Convened by the American Association for the
Advancement of Science
Main | Participants
For persons with disabilities, the Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA)
is not merely an election reform law. It is a civil rights statute, which
mandates for the first time that voters with disabilities have the right
to cast a private and independent vote. To give effect to this promise,
HAVA requires that every polling place be accessible and have at least
one accessible voting system available for voters with disabilities.
Because of HAVA, many voters with disabilities are casting secret ballots
– just like other voters – for the first time in their lives.
Unfortunately, due to implementation delays, HAVA is
not helping all of the voters with disabilities it intended to serve.
Voting system guidelines, meant to instruct states on voting machine accessibility,
do not go into effect until December 2007 – almost two years after HAVA’s
accessibility deadline of January 1, 2006. Accordingly, states purchased
new voting technology that might have met pre-HAVA accessibility standards,
but which fall short of recently-adopted HAVA Volunteer Voting System
Guidelines (VVSG). These guidelines are designed to provide accessibility
to voters with a greater range of disabilities. Not only do many current
“accessible” voting systems fail to meet the VVSG, but they also have
accessibility features that are, in some instances, onerous for individuals
with disabilities to use. For example, some voting systems do not allow
voters using the audio output to adjust the speed of speech or move between
contests in order to maneuver through the ballot more quickly.
One challenge for the future is to ensure the development
of accessible voting machines that are both easy to use and provide the
greatest access for the greatest number of voters with disabilities.
Implementation of HAVA’s accessibility requirement has focused almost
exclusively on voters who are blind and even more specifically on those
who have been blind long enough to develop skills to benefit from the
accessibility features available on many of the voting machines in use.
A lack of appreciation of the great diversity and degree of disabilities
has resulted in voters with other disabilities – e.g., low vision, limited
manual dexterity, mental disabilities, hearing disabilities – deriving
little or no benefit from the provisions of HAVA that were meant to protect
them as well. Meeting the varied needs of voters across the spectrum
of disability requires research with an appreciation of all of the categories
and subcategories of disabilities, as well as the degrees and severity
of disabilities, and the varied challenges presented by each of these
factors. This can be accomplished in part by consulting experts with
knowledge about various types of disabilities and specific expertise and
background on assistive technology for individuals with disabilities.
Another great challenge is making certain that the evolving
standards of accuracy and security for voting systems take into account
the goal of universal accessibility so as not to undermine the gains achieved
and promised under HAVA. Electronic voting machines have provided unprecedented
access for some voters with disabilities, but they have also raised questions
about the integrity of our elections. Whatever technologies are devised
to address perceived and real vulnerabilities must also be fully accessible
to voters with disabilities. Not only is this required under federal
law, but it is also necessary to providing an election system that is
worthy of our democracy. For example, if paper trails are deemed necessary
to provide voter confidence or to ensure security and accuracy, paper
trail technologies must be fully accessible. Voters with disabilities
also want secure and fair elections and should not be forgotten when new
technologies are developed to ensure election integrity.
The need for additional research on behalf of voters
with disabilities is not limited to voting systems. Research regarding
election administration and election reform needs to consider the impact
on voters with disabilities and ensure their equal access to the franchise.
Too often, individuals with disabilities are an afterthought in debates
about election reform. For instance, recent studies in Georgia and Wisconsin
examined the impact of voter identification legislation on certain segments
of the states’ voting age populations. Despite evidence that voter identification
requirements disproportionately disenfranchise voters with disabilities
– who often do not drive and therefore do not possess photo identification
– these studies failed to consider this population. Whether the issue
is emerging voting technologies, novel approaches to election administration
– like vote centers and vote by mail – or efforts to refine tried and
true methods of conducting elections, the difficulties encountered by
voters with disabilities must be considered and addressed.
National Disability Rights Network
The National Disability Rights Network (NDRN) is the
nonprofit membership organization for the federally mandated Protection
and Advocacy (P&A) Systems and Client Assistance Programs (CAP) for
individuals with disabilities. Collectively, the P&A/CAP network is
the largest provider of legally based advocacy services to people with
disabilities in the United States.
Section 291 of HAVA provides that P&As are to “ensure
the full participation in the electoral process for individuals with disabilities,
including registering to vote, casting a vote and accessing polling places.”
The P&As’ unique role under HAVA provides
them the opportunity to lend their expertise to voters, advocates, and
election officials who are trying to comply with HAVA and other statutes
relating to individuals with disabilities.
| 
