Interactions - March/April 2013

Officials also allowed voters to return their ballots by email and fax. Election departments had few procedures to handle this option; election advocates raised concerns about security. As intriguing as these options are, they are probably not ready for prime time.

March + April 2013

interactions

How Do We ‘Fix This’?

One of the recurring themes is that you can’t fix just one aspect of elections. Even the best new voting systems, for example, will not live up to their potential if voters don’t understand them and poll workers don’t know how to use them on Election Day. It’s tempting to say that the whole problem should be turned over to UX designers, but that’s not the right answer, either. Everyone who has a stake in elections should have a place at the design table.

A few projects are trying to open
up the process and invite broader
participation:
• In Los Angeles County, Dean
Logan started the Voting System
Assessment Project (VSAP) to inves-
tigate a new voting system for the
largest jurisdiction in the U.S. to
“ensure the ‘people’ element is well
balanced with those of ‘technology’
and ‘regulations’” [ 9].

• In Travis County, Texas, a similar project to define a new voting system is under way under Dana Debeauvoir’s leadership.

• Oregon and Washington states have used AIGA Election Design Fellows to bring design and usability expertise to improve their election forms, ballots, and other materials.

• The ITIF Accessible Voting
Technology Initiative, funded by the
EAC, ran a series of design work-
shops, bringing together election
officials, voting system designers,
accessibility advocates, and design-
ers to work on removing barriers
to voting. Several of the concepts
that emerged led to research col-
laborations currently in progress.
One proposed that ballots could be
marked anywhere, on any device,
and then brought to a polling place
to be cast, using QR codes to count
them efficiently, combining the best
aspects of convenience voting with
the social “ceremony” (and security)
of voting in a polling place [ 10, 11].

ity, and accessibility experts, so that all of the requirements are considered together.

ENDNOTES:

1. http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press- office/2012/11/07/remarks-president-election-night 2. http://www.votethenewwayny.com/ 3. Noel Ruyan’s voting experiences: http://www. openideo.com/open/voting/inspiration/accessible-voting-experiences 4. Better Ballots (2008) and Better Design, Better Elections (2012). The Brennan Center; http:// www.usabilityinciviclife.org/better-design-better-elections/ 5. Design Deficiencies and Lost. The Brennan Center, 2011; http://www.brennancenter.org/con-tent/resource/design_deficiencies_and_lost_votes/ (or http://ow.ly/fK5CC) 6. NY Daily News Editorial. Voters be damned. (February 27, 2012); http://articles.nydailynews. com/2012-02-27/news/31105827_ 1_miscounted- votes-ovals-ballots (or http://ow.ly/fK5rQ) 7. Farivar, C. Saving throw: Securing democracy with stats, spreadsheets, and 10-sided dice. Ars Technica (July 24, 2012); http://arstechnica.com/ tech-policy/2012/07/saving-american-elections- with-10-sided-dice-one-stats-profs-quest/ (or http://ow.ly/fK5pR) 8. Hall, T. and Alvarez, R.M. Defining the Barriers to Political Participation for Individuals with Disabilities. 2012; http://elections.itif.org/reports/AV TI-001-Hall- Alvarez-2012.pdf 9. Voting System Assessment Project – Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk; http://www.lavote.net/voter/vsap/ 10. Accessible Election Design Workshop – I TIF Accessible Voting Technology Initiative; http://elec-tions.itif.org/projects/design-workshops/ 11. 50 Ideas for More Accessible Elections: #26: Mark ballots anywhere; http://www.openideo.com/ open/voting/realisation/50-ideas-for-accessible- elections (or http://ow.ly/fK7B8) 12. OpenIDEO Accessible Election Design Innovation Challenge; http://www.openideo.com/ open/voting/ brief.html 13. Dirks, S. Vote while you shop: ‘Pop-up’ poll sites sweep Iowa. NPR; http://www.wbur.org/ npr/163560324/vote-while-you-shop-pop-up-poll- sites-sweep-iowa or http://ow.ly/fK5su 14. Field Guides to Ensuring Voter Intent; http://civ-icdesigning.org/fieldguides/

ABOUT THE AUTHOR Whitney Quesenbery combines an obsession with clear communication with her work bringing user research insights to designing products where people matter.

She is passionate about Usability in Civic Life. Quesenbery has worked with election officials on ballots and other election materials and is a co-author of two influential reports that show just how much design matters in elections.