Studies have shown that people with disabilities eligible to vote are 20 percentage points less likely than non-disabled people to do so with similar demographics. This PowerPoint researches the barriers that exist to voting and suggest legislative, structural and community solutions to increase voter participation for individuals with disabilities.

1. Barriers to Democracy:
Voter Accessibility in
Minnesota

2. 2
Global Context of Voting
53.6%
58.3% 58.3%
82.7%
87.7%
107.8%
0%
50%
100%
Canada Great Britain USA Australia Greece Dem. Rep of
Congo

3. 3
Agenda
• Historical Context
• Why did we get involved
• The first survey
• The post-election survey
• Solutions

4. 4
Universal Declaration of Human Rights
Article XXI
The will of the people shall be the basis of the
authority of government; this will shall be
expressed in periodic and genuine elections
which shall be by universal and equal suffrage
and shall be held by secret vote or by
equivalent free voting procedures.”
Right to Vote

5. 5
Minnesota Constitution
ARTICLE VII Section 1.
Every person 18 years of age or more who has
been a citizen of the United States for three
months and who has resided in the precinct for
30 days next preceding an election shall be
entitled to vote in that precinct.
Right to Vote

6. 6
Recent Landmarks
Voting Accessibility for the Elderly and
Handicapped Act 1984
• Requires polling places to be physically
accessible to people with disabilities
Americans with Disabilities Act 1990
• Provided for ballot and poll access for
those with disabilities
Help America Vote Act 2002
• Mandates that all polling places have at
least one disability-accessible voting
device

7. 7
Why Voting? Why Courage?
What if you wanted to vote but the polling place
was locked?
For many of the 33.7 million Americans with
disabilities of voting age, this situation is all too
real

8. 8
Why Voting? Why Courage?
• Courage Center is committed to advancing the
lives of children and adults experiencing barriers
to health and independence.
• Empowering people to advocate for themselves,
friends, family and the whole community is
essential for moving Minnesota forward.

9. 9
Why Voting? Why Courage?
A study by researchers Kay Schriner and
Douglas Kruse shows that people with
disabilities eligible to vote are 20 percentage
points less likely than non-disabled people to
do so.
University of Arkansas Study

10. 10
Why Voting? Why Courage?
• If people with disabilities voted at the same
rate as the non-disabled, 10M more votes
would have been cast in the last Presidential
election - a major voting bloc.
• Voting is power, and measuring the size of a
group's vote can significantly impact that
group's political muscle.
Untapped Power of the Disability Vote

11. 11
The First Survey Development
• We developed the survey by reviewing the
literature and looking at common problems
with access.
• We wanted to hit on all types of
accessibility – including physical and social
access

12. 12
The First Survey Data Collection
• We distributed the survey through various
organizations, particularly utilizing the
reach of the Minnesota Consortium for
Citizens with Disabilities
• They were distributed in hard copy and by
email
• We received 144 surveys
Conducted in March of 2008

13. 13
First Survey Outcomes
• 97% of the respondents voted in Minnesota
• 90% voted at the polling place, 10% absentee
• 65% of the respondents knew that accessible
voting machines were available, but only 44%
used them
• 64% of respondents knew that they could use
an absentee ballot, and 54% said they knew
they could request to always get an absentee
ballot.
By the numbers

14. 14
First Survey Outcomes
• 26% of respondents reported that transportation
or parking were barriers to the polls
• While the individual responses for physical
barriers were not high, 24% of respondents
reported at least one physical barrier to the polls
• Heavy doors, signage, curb cuts, steps, narrow or
obstructed paths, narrow doors, ramps, and
revolving doors were the biggest challenges
Physical Barriers to Voting

15. 15
First Survey Outcomes
• 20% of respondents reported that providing
identification was a barrier to the polls
• 11% of the respondents reported that
election judges had presented barriers to
voting.
Other Barriers to Voting

16. 16
However, we had more questions:
• We didn’t specify which election, so could not
say whether these were problems that had
existed at one time, or existed currently
• We decided to repeat the survey after the
2008 elections to see what the experiences of
were in a Presidential year
• We also wanted more information about
where the respondents lived, and more about
their health condition

17. 17
New Survey
• We received 127 surveys, returned by
individuals who were eligible to vote in the
2008 Presidential elections.
• The respondents had a wide range of
disabilities, including:
Completed this Summer

18. 18
Breakdown of Disabilities
4%
3%
13%
29%
15%
15%
11%
5%
5%
• Neuromuscular diagnoses
• Aquired Brain Injury
• Spinal Cord Injury
• Mobility impairments
• Vision deficits
• Mental Health Diagnosis
• Cognitive deficits
• Developmental Disability
• Other

19. 19
Respondents were Statewide

20. 20
New Survey
• 55% of the respondents were aware of
accessible voting machines
• 31% of the respondents had used the accessible
voting machines
• However, 10% reported that election judges
being unable to use the accessible voting
machines was a barrier to voting
How we vote

21. 21
New Survey
• 78% were aware that they could vote by
absentee ballot
• Respondents had strong feelings about
going to the polls and voting
• Overall distrust of absentee ballots, and
whether they would be counted
Absentee Ballots

22. 22
Comments on Absentee Ballots
• “They have to count my ballots if I come in
person, absentee ballots may not be counted.”
• “It’s traditional for me to vote in person.”
• “Why should I [vote absentee]? I have the
right to vote in person and shouldn’t be forced
to vote absentee”
Comments Included:

23. 23
Comments on Absentee Ballots
• “Because I want to participate in the process”
Respondents wanted to be part of the social
experience as a member of the community,
and specifically to demonstrate that everyone
votes.
• Some eligible voters didn’t know that they
could vote absentee, or found the absentee
process complicated or confusing.

24. 24
New Survey
TRANSPORTATION
• 34% identified transportation, parking or
drop off problems as barriers to the polls
Barriers Identified by Respondents

25. 25
New Survey
PHYSICAL BARRIERS
• 35% identified physical barriers to the
polls and to voting.
Barriers Identified by Respondents

26. 26
New Survey
• Doors too heavy or difficult to open – 17%
• Lack of signage to accessible entrance – 13%
• Narrow or obstructed paths, in or outside of
the building – 10%
• Steps – 9%
• Lack of curb cuts at the voting site – 9%
• Doors that are too narrow – 6%
• Ramps too steep – 3%
• Revolving doors – 2%
Barriers Identified by Respondents

27. 27
New Survey
ELECTION JUDGES/STAFF
• 14% of the respondents identified the polling
staff as a barrier to voting (increase over last
survey)
• Only 37% of the respondents were able to vote
without asking for help.
Barriers Identified by Respondents

28. 28
New Survey
IDENTIFICATION
• 8% reported that the need for identification
was a current barrier to voting
• In one case, the voter lived in a group home,
did not have an ID, and didn’t receive bills in
the mail so could not use those as ID. The
staff at the group home would not accompany
the individual to vote.
Barriers Identified by Respondents

29. 29
What are the Solutions
• Long lines
• Difficulty getting a picture ID
• Difficulty physically handling the ID
• Difficulty with transportation to get the ID
• Problem with losing the ID
Picture ID
We asked if needing a picture ID would be a
barrier to voting. 10% said that it would, and cited
the following problems:

30. 30
What are the Solutions
Assessment of the environment
1) Is community transportation available
throughout the voting day? (not just work
hours)
2) Are the judges trained and comfortable
with the voting machines?

31. 31
Poll Accessibility Checklist
• Are the doors (interior or exterior) too narrow
for wheelchairs?
• Is there adequate parking and drop-off space
near the polling area?
• Are there curb cuts at the voting sites?
• Are there narrow or obstructed paths inside or
outside of the building?

32. 32
Poll Accessibility Checklist
• Is the voting location and parking and drop off
areas clearly marked?
• Are there steps between parking and the
voting location?
• If there is a ramp, is it of appropriate grade?
• Are there heavy doors that must be opened?
• Are there revolving doors?

33. 33
Community Solutions
• Pilot project in the Seven County Metro
• Multiple partners including MN Council of
Non-Profits, Merrick Inc. and Target
• Driver recruitment entirely voluntary- 50+
volunteers in total
• Multiple ride options on Election Day
including 6 fully accessible minivans
• A total of 242 rides given on Nov 4th
Rides to the Polls

34. 34
Community Solutions
Selected Stories and Quotes:
‘Thank you for you service today. I had a stroke and
this way the only way I could vote.’
‘Accessible Service + Curbside voting + Respectful
Help = One More Voice! A stronger Democracy’
‘Ming, originally from Shanghai, China and a new
citizen. Due to his physical disability he was unable to
get to his polling place independently. He called for a
ride and was picked up by a volunteer driver at his
senior citizen high rise and was excited to vote for the
first time.’
Rides to the Polls

35. 35
Innovative Solutions
• The Australian Electoral Commission has
mobile polling teams that take portable
polling places to many eligible voters who are
not able to get to a polling place.
• Mobile polling is carried out around Australia
during the 12 days before election day and
on election day.
Mobile Polling Teams

36. 36
Innovative Solutions
• Mobile polling teams visited hospitals and
nursing homes to enable patients and
residents to cast their vote.
• In 2004 2,107 hospitals and nursing homes
around Australia were visited by a total of
445 mobile polling teams in the days leading
up to and including election day.
Mobile Polling Teams

37. 37
Innovative Solutions
• The AEC used road, air and sea transport to
visit Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
communities and their outstations, pastoral
properties, small towns, tourist resorts and
mine sites
• 43 mobile polling teams visited 382 remote
locations in the Northern Territory, Western
Australia, South Australia and Queensland
Mobile Polling Teams

38. 38
Summary
• Access to the polls is still a major issue for
individuals with disabilities
• Action at the community and state level
needs to take place
• An examination of the organizational set up
of elections needs to occur

39. 39
Thank You
Courage Center
www.couragecenter.org
Nancy Flinn & Christian Knights