IV. Background

Every year, New Yorkers head to the polls to cast their votes in federal, state and local elections. For the majority of these voters, their trip to the polls is unexceptional: they arrive at their polling site; head to a table with courteous poll workers who locate their name in a poll book; and cast their ballot on a working voting machine.

Unfortunately, far too many voters have a different experience: they discover their names are not in the poll book, their polling site has changed; confused poll workers send them to wait on line after line (or from site to site); or broken machines, poorly trained poll workers and long lines await them. While these problems occur in off-election years at dismaying rates, the system typically fares its worst in Presidential election years, when turnout is highest.

This past year the problems faced by voters were compounded by the failure of the New York City Board of Elections' two primary means of communicating with the public: both the Board's website and voter hotline broke down on Election Day leaving many voters in the dark about whether they were registered, where to vote and unable to complain about problems at the polls.

New York City is no stranger to troubled elections. A number of civic and community organizations have been working to focus attention on the problems faced by voters for years. The Citywide Coalition for Voter Participation, a broad non-partisan coalition of labor, civic, community advocacy and civil rights groups facilitated by NYPIRG and Common Cause/NY has worked to monitor and improve election administration here in New York City and State. NYPIRG, the Citywide Coalition and a second effort by many of the same organizations – New York State Citizens Coalition on HAVA Implementation – have:

Conducted massive surveys of conditions at the polls in 2001 and 2002. These surveys, with hundreds of voters rating their own Election Day experience, highlighted problems faced by voters city-wide and helped lay the groundwork for this year's effort. One of the major findings in Report from the Polls I & II was that many poll workers gave out misinformation that can disenfranchise voters (copies of the reports may be found at www.nypirg.org/goodgov/elections/report02).

Provided an Election Day Helpline for voters seeking assistance and/or wished to lodge complaints about conditions at the polls. The helpline, sponsored by NYPIRG and Common Cause/NY offers voters such basic information about the location of their polling sites and also chronicles problems at the polls such as broken machines which are forwarded to Board of Elections executive staff for remedial action. This past Election Day the helpline received more than 3,000 calls and served an even more vital service due to the breakdown of the Board's website and phone system. Attorneys at the New York Civil Liberties Union also handled calls from voters who had problems at the polls.

Pressured the State Legislature and City Council for important changes in State Election Law and the administration of elections. Coalition groups such as the Brennan Center for Justice Citizens, Union, Common Cause/NY, Demos, the New York City and State League of Women Voters, the New York Civil Liberties Union, NYPIRG and the Women's City Club of New York have lobbied elected officials and provided definitive research into implementing new federal election mandates. We've held numerous media events to focus attention on election-related issues and offered expert testimony at a wide range of forums (a collection of coalition documents on implementation of the Help America Vote Act can be found at www.nypirg.org/goodgov/hava).

Successfully pressed Mayor Bloomberg to focus on Election Day problems. Earlier this year, Mayor Bloomberg appointed a special task force to focus on the election process. The Task Force is currently pursuing a number of initiatives, including pushing the Board to modernize its' website and phone system, along with managerial changes to Board operations. Unfortunately, much of their work has been conducted behind closed doors with limited public input. Coalition groups continue to monitor and weigh in on their work.

Met with the New York City Board of Elections to press for changes and improvements in election administration . Coalition groups have met with the Board's executive staff on numerous occasions to press for proper implementation of HAVA (see below) in an effort to limit the law's disenfranchising impact on voters on Election Day. While there was agreement with the Board regarding many facets of the implementation of HAVA, the Coalition had considerable disagreement with the Board's decision not to provide poll workers and voters with detailed information about the law's ID requirements.

The Help America Vote Act: One of the major motivations of this survey was to gauge the impact of the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) on city elections. In October, 2002, President Bush signed HAVA into law. The new law allocates nearly $4 billion in federal funds with the stated goal of improving elections and voting procedures. One of the major impacts in New York is the imposition of a requirement that certain first-time, mail-in registrants provide photo or other documentary evidence of identity either when they register or when they vote. Those voters satisfying poll workers requests for ID are entitled to cast their ballots on the voting machine, those who do not are supposed to be offered the opportunity to vote on a Provisional (Affidavit) Ballot. There has been widespread concern that the ID provision unfairly targets low income, urban and voters of color along with new citizens and young voters because they are less likely to possess one of the key forms of identification called for in federal legislation, a valid drivers license. Indeed, in NY State, while some 93% of those 18 and over outside of the five boroughs possess driver licenses, only 52% of New York City residents do(20).

The inherently discriminatory impact of HAVA's ID requirements can be further amplified if administered unfairly by local boards of elections. The subjective imposition of ID requirements raises the potential for de-facto or intentional disenfranchisement of significant numbers of voters on Election Day. This survey's findings clearly demonstrate the need for the Board of Elections to review their training efforts.

next>>