The MIT Election Data and Science Lab manages the Elections Performance Index (EPI), an objective, nonpartisan assessment tool evaluating U.S. election administration. Following the recent update to the index with data from 2016, we are dedicating a series of posts to exploring the EPI’s underpinnings.
Our post today was written by Lisa Schur, professor and chair of the Department of Labor Studies and Employment Relations at Rutgers University.
In the 2016 election, 35.4 million people with disabilities were eligible to vote; put another way, they represented one out of every seven potential voters that November.
The number of eligible voters with disabilities is growing as the population ages, so this figure is likely to be even higher in 2018 and the next several elections. Their voter turnout, however, has consistently been less than that of people without disabilities. In 2016, 55.9% of eligible people with disabilities reported voting, compared to 62.2% of people without disabilities, for a gap of 6.3 percentage points. This gap was very similar in the general elections of 2008 (7.2 points) and 2012 (5.7 points). The gap remains when controlling for other predictors of voting such as age, gender, race, education, and income. Turnout is especially low for people with cognitive impairments and difficulty with self-care or going outside alone (despite the availability of mail ballots), but the turnout gap also exists for people with vision and mobility impairments.
The MIT Elections Performance Index taps into this issue with its measure of how many people report not voting due to “illness or disability (own or family’s).” The percent of nonvoters who gave this answer in 2016 ranged from 3.4% in Washington State to 22% in Alabama. Overall, close to one-third (35.7%) of nonvoters with disabilities gave this response, compared to 6.6% of nonvoters without disabilities.
Why are people with disabilities less likely to vote?
Several factors contribute to the gap: greater social isolation that reduces voter recruitment, for example, as well as lower levels of education and income, and lower feelings of political efficacy — the belief that the political system is responsive to people like you. But these factors alone do not fully explain the turnout gap.
Voting among people with disabilities can also be discouraged by barriers in getting to or using polling places. There is evidence that living in an area with streets in poor condition is linked to substantially lower voter turnout among people with mobility limitations, and that difficulty finding and getting to the polling place lowers voter turnout among people in general.
In 2012, we conducted a nationally representative survey of 2000 people with disabilities and 1000 people without disabilities. We found that 30% of voters with disabilities reported some type of difficulty in voting, compared to only 8% of voters without disabilities. Such difficulties not only make voting more time-consuming, frustrating, and costly, but may also decrease feelings of efficacy by essentially sending the message that people with disabilities are not expected to participate in the political process.
Despite laws such as the Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA), which requires polling places to be accessible, the U.S. GAO found that only 40% of polling places in 2016 had no potential impediments to access by people with disabilities. This is a modest improvement from 27% of polling places in 2008 and 16% in 2000. Some of this change has been driven by legal challenges: a 2012 U.S. District Court ruling, for example, identified a number of voting barriers and ordered New York’s Board of Elections to improve accessibility.
The most common problems identified in the 2012 voter survey were:
- reading or seeing the ballot,
- understanding how to vote or use the voting equipment,
- waiting in line, and
- finding or getting to the polling place.
Problems of polling place access, reading the ballot, and understanding the voting process were also cited by focus group participants with disabilities in research conducted in Los Angeles in 2010.
What can be done to improve the voting process for citizens with disabilities?
Citizens with disabilities may especially benefit from more flexible opportunities to vote, including before election day or by mail. In recent elections, people with disabilities have been more likely to vote by mail, but were not more likely to vote early at a polling place or election office.
One discouraging factor that seems to depress turnout among people with disabilities — even with mail-in ballots — is the requirement in twenty states to to present an excuse for a mail ballot. Research has shown that this seems to negatively affect turnout for voters with disabilities, who may be reluctant to report a disability on an official government form. No-excuse and all-vote-by-mail states, on the other hand, have smaller disability gaps in turnout.
Voting by mail can also bring its own problems, however. In 2012, 10% of mail voters with disabilities reported problems. In addition, voting by mail on its own is not a sufficient solution — majorities of people both with and without disabilities in 2012 said that they would prefer to cast their vote in a polling place rather than submitting it by mail or some other way.
There are other options to increase voter turnout among people with disabilities. Some of these lie outside the election system — for instance, long-term policies to increase employment, accessible transportation, and educational opportunities may all have positive effects. Potential solutions within the election system, however, can have a direct impact on turnout for people with disabilities. Based on available research, the best practices for increasing voting opportunities for people with disabilities include:
1. Increased accessibility of polling places and voting equipment
A number of states have worked to monitor and improve the physical accessibility of polling places. This includes a wide range of efforts to eliminate different types of obstacles, from removing barriers to entering polling places for people with mobility impairments, to making ballots easier to read and understand for people with visual and cognitive impairments. The direct involvement of disability organizations helps ensure the effective design, choice, and implementation of accessible technologies and practices.
2. Mobile voting
Mobile voting consists of bringing ballots or other voting equipment to convenient locations, such as long-term care facilities and shopping centers located on accessible bus routes. This has been found to work particularly well in long-term care facilities, where it has helped reduce concerns about voter fraud and enhanced residents’ dignity and rights.
3. Training for election officials and poll workers
States have increasingly focused on developing and expanding training for poll workers and election officials, often in partnership with disability service and advocacy organizations. These efforts have included videos on accessibility and poll worker assistance for voters with disabilities, conferences on polling place accessibility, and direct training for county election clerks and state election officials. One program found that the best results occurred when a variety of interactive training methods were used for voters with disabilities, using tools for poll workers such as checklists and visual aids to carry out election day procedures.
4. Outreach and education for people with disabilities
Difficulty in understanding how to vote can be a significant barrier. But it is also a barrier that can be addressed through education and outreach, which can be especially valuable for those with cognitive impairments. Examples of this sort of outreach include posting audio files with the full text of ballots and instructions on how to mark the ballot, booklets and videos on accessible voting features, outreach to assisted living facilities, and radio and television public service announcements produced in conjunction with disability organizations. Other direct outreach can include Voter Education Kits provided to individuals at conferences, provider locations, psychiatric hospitals, nursing homes, and senior centers.
In sum, voter turnout is lower among people with disabilities, and voting difficulties appear to contribute to this problem.
Although polling place accessibility has improved over the past two decades, progress has been slow and uneven. Given the growing number of people with disabilities, it is important that progress continue to ensure that all American citizens can easily and effectively exercise their right to vote.
