[an error occurred while processing this directive]

REVISITING THE U.S. VOTING SYSTEM: A RESEARCH INVENTORY

November 27-28, 2006

Convened by the American Association for the Advancement of Science

David B. Magleby

SYNOPSIS OF CSED/BYU RESEARCH AGENDA ON THE VOTING EXPERIENCE

The Center for the Study of Elections and Democracy (CSED) at Brigham Young University (BYU) is conducting research on the voting experience from the perspective of voters, poll workers, and neutral observers. We conducted studies in two Ohio counties (Franklin and Summit) and statewide in Utah in 2006. We surveyed voters leaving the polling place to measure their perceptions and confidence in the mode of voting and election administration more generally (i.e. identification requirements). Poll workers from these same randomly selected voting places were also interviewed by telephone in the days immediately after the election to gain their perspectives on the implementation of new voting technology, the relevance and usefulness of the poll worker training, and suggestions for ways the process can be improved in the future. Finally a group of trained observers gathered data from inside a subsample of our exit poll voting places providing contextual data for the broader study. The methodology and experience developed in 2006 will serve as a foundation for a more extensive assessment in several states in 2008. These pilot studies have been funded by the National Science Foundation in a Supplemental Grant for Exploratory Research, the Carnegie Corporation of New York, and the JEHT Foundation.

Exit poll survey: Several post-election surveys have been conducted after the fact on voter confidence and satisfaction; they rely on respondents to recall information about their election experience several days or weeks after the fact when memories have faded and may have been affected by media reports about the election. Few researchers have attempted to interview voters about their perceptions of the voting process immediately after they actually voted or attempted to vote. Voters leaving the polling place can readily recall elements of their experience and do not know the election outcome and their perceptions of the fairness of the election and confidence in the process cannot be affected by the election results. Our exit polls use standard survey methodology developed by a consortium of Utah colleges to conduct exit polls from 1982 through 2006. Exit polls can, despite some limitations, provide valid measures of how a voter rates the quality of the voting experience and help to assess the quality of the location at which the voting occurs.

On May 2, 2006 we helped organize an exit poll in Cuyahoga County, Ohio conducted by the Election Science Institute using an instrument developed by Edison/Mitofsky Research and Cuyahoga County. On June 27, 2006 we completed a pre-test of our own exit poll instrument in a Utah primary to measure voter reactions to various aspects of the voting experience including the new Diebold TSX voting machines and voter interactions with poll workers. On November 7, 2006 we conducted a statewide exit poll in Utah as well as an exit poll in Summit and Franklin Counties in Ohio. In Utah we have always received cooperation from state and county officials in conducting our exit polls and 2006 was no exception. The Ohio counties were selected in part on the willingness of local election officials to cooperate with our data collection efforts and in part because each Ohio county uses a different voting technology.

The questionnaire for the exit polls in Utah and Ohio measured the following attitudes and variables: overall satisfaction with the voting process and confidence in the system, perceptions of poll workers, interaction and satisfaction with the voting equipment, any problems or obstacles to voting (registration and ID requirements), demographic variables: (e.g. race, gender, education, income, and religion).

Poll worker survey: Poll workers are critical to the efficiency and integrity of the voting process. Yet, researchers and policy makers know little about who poll workers are and how they do their work. No research has sought to connect the attitudes and capabilities of the poll workers with the attitudes of the voters who show up at their polling location on Election Day. Therefore, we conducted a poll worker survey focusing on those individuals who work in all polling locations where the exit polling occurred in Utah and Ohio. The poll worker surveys measure the following variables: overall assessment of Election-Day experience, problems encountered on Election Day, overall assessment of training and preparation, application of election law (e.g. voter ID practices), attitudes toward the election process, assessment of the new voting technology, perception of voters’ reactions to the voting process, demographic variables (e.g. age, race, gender, education, income, party identification).

Gathering of contextual data: The interaction between the poll worker and the voter occurs in a particular context. Voting locations can be clean and orderly, easy to find, and readily accessible. Or they can be just the opposite. The November 2006 research included a structured observation of the polling locations in order for us to examine what variables at the location may affect the work of the poll worker and the experience of the voters. The following variables were observed and recorded: organization of the polling location, cleanliness and size of voting place, number of voting machines (actual and working), interactions between voters and poll workers

Our 2006 research is a pretest for a comprehensive research strategy for evaluating the functioning of electoral democracy. With data from these three research strategies, we can more confidently assess the amount of satisfaction and confidence voters have in the election process and the factors that contribute to it. For example, we can accurately determine whether the confidence voters have may vary from polling location to polling location, controlling for characteristics of the voters and the poll workers stationed at those locations. The three research strategies allow us to assess the voting experience in a comprehensive manner that has never been attempted before. Our broad focus is on the various interactions voters have with the voting process and the ways it may shape overall confidence and satisfaction with the voting process and the broader political system.

A comprehensive, systematic, and objective analysis of the voting process provides substantial benefits to society. In our view, research in this area should aim to produce the following benefits: provide election officials, policy makers, and legislators (state and federal) with research tools to assess and understand the voting process, provide recommendations on how to create a more “robust” voting process, increase transparency and, therefore, confidence in the voting process.