www.nypirg.org | about us | good government | environment | consumer protection | straphangers campaign | fuel buyers group


A SURVEY OF CONDITIONS AT THE POLLS IN NEW YORK CITY

PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION NOVEMBER 2, 2004
A NYPIRG Report
________________


II. Summary of Findings

The results of this survey confirm what many voters and civic groups have been saying for years; too many voters face too many avoidable problems at the polls on Election Day. The survey's major findings are summarized below and detailed in section III.

  • 1. Thirteen percent of voters surveyed experienced an "agonizing" experience at the polls. Our Voter Agony Index for the November 2 nd election found that 13% of voters surveyed experienced major, avoidable problems on Election Day. This included 4% of voters experiencing a broken voting machine and more than 7% describing their polling site as either "confusing" or "chaotic." In our survey, more than twice as many voters in Manhattan (19%) faced "agonizing" problems, compared to 7% of voters in Staten Island and Queens. (These problems are separate from those encountered by voters who were improperly asked for ID or didn't find their name in the poll site book.)
  • 2. Only 55% of Poll Site Coordinators surveyed correctly answered a three-part question on identification requirements at the polls. Too many Poll Site Coordinators don't know the law when it comes to what types of identification can satisfy new requirements imposed on certain first-time voters. These staff people oversee site operations and are supposed to be more experienced, knowledgeable and better trained than their fellow Poll Inspectors (the workers who most voters interact with at their particular table/machine).
  • 3. Too many Poll Inspectors are improperly administering elections. Poll Inspectors are the Board of Elections workers that voters interact with at their assigned Election District tables and when using the voting machines. Inspectors are responsible for "signing in" each voter, running the machines and determining which voters are directed to vote on paper/Affidavit Ballots. We found two troubling findings about Poll Inspector performance:
  • Six percent of voters surveyed reported that they were unjustly asked to produce identification at the polls on November 2 nd.(1) This percentage of voters is separate from the number legally required to do so under law
  • Almost half of voters surveyed (48.6%) reported that poll workers had failed to ask them if they needed help using the voting machine. Failing to assist voters unfamiliar with the workings of the machine can lead to numerous problems including lost votes and longer lines. Poll Inspectors are required to ask each voter if they need assistance with voting.
  • 4. Five percent of voters surveyed relayed to surveyors that, while properly registered, they did not find their name in the poll books on November 2 nd. While there are a variety of reasons a voter's name may be missing from the rolls, the size of this percentage indicates a significant problem faced by voters on Election Day.
  • 5.Poll workers did a good job distributing paper (Affidavit) ballots to voters. Almost all voters in our survey were offered this option if problems arose with their registrations. (While it's good news that voters are being offered Affidavit Ballots, often times other action is needed, such as directing voters to their proper poll site or table.)


next>>