One of the major concerns I heard from voters on election day was about privacy. The large paper ballot that we give voters does not come with the traditional ballot envelope that the punch card ballot had. We talked with other counties around the state in trying to arrive at the best way to give the voter some secrecy. The privacy cover we provided was the result of that research. We felt that it afforded the same level of privacy as a privacy folder, but would be easier for voters and judges to handle. It appears from a few comments that I have heard on line, in person, and over the phone, that some people still had concerns.

First, some judges apparently were not offering the privacy cover. We have trained all our judges to offer the cover to every voter. What we have heard from other jurisdictions is that many voters don’t want the cover. It is possible that over the course of the day, as many voters turn down the cover, that some judges became lax in offering them. We will reiterate this in our next election judge class. I am also going to look for a plastic display that would make the privacy cover more obvious to voters. Any other suggestions are welcome.

Second, some voters apparently didn’t like the design and felt that the privacy cover should shield both the front and back of the ballot. I think that the chance of someone viewing an exposed ballot from the underneath side are minuscule. My guess is that the concern stemmed more from the fact that some voters may have had to manipulate their ballot at the ballot box, perhaps turning it over to reveal judge’s initials. We will look into a new cover that can shield both sides of the ballot.

Many voters take a light hearted approach to this issue, not caring who sees their ballot. That is not the position of this office. We want to provide secrecy to every voter and will work to improve this in future elections. Thanks to all who have expressed their concerns.

Trackback URI | Comments RSS