Resources

The analysis implies election workers are more likely to wrongly reject valid ballots for purported signature mismatch than to correctly reject invalidly signed returns. On the other hand, research on election workers as problem-solvers suggests they may try to minimize the wrongful rejection of ballots.

These materials were designed by The Elections Group for use by election officials to enhance transparency and public understanding of mail ballot processing. The signs and posters provided are intended for display in election offices and ballot processing areas.

In this paper, authors provide a structured, data-driven framework to help election officials make consolidation decisions by applying it in a case study using Richland County, South Carolina data. The paper names an integer programming model, the Polling Location Consolidation Problem (PLCP), that simultaneously selects polling locations, reassigns voter precincts, and allocates resources while minimizing increases in voter travel distance.

This report details how American voters experienced the 2022 midterm election, based on a survey of 10,200 registered voters (including 200 from each state and D.C.), administered by YouGov. Key findings on in-person voting show mail ballot usage declined to 32%, down from 43% in 2020, while Election Day in-person voting increased to 50%. Most voters had short wait times, but racial disparities persisted. Disruptions at polling places were rare but measurable. Voter confidence varied significantly by party, with Republicans showing much lower confidence than Democrats. This is the only SPAE report on a midterm election cycle since 2014, enabling direct comparisons between presidential and midterm voting experiences.

Using this tool, NCSL tracks and classifies voter ID laws across all 50 states along two dimensions: whether they require voters to present an ID and whether the requirement is strict or non-strict.

Using a comparative state-politics approach and new data, authors demonstrate that exposure to COVID substantially influenced voter turnout, and election policies had a major effect on whether a voter cast a ballot by mail, early in-person, or in-person on Election Day. Unique circumstances, including the emergence of voting policies as a polarizing issue, also spawned a new partisan voting gap that is especially prominent among heavy news consumers. Compared to 2018, many more Democrats than Republicans abandoned Election Day voting in favor of mail voting.

In this paper, authors compare electronic and paper ballot voting systems, examining how election laws directly impact operational efficiency and capacity, and what this means for polling place design and resource allocation.

The findings of this research suggest that signature validation, which serves as a primary safeguard for mail voting integrity, may be systematically influenced by underlying biases.

The biennial comprehensive survey of election administration across all 50 states, five territories, and D.C., covering the 2022 midterm general election—widely seen as a return to normal operations after the COVID-19-disrupted 2020 election. Key in-person voting findings include: 645,219 poll workers assisted with early and Election Day voting, including more than 80,000 first-time poll workers (16.7% of the total); election officials reported that poll worker recruitment was meaningfully easier than in the 2018 midterms; e-pollbook adoption grew significantly, with 2,271 local jurisdictions in 40 states using them (up 60% from 2008); nearly all states (94.6%) reported conducting logic and accuracy testing of voting machines before tabulation; and the 2022 EAVS collected data on drop boxes and ballot curing for the first time, finding nearly 13,000 drop boxes in use nationally. The survey also covers voter registration, UOCAVA voting, absentee voting, provisional balloting, and voting technology across all reporting jurisdictions.

This paper present a case study examining the implementation of Election Day vote centers, finding that successful adoption requires coordination across multiple elements of the election ecosystem.

This research assesses whether messages reinforcing election integrity increased participation in the 2020 election through a large-scale voter mobilization field experiment in California. Registrants were mailed a letter that described either existing safeguards to prevent vote-by-mail fraud or the ability to track one’s ballot and ensure that it was counted. Analysis of state voter records reveals that neither message increased turnout over a simple election reminder or even no contact, even among subgroups where larger effects might be expected.

In the 2020 North Carolina general election, about 82 percent of the roughly 26,000 voters who submitted mail ballots eligible for a cure process ultimately cast a counted ballot. About 39 percent of these counted ballots were cured in-person, and greater access to in-person curing options increased the likelihood that a ballot was cured. Democratic and non-major party registrants cured their ballots more often than Republican registrants, particularly when they lived in a county in which the Democratic Party was running a coordinated campaign focused on curing. While election officials sometimes attempted to inform voters by phone about the need to cure, there was no clear relationship between having a phone number recorded in a registration record and the likelihood that a ballot was cured.