Voting Experiences of Voters with Disabilities in Georgia & Missouri - Expert Update from MAD Winter'13
The following is the Expert Update article from the Winter 2013 Making a Difference magazine.
Voting Experiences of Voters with Disabilities in Georgia & Missouri
By Jon Sanford
On Election Day, staff from Georgia Tech's Center for Assistive Technology and Environmental Access (CATEA) accompanied 18 individuals with disabilities to the polls in Atlanta and St. Louis to learn about their voting experiences. Voting in person was extremely important to them. Afterwards, many commented that voting in person made them feel they were a part of the voting process, while doing absentee balloting "you lose the feeling that you're casting your ballot" and they were "afraid something could get lost ... and it's too important."
Overall, voting experiences were clearly affected by polling site accessibility, room layout, accessibility of voting equipment and poll worker attitudes.
Polling site accessibility: Many noted crowded parking at both the polling site and on public streets. Both vision and mobility impaired individuals complained about getting from parking lots to the polling site due to distance, signage, lack of curb cuts or stairs that were difficult to climb. And once inside, some complained about the poor signage, especially vision impaired voters.
Room layout: Privacy, noise levels and segregation of accessible voting machines were key concerns. The absence of places to sit to prevent fatigue was particularly noticeable. The close positioning of the accessible machines to other voting machines created a lack of privacy, particularly the lower height of the accessible machines, which could permit someone standing to look down and see the screen.
Voting Equipment Accessibility: Voters were adamant about using the machines, however, numerous problems with voting machines were noted, especially the audio information provided for blind voters and the placement of the machines on a table for seated voters. The audio was a major facilitator when it functioned well. One voter commented, "I got to do it myself ... I didn't need somebody to read to me and tell them what I wanted. It was liberating to be able to do it myself." But when there were difficulties starting the audio, sound quality was poor or instructions were confusing or incomplete, voters became frustrated and had to have the ballot read to them, resulting in a lack of privacy.
While voters with mobility aids didn't need machines providing audio, the standard touch screen machines were too high to reach. Although the accessible machines were located on a table at the right height, they often had insufficient legroom, which prevented voters from getting close enough to reach the machine.
Poll Workers: Poll workers can make or break a voter's experience. However, many poll workers were ignorant about people with disabilities, including knowing they had a right to vote. Poll workers often offered either no help when it was needed or too much help when it wasn't needed. More concerning, too many poll workers were unprepared to set up accessible voting equipment or provide instructions on how to use it, leaving voters with disabilities either on their own or in the case of two individuals, having to use absentee ballots.
About Jon Sanford
Jon Sanford, is the director of the Center for Assistive Technology and Environmental Access (CATEA) and an associate professor of Industrial Design in the College of Architecture at Georgia Tech. Additionally, he is a research architect at the Rehab R&D Center at the Atlanta VA Medical Center. Sanford has been actively involved in research and development related to the accessibility and usability of products, technologies and environments for the past 25 years and was one of the authors of the Principles of Universal Design.
