 |
Wagon Train to Bullet Train: Street-Level Implementation of E-Voting
| |
| | Unformatted Document Text:
Introduction They are called Poll workers, Precinct board members or Election day workers and are commonly referred to as the ‘army of volunteers’ who staff polling places around the country each election day, working long hours for varying, but uniformly little pay. They are the guardians, facilitators, policing authorities, access granters and gate keepers of the in-person voting process nationwide. They are the unsupervised links in the Election Day chain that makes no allowance for error. They are the weak links, as we will explain below! This paper is based on a simple premise: in order to have equity in the in-person (as opposed to absentee) voting process, voters should have a uniform experience at the polling place, with equal access to information and assistance if required. Only if these factors are in place will the constitutional “one person, one vote” doctrine truly be met. In the following pages, we analyze a survey of poll workers in the Primary Election of 2006 and find large variation in how well they felt the training prepared them to operate and explain equipment to voters across various technologies. We also find great differences in whether poll workers were trained on how to use and explain equipment to disabled voters. Some Context and Previous Work on Poll Workers Since the passage of the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) in 2002
1
, there has been more
attention paid to these workers, but the systematic study of them has lacked sorely. HAVA among other things seeks to increase uniformity in election administration ranging from registration databases to poll worker training. When poll workers are in the spot light, they are usually there because the U.S. election system failed at one of the hundreds of thousands of polling places that are staffed in each election
2
. They are talked about when voters report that they were discriminated against
3
,
1
"Help America Vote Act of 2002," (HAVA), Pub. L. No. 107-252, 116 Stat. 1666 (2002)
2
Any internet search using the terms: poll workers and problems will reveal hundreds of accounts of
documented failures to administer elections properly. Below are just a couple of links. The Verified Voting Foundation and the Election Protection coalition are non-profit organizations that also track poll worker problems as they are reported by voters. Groups like the League of Women Voters, NALEO, Maldef and APALC have also collected data on this topic, through self-reports by voters and polling place observations by volunteers on election day.
Poll worker jailed after allegedly choking voter: Dispute over whether man has to cast ballot in judicial race boils over in Ky. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15611865/
Lines, malfunctions and untrained poll workers plague some states; http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2006/11/08/lines_malfunctions_and_untrained_poll_workers_plague_some_states/
3
COMPLAINTS REVEAL WIDESPREAD PATTERNS OF VOTING DISCRIMINATION
AGAINST NEW YORKERS WITH DISABILITIES
http://www.nysilc.org/News%20-
2
|
| | Authors: Mac Donald, Karin. and Glaser, Bonnie. |
|
| |
|
|
Introduction
They are called Poll workers, Precinct board members or Election day workers and are
commonly referred to as the ‘army of volunteers’ who staff polling places around the
country each election day, working long hours for varying, but uniformly little pay. They
are the guardians, facilitators, policing authorities, access granters and gate keepers of the
in-person voting process nationwide. They are the unsupervised links in the Election Day
chain that makes no allowance for error. They are the weak links, as we will explain
below!
This paper is based on a simple premise: in order to have equity in the in-person (as
opposed to absentee) voting process, voters should have a uniform experience at the
polling place, with equal access to information and assistance if required. Only if these
factors are in place will the constitutional “one person, one vote” doctrine truly be met.
In the following pages, we analyze a survey of poll workers in the Primary Election of
2006 and find large variation in how well they felt the training prepared them to operate
and explain equipment to voters across various technologies. We also find great
differences in whether poll workers were trained on how to use and explain equipment to
disabled voters.
Some Context and Previous Work on Poll Workers
Since the passage of the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) in 2002
attention paid to these workers, but the systematic study of them has lacked sorely.
HAVA among other things seeks to increase uniformity in election administration
ranging from registration databases to poll worker training.
When poll workers are in the spot light, they are usually there because the U.S. election
system failed at one of the hundreds of thousands of polling places that are staffed in each
election
1
"Help America Vote Act of 2002," (HAVA), Pub. L. No. 107-252, 116 Stat. 1666 (2002)
2
Any internet search using the terms: poll workers and problems will reveal hundreds of accounts of
documented failures to administer elections properly. Below are just a couple of links. The Verified
Voting Foundation and the Election Protection coalition are non-profit organizations that also track poll
worker problems as they are reported by voters. Groups like the League of Women Voters, NALEO,
Maldef and APALC have also collected data on this topic, through self-reports by voters and polling place
observations by volunteers on election day.
Poll worker jailed after allegedly choking voter: Dispute over whether man has to cast ballot in judicial race
boils over in Ky. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15611865/
Lines, malfunctions and untrained poll workers plague some states;
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2006/11/08/lines_malfunctions_and_untrained_poll_workers_
plague_some_states/
3
COMPLAINTS REVEAL WIDESPREAD PATTERNS OF VOTING DISCRIMINATION
AGAINST NEW YORKERS WITH DISABILITIES
2
|
|
 Convention | | Convention is an application service for managing large or small academic conferences, annual meetings, and other types of events! | | Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf. | | Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets! | | Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more! | | Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering. | | Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more! | | Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches! | | Click here for more information. |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
