Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Why not allow us to use whatever polling place we find most convenient?

Opinion

voting locations
Stephen Maturen/Getty Images

Malbrough started the Georgia Youth Poll Worker Project this summer after graduating from Georgia State and becoming a fellow with the Andrew Goodman Foundation, which promotes political engagement by young people


In the age of early voting and advanced election technology, one of the main requirements for citizens on Election Day is obsolete. It is time for us as a country to change our election procedures and how we change the processes we use to administer it.

We have the ability to build a democracy that is more efficient and streamlined, and it is time for us to act on it.

Voters walking into a polling place on Election Day are usually presented with three options based on their address. If they are a resident of that local precinct, they can head to the voting booth right there. If they are not a resident of the precinct, they will be given information on their appropriate precinct and its voting location. If they don't want to head to a different polling place, they can stay where they are and cast a provisional ballot.

Poll workers are generally instructed to almost always permit people to cast a ballot, even if it's provisional, to ensure no voters are turned away but also to give local election administrators time to sort out disputes and certify the legitimacy of ballots after the election.

Before the advent of the internet and subsequent technologies, the reason for getting people to vote close to home was obvious — to make sure they were given the right ballots. One precinct may be in a different city council or even congressional district than the precinct across the road.

Poll workers used to have no way verify the identity of voters, and provide the proper ballot, to a voter from another precinct. But modern software, the internet and high-speed printers now mean that voters can be identified, and quickly provided with just the right ballot, at any polling place in their county if not their state.

The ability to cast a ballot wherever the voyager finds most convenient expands democracy and allows for easier election administration.

Every Election Day we see news footage of long lines snaking out of schools and libraries, and people waiting sometimes for hours after the polls are supposed to have closed in order to cast their ballots. Many of these delays are caused by technology failures and precincts that are at once overpopulated with voters and understaffed by poll workers. And many of these voters are stuck in line because they are effectively required to vote in their home precinct.

Technology can allow voters to find a firehouse or city hall that's not overcrowded — and head there to vote, even if it's in the next town down the road. This would reduce wait times as well as alleviate stress on poll workers who oftentimes have to work extended hours every election.

In-person absentee voting, which is often known as early voting, is an option 40 states use to expand voter access. Some states offer this option for several weeks, others only for a few days, but the benefits are shorter waiting times for voters and easier administration of the election by the state. In most of them, polling centers are open to all residents of a county, so voting close to home is not required.

As a country we are working toward a culture of voting in advance of Election Day, in effect creating something closer to an Election Month. The non-official holidays that promote exercising of the franchise, such as National Voter Registration Day and Vote Early Day, are helping. What would help more would be a further blurring of the distinctions between early voting, provisional voting and Election Day voting.

The technology is here to make that happen. We have the tools. Integrated technologies could be a cost effective way to modernize and secure our democracy.

Read More

Is Politico's Gerrymandering Poll and Analysis Misleading?
Image generated by IVN staff.

Is Politico's Gerrymandering Poll and Analysis Misleading?

Politico published a story last week under the headline “Poll: Americans don’t just tolerate gerrymandering — they back it.”

Still, a close review of the data shows the poll does not support that conclusion. The poll shows that Americans overwhelmingly prefer either an independent redistricting process or a voter-approved process — not partisan map-drawing without voter approval. This is the exact opposite of the narrative Politico’s headline and article promoted. The numbers Politico relied on to justify its headline came only from a subset of partisans.

Keep ReadingShow less
Is Politico's Gerrymandering Poll and Analysis Misleading?
Image generated by IVN staff.

Is Politico's Gerrymandering Poll and Analysis Misleading?

Politico published a story last week under the headline “Poll: Americans don’t just tolerate gerrymandering — they back it.”

Still, a close review of the data shows the poll does not support that conclusion. The poll shows that Americans overwhelmingly prefer either an independent redistricting process or a voter-approved process — not partisan map-drawing without voter approval. This is the exact opposite of the narrative Politico’s headline and article promoted. The numbers Politico relied on to justify its headline came only from a subset of partisans.

Keep ReadingShow less
For the Sake of Democracy, We Need to Rethink How We Assess History in Schools

classroom

Photo by Ivan Aleksic on Unsplash

For the Sake of Democracy, We Need to Rethink How We Assess History in Schools

“Which of the following is a right guaranteed by the Bill of Rights of the United States Constitution?"

  1. Right to public education
  2. Right to health care
  3. Right to trial by a jury
  4. Right to vote

The above question was labeled “medium” by the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) for the 2022 8th-grade U.S. history assessment.

Keep ReadingShow less
White Books and Curriculum Damage Black Children

The rise of book bans and erasure of Black history from classrooms emotionally and systematically harms Black children. It's critical that we urge educators to represent Black experiences and stories in class.

Getty Images, Klaus Vedfelt

White Books and Curriculum Damage Black Children

When my son, Jonathan, was born, one of the first children’s books I bought was "So Much" by Trish Cooke. I was captivated by its joyful depiction of a Black family loving their baby boy. I read it to him often, wanting him to know that he was deeply loved, seen, and valued. In an era when politicians are banning books, sanitizing curricula, and policing the teaching of Black history, the idea of affirming Black children’s identities is miscast as divisive and wrong. Forty-two states have proposed or passed legislation restricting how race and history can be taught, including Black history. PEN America reported that nearly 16,000 books (many featuring Black stories) were banned from schools within the last three years across 43 states. These prohibitive policies and bans are presented as protecting the ‘feelings’ of White children, while at the same time ignoring and invalidating the feelings of Black children who live daily with the pain of erasure, distortion, and disregard in schools.

When I hear and see the ongoing devaluation of Black children in schools and public life, I, and other Black parents, recognize this pain firsthand. For instance, recently, my teenage granddaughter, Jaliyah, texted me, asking to visit the National Museum of African American History and Culture in Washington, D.C., because she had heard that the President planned to close it. For what felt like the millionth time, my heart broke with the understanding that too many people fail to rally on behalf of Black children. Jaliyah’s question revealed what so many Black children intuitively understand—that their histories, their feelings, and their futures are often treated as expendable.

Keep ReadingShow less