Last week, when Minnesotans stood in line at their various polling places to exercise their civic duty on Election Day, few probably gave much thought to the people they saw working at the polls — other than to perhaps wonder why they couldn’t make the lines move any faster. For me, however, last Tuesday was different, as I was one of the people controlling the lines.
For those who don’t know, the people who run the polling places during elections are called “election judges.” This year, after some encouragement from my coworkers at the House of Representatives, I volunteered to serve as an election judge in Ramsey County. It was a first for me, and I’m glad I did it. Not only was it a fascinating experience; I also learned more about elections than most people will ever know (or would probably care to know, truthfully).
Now that I’ve had a chance to collect my thoughts on what happened that day — and before they fade from memory completely — I wanted to share some ideas on things that I think could be easily improved about the way polling places operate.
But first, let me say that volunteering as an election judge was a great experience, and I’d highly recommend it to anyone who cares about the integrity of the electoral process. I was surprised to learn that, in Ramsey County at least, election judges are actually paid, but I honestly would have done it for free. The other judges I worked with were great, and it was gratifying to be able to work with such a dedicated group of people.
That said, it seemed to me like there are a few glaring weak points in the way that polling places are run, and I’d like to offer my thoughts on how they might be fixed, or at least improved.
1) Find More Judges
Okay, first a little background. After my application to become an election judge was accepted, I received notification that I was to attend a two-hour training session one weeknight in late October and then show up at the El Rio Vista Recreation Center (a.k.a. Neighborhood House, a.k.a. the Wellstone Center) on Election Day. At 6:00 a.m. on Tuesday, Nov. 4, I reported for duty and was selected (rather arbitrarily) to serve as a registration judge — making sure that unregistered voters are properly registered according to state law before they can vote. As it turns out, this is a fairly frenetic job.
I was extremely fortunate in that my partner at the registration table was a friendly and knowledgeable St. Paul librarian who had worked in several previous elections and knew the ins and outs of the registration process by heart. Without her, my day would’ve been a lot more difficult. (She also spoke fluent Spanish — something that comes in handy in the heart of District del Sol.) One thing I learned last Tuesday is that having a group of quality people running a polling place is critical — and there simply are not enough poll workers to go around.
Between me and the librarian, we registered 236 new voters during the course of the day — approximately 118 each. Many of these people had to be vouched for by voters already registered in the precinct — a process that basically doubles the amount of paperwork involved. Many of the new registrants spoke little or no English, which naturally made it difficult to explain to them what kinds of documentation they needed to produce in order to be eligible to vote. At various points throughout the day, communication issues ground the registration process to a halt, forcing frustrated would-be voters to languish in line. Adding a few more bodies to the registration table could’ve easily simplified things. The counties need more judges, so if you’re reading this, please, volunteer to be an election judge next time.
2) Get Some Computers
At my polling place, one of the most common problems we faced throughout the day was having to redirect voters who were attempting to vote in the wrong precinct. (A great many people seem to think that either you can vote anywhere you want to, or that your proper polling place is simply whichever one is closest to your house.) Unfortunately, our repeated attempts to steer confused voters to their correct polling places quickly turned into an exercise in futility — one that could’ve been avoided with nothing more than a laptop computer and a wi-fi Internet connection. Even an iPhone would’ve worked better than what we had.
What we had was a pair of “precinct finders” — red-covered, plastic-bound flip books that allow poll workers to determine a voter’s ward and precinct by looking up their house number and street name. These precinct finders, though accurate, are extremely difficult to read and serve as a virtual catalyst for human error. An inattentive poll worker can easily misdirect a voter to the wrong precinct — and in fact, an election judge in a neighboring precinct did exactly that when they mistakenly sent someone to our precinct, forcing me to explain to the frustrated voter that in fact they had been in the right place the first time and now had to go back if they still wanted to vote.
Moreover, since the precinct finders only included information for Ramsey County, anyone from outside the county who showed up at our location was basically S.O.L. We had a number of residents from Dakota County — and one from as far away as Park Rapids — who for some reason thought they could vote in our precinct. We informed them that they had to vote elsewhere; however, we had no phone numbers for their home counties or anyone else who could actually direct them to the proper polling place, so we essentially sent them away with nothing. Did they actually end up going to the right place and voting that day? Who knows.
And thusly did we squander untold tracts of time dealing with problems that could’ve been solved in a matter of seconds with a simple trip to the Minnesota Secretary of State’s Web site. But even when the precinct finder could tell us where a voter was supposed to go, we had no way of directing them there; all we had for them was a building name and an address. Almost none of the judges — myself included — knew where these places were — and the few who did were usually tied up taking care of other things. We had no phone numbers for the other precincts, and no way to provide directions to the locations of the polls. We had a pair of maps on hand, but they were utterly useless. (Try giving out driving directions to a Somali immigrant sometime using a map with no street names on it and let me know how it goes.)
God only knows how many people didn’t get to vote Tuesday because I didn’t have access to Google Maps. Perhaps this is a good opportunity for Best Buy or some other retailer to purchase some good will and remedy the problem by lending wireless devices to polling places on Election Day. Any way you do it, the outdated “precinct finders” should only be used as a backup, or as a way to double-check what can be found online.
3) Update the Literature
At one point during the day, a dispute emerged over whether cell phone bills qualified as acceptable documentation for proof of residency purposes. After some discussion, we determined (correctly, apparently) that, yes, a current cell phone bill is acceptable as proof of a voter’s current residence. The confusion resulted from the literature available to us at the table, which said “telephone” bills were acceptable, but did not discuss cell phones specifically.
Once again, if we had had Internet access, we could’ve resolved the dispute simply by consulting the Minnesota Secretary of State’s Web site, or perhaps looking up the relevant statute. Barring that, the literature made available to poll workers on Election Day definitely needs to be updated to include answers to specific questions that reflect the realities of a rapidly changing modern existence.
Additionally, some kind of posters or even handouts should be available at each polling place that explain in several different languages (especially Spanish, Somali and Hmong) the process of voting and the documentation needed from each voter in order to be able to vote.
4) Have Someone Observe the Observers
Apparently, it’s customary to have DFL and Republican observers hang around the polling place on Election Day to watch over the process. Our location had one of each — both of them young guys, both clean-cut looking. They sat off to the side of the registration table and watched attentively over us as we signed up new voters. Both of our observers were polite, respectful and even helpful at times; apparently, though, some polling places were not as lucky as ours.
After some careful consideration, I’ve decided not to get into any details about the shenanigans that I heard took place in other precincts that day. There were even some shenanigans in our precinct — not from the observers, but rather from members of the public — but I’m not going into any details about those either. Suffice it to say that someone should always be on hand to watch the watchers on Election Day.
14 Comments
November 11, 2008 at 10:19 am
Hey Nick, nice article. But I’m curious about something. When you wrote about checking the residency requirements etc., I wondered … when does someone actually check for citizenship? What is used for proof that the person registering is even legally eligible to vote?
November 11, 2008 at 11:30 am
Tonight we’re doing a Good Question for WCCO on voting– and whether we should count votes from people who can’t fill in the circle correctly. Of course- the law says we have to — but should we?
November 11, 2008 at 2:38 pm
Maz,
My understanding is that election judges in Minnesota are not allowed, under any circumstances, to ask for proof of citizenship; however, being a U.S. citizen is of course a requirement for voter eligibility. Voter registration forms ask potential voters to affirm twice that they are U.S. citizens — once by checking a box at the top of the form, and again by signing their name at the bottom of the form. Of course, someone could potentially lie about their status, but my understanding is that doing so would be a felony. If someone challenged that particular vote and it was subsequently discovered that the person had committed fraud, they could potentially be deported.
We actually had one guy try to register who wasn’t a citizen. He handed his form to me without checking the box; I handed it back to him and asked him if he could finish filling it out. He told me he was in the process of applying for citizenship but was not actually technically a citizen yet. We informed him that he could not legally vote, whereupon he simply left the building. That was it.
November 12, 2008 at 2:44 pm
[...] an Election Judge” Nov.12, 2008 in Civics, Government Nick at Saintpaulitan talks about his experience as an election judge and lists a few things that he thinks would make polling places operate much more smoothly. [...]
November 12, 2008 at 4:30 pm
I swear I read in the paper (of course I can’t find the link now) that Ramsey County turned away eligible election judges because they had too many applicants. I wonder how they determine the adequate number of judges in each location?
November 12, 2008 at 6:25 pm
Despite the obvious challenges, I thought the election judges at my polling place did a fantastic job getting everyone through the line as quickly as possible. They even went up and down the line asking questions and making sure everyone had the documents they needed so that those who weren’t prepared didn’t have to wait until they got to the front of the line to find out.
November 12, 2008 at 6:29 pm
Good point. At my training, our instructors said that the county was short on election judges this year, but then later mentioned that so many people had volunteered to be election judges that there was a waiting list. That didn’t make much sense to me, but they explained that they simply didn’t have the resources to train those people in time for the election…
November 13, 2008 at 11:01 am
I also read about volunteer election workers being turned away in Minneapolis and St. Paul. It seems this concern should definitely be directed at the SoS office.
Also, I would suspect that the SoS could easily make an offline version of their literature and precinct finder, and put this on a laptop for the most populous precincts. Attach a printer, and you have the quickest and easiest way to direct voters to the correct locations.
These are wonderful concerns, but I hope that in addition to sharing them with the public here, you are directing them to election authorities as well! (I suspect the SoS could get the equivalent of a blank check for upgrades and overhauls after this most recent election!)
November 13, 2008 at 11:21 am
Thanks for volunteering in my hood! I voted, as always, at St. Matt’s.
November 13, 2008 at 4:20 pm
Having been an election judge every two years since 2002, I would concur with most of what Nick said.
I have my own suggestions.
1. Have separate lines for registered voters and voters who need to register. That eventually happened in my precinct, but it took way too long to get there. The person working the line should be able to check to see if the person in line is registered or not. It’s frustrating to wait in one long line only to be told you have to wait in another.
2. Make the absentee vote counting process crystal clear. I’ve processed absentee ballots before, and each time it seems harder, not easier. The instructions for processing ballots are in three different places and you start on one sheet and finish on another. It caused us to process a small batch of ballots (fewer than 20) without any of us to initial those ballots, which made me worry that someone will look at those ballots in the recount and insist they don’t count.
3. Revamp the same-day registration process. I worked as a registration judge for the better part of my shift and it was a study in chaos.
a. Our chair judge made three of us share one registration tablet. This meant that voters had to wait their turn to sign the oath in order to vote. Each of us could have had our own registration tablet and been responsible for our own pile of registrants.
b. One person told me that her husband, who lived in the same house, was told by the SoS website to go to a different precinct than it told her to go to. They double-checked each other’s info. He went to one, and she came to ours. I double checked her address in our precinct and according to my info, she belonged in ours. But she said her husband was allowed to register and vote at the other precinct. Nick’s computer suggestion is a good one, but is only as good as the SoS website and the folks doing the typing and checking.
Same-day registration is great, and I wouldn’t want it to go away because judges and voters make registration mistakes.
c. Post the requirements for new registrations (as in which documents you need) in a clear and bold way. Make posters that get posted on doors and along hallways, in several languages, and not just one white photocopied plain text sheet. People brought in leases, library fine bills, and even an old utility disconnection notice. I saw on one website, someone brought in an out-of-state driver’s license, a birth certificate, a SS card, student loan statement, and pay stubs, none of which would guarantee that the person registering actually lives in that precinct. People who aren’t judges might look at that list and wonder why we couldn’t register her. But, according to the website, she was calling from her car. Which means that she had a cell phone, and therefore should have a cell phone bill, which would qualify.
4. Test previous election judges on their rules knowledge so that if they know their stuff, they don’t have to waste two hours of time going over rules and regulations that they’re already aware of. Let them attend a half hour training that goes over any rule changes (like, for instance, the cell phone bill rule).
And general info: Did you know that you can bring your bills on your Blackberry or iPhone or other internet-enabled phone? And that those count as a bill?
November 13, 2008 at 9:56 pm
Thanks, everybody, for all your comments. I’m surprised anybody bothered to read such a long post. “Spycake,” I will indeed think about sending something to the Secretary of State’s office. And Jeanne, I completely agree with your suggestions. And it really is amazing what people bring in for documentation and think they can use it to register. We had a couple of people come back two or three times because they either misunderstood what was required of them or thought they could get by with any old thing. We tried to make it as clear as possible, but in my precinct language was definitely a barrier to communication. I do think technology can solve a lot of these issues in the near future — as long as it’s used properly.
November 14, 2008 at 2:11 pm
A good friend of mine is an election judge and she had all sorts of crazy stories about her polling place. She said the biggest issue she saw was that almost all of her fellow election judges were elderly and couldn’t neccessarily perform all of their duties to the extent they should have. For example, the judge who stands by the ballot counter needs to stand a certain distance away from the machine to protect the voter privacy. One of the elderly judges couldn’t stand that long so she sat in a chair. When the machine would beep because of an error (often to alert the voter of an overvote or undervote) the judge should have stood up and gone over to offer to help the voter discern the error message. This judge couldn’t keep getting up and down from their chair, so they just shouted instructions from six feet away, leaving the voter to fend for themselves.
She also told me that it is actually against the rules to form separate lines for registered and non-registered voters. The intention is that nothing should deter a voter from registering on the day of the election. Being preregistered should not give anyone an advantage on election day, like waiting in a shorter line. Voters need to be taken in the order they arrive, no matter what their registration status.
I also learned the reasoning behind NOT showing ID when you are preregistered. Apparently if a person pulls out their ID, the election judge is supposed to explicitly tell them that they don’t need to see it so that other people in line don’t think they need ID and get out of line if they don’t have one. You would think they would want people to prove their identity to minimize voter fraud, but if you think about it, having a state ID requires paying a fee. If they required everyone to have a state ID in oder to vote, it would be the equivalent of making people pay to vote.
I had a very positive experience at my polling place and all of the election judges did a fantastic job. I live in the Phillips Neighborhood of South Minneapolis which consists of a lot of non-native english speakers and folks with low education levels, which means a lot of first time voters. When I arrived during the lunch hour, there was exactly one person in line in front of me. My entire voting process took about 15 minutes. That being said, I think there is a lot of room for improvement in the election process, particularly with regards to some of the antiquated paper-based systems many people have referenced already.
November 14, 2008 at 11:39 pm
Claudia: There is no rule that there can’t be two lines, one for pre-registered and one for registered. I have been an election judge for 10 years and we have always had separate lines. We have a greeter judge that asks voters whether they are registered as the enter. If they are not, they are directed to the new registration table. I like the idea of walking outside to find people who aren’t registered and make sure they have the correct documentation. That is a great service to avoid getting into the building only to find out you are not prepared.
April 6, 2009 at 9:25 pm
Great ideas, is there a place to elaborate on this all?