Bureau of the Census in the 1960s. To this day, it is this legacy for accurate exit poll data that has become so important to the news media on election day.

But the legacy is a greater one in terms of the importance it plays far beyond the immediate postelection news coverage of winners and losers. Exactly who wins and loses an election may matter on a momentary personal level to many citizens, and it may matter in the longer term to some citizens regarding the effect of the policies the winners set in motion; but whether they realize and appreciate it or not, the lives of all citizens in the United States are affected by the way in which the mandates of the elections are framed. Thus, I have long believed that we are very fortunate that (a) it is our news media, not our politicians, that play the major role in framing these mandates, and (b) a good deal of the media’s interpretations of the mandate is based on the insights gleaned from exit poll data. For the news media to do this right they must have high-quality exit poll data. It is paramount for the well-being of our democracy that the consortium of news organizations that fund the national exit polls continue to invest in making those surveys as accurate as they reasonably can be.

That exit polling in the United States has taken on such prominence is largely due to the efforts of those involved in conceptualizing the exit polls, conducting them, and analyzing them. For those who share with me a high regard for the importance of accurate exit poll data for our democratic processes, we all owe a great deal to the intelligence and commitment of our exit poll pioneers, in particular Warren Mitofsky and Murray Edelman and their associates.

Having helped monitor the exit polling “quarantine room” from 11:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. EST on Election Day 2006 to prevent any early leaks of the data that day, I experienced firsthand how precarious is the confidence of the NEP media sponsors in the validity of the exit poll data. I fear that if another “disaster” were to take place in 2008 or 2010 or 2012, that rightly or wrongly was blamed on the exit polls themselves, the commitment of some or all of the media sponsors might wane. Were this to happen, and if there were no reliable national exit poll data gathered and disseminated by a reputable survey organization, our democracy surely would suffer.

Paul J. Lavrakas, Ph.D., is a former professor of journalism and communications studies at Northwestern University (1978-96) and Ohio State University (1996-2000), and founding faculty director of the Northwestern University Survey Lab (1982-96) and Ohio State University Center for Survey Research (1996-2000).