Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Dallas County GOP Will Agree To Use Countywide Voting Sites for May 26 Runoff Election

The party had forced a switch to precinct voting during the primary election that confused and frustrated voters.

News

Voters lining up to vote.

Voters line up at the Oak Lawn Branch Library voting center on Primary Election Day in Dallas on March 3, 2026. Republicans' decision to hold a split primary from the Democrats and to eliminate countywide voting forced Dallas County voters to cast ballots at assigned neighborhood precincts, leading to confusion. Republicans have now decided to use countywide polling locations for the May 26 runoff election.

Shelby Tauber for The Texas Tribune

Dallas County Republicans will agree to allow voters to cast ballots at countywide voting sites for the May 26 runoff election after a switch to precinct-based voting sites caused chaos, the county party chair said Tuesday.

Dallas County Republican Chairman Allen West supported the use of precinct-based sites earlier this month, but said using precincts again for the runoff would expose the county party to “increased risk and voter confusion” because the county is planning to use countywide sites for upcoming municipal elections and early voting.


“To then shift for the one day runoff election to precincts would bring about large scale disruption,” West said in a statement.

That’s what critics say resulted from the Dallas GOP’s decision to use precinct sites on Election Day for the primary on March 3.

Under Texas state law, county political parties have the authority to choose how they administer their elections. During the primary, Dallas County Republicans wouldn’t agree to participate in the countywide polling place program, which the county has used for years.

Because both parties must agree in order for countywide sites to be used, both Democrats and Republicans in the county instead had to cast ballots at assigned neighborhood precincts on the day of the election, though the county was still able to offer countywide sites during the early voting period.

Experts and election officials warned the change was likely to confuse voters, and on Election Day, hundreds, potentially thousands, of voters had to be redirected after finding out they were at the wrong polling locations. As polling hours were extended in the wake of the confusion, at least 1,756 Democratic primary voters in Dallas cast late ballots that ultimately weren’t counted. It’s not clear how many Republican primary voters were impacted by the shift. West did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Republicans still want a separate primary — which means the parties won’t share poll workers and voting equipment — so runoff voters will likely still see separate lines for Republicans and Democrats, according to West’s statement. West said he plans to sign a contract with the county elections department this week to make the change official. He also signaled it isn’t permanent, saying the party successfully executed the primary and can assess lessons learned “and improve upon the process and procedures for March 2028.”

The move by Dallas Republicans and other county parties to eliminate the countywide polling place program for the primary follows a years-long push by Republicans to ditch it entirely.

Republican critics of countywide voting claim it makes elections less secure because it could allow people “to double or triple vote,” though there’s no evidence that countywide voting is less secure. In addition, Texas election officials have procedures in place to prevent double voting, including the use of technology that helps officials know in real time who has voted and where.

The countywide voting program, which has been in use in Texas for more than 20 years, has allowed counties to save money by using fewer polling locations (and fewer workers and equipment) that are centralized for all voters to use.


Dallas County GOP Will Agree To Use Countywide Voting Sites for May 26 Runoff Election was originally published by Votebeat Texas and is republished with permission.

Natalia Contreras is a reporter for Votebeat in partnership with The Texas Tribune. She is based in Corpus Christi. Contact Natalia at ncontreras@votebeat.org.


Read More

People at voting booths.

A clear breakdown of voter ID laws under the Constitution, federal statutes, and court rulings—plus analysis of new Trump administration proposals to impose nationwide voter identification requirements.

Getty Images, LPETTET

Just the Facts: Voter ID, States’ Powers, and Federal Limits

The Fulcrum approaches news stories with an open mind and skepticism, presenting our readers with a broad spectrum of viewpoints through diligent research and critical thinking. As best we can, remove personal bias from our reporting and seek a variety of perspectives in both our news gathering and selection of opinion pieces. However, before our readers can analyze varying viewpoints, they must have the facts.


Few issues generate more heat and are less understood than voter ID.

Keep Reading Show less
A person signing a piece of paper with other people around them.

Javon Jackson, center, was able to register to vote following passage of a 2019 Nevada law that restored voting rights to formerly incarcerated individuals.

The Nation Is Missing Millions of Voters Due to Lack of Rights for Former Felons

If you gathered every American with a prison record into one contiguous territory and admitted it to the union, you would create the 12th-largest state. It would be home to at least 7 million to 8 million people and hold a dozen votes in the Electoral College.

In a close presidential race, this hypothetical state of the formerly incarcerated could decide who wins the White House.

Keep Reading Show less
With the focus on the voting posters, the people in the background of the photo sign up to vote.

An analysis of Trump’s SAVE Act strategy, the voter ID debate, and how Pew data is being misused—exploring election integrity, voter suppression, and the political fight shaping U.S. democracy.

Getty Images, SDI Productions

Stop Fighting Voter ID. Start Defining It.

President Trump doesn't need the SAVE America Act to pass. He only needs the debate to continue. Every minute spent arguing about voter suppression repeats the underlying premise — that noncitizen voting is a real and widespread problem — until it feels like an established fact. The question is whether Democrats will contest Republicans’ definition before the frame hardens.

Trump's claim that 88% of Americans support the bill traces to a Pew Research Center survey — a survey that found 83% support a “government-issued photo ID to vote,” not extreme vetting for proof of citizenship. That support included 95% of Republicans and 71% of Democrats, indicating genuine, broad, bipartisan support for a basic civic principle. That's worth taking seriously.

Keep Reading Show less
People standing at voting booths.

The proposed SAVE Act and MEGA Act would require proof of citizenship to register to vote, risking the disenfranchisement of millions of eligible Americans.

Getty Images, EvgeniyShkolenko

The SAVE Act is a Solution in Search of A Problem

The federal government seems to be barreling toward a federal election power grab. Trump's State of the Union address called for the Senate to push through the SAVE Act, which has already passed the House, in the name of so-called "election integrity." And the SAVE Act isn’t the only such bill. Like the SAVE Act, the Make Elections Great Again (MEGA) Act—introduced in the House—would require voters to provide a document outlined in the Act that allegedly proves their U.S. citizenship. We’ve been down this road before in Texas, and spoiler alert: it was unworkable.

Both the SAVE and MEGA Acts would disenfranchise millions of eligible U.S. citizens without making our federal elections more secure. They seek to roll out a faulty federal voter registration system, despite the existing separate registration and voting process for state and local elections. And these Acts target a minuscule “problem”—but would unleash mass voter purges and confusion.

Keep Reading Show less