	Background

		Bilingual Voting Requirements and Covered Jurisdictions

The Voting Rights Act was intended, among other things, to protect the  voting rights of U.S. citizens of certain ethnic groups whose command of  the English language may be limited. Election Officials in All But One Jurisdiction Reported Providing Bilingual Voting Assistance, but Experienced Challenges

Election officials in 13 of the 14 jurisdictions included in our review  reported providing some type of bilingual voting assistance at each stage  of the election process but also reported challenges in providing this  assistance. In part because DOJ’s guidance intentionally provides  jurisdictions some flexibility in how they implement bilingual voting  requirements and the needs and preferences of language minority  communities vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, election officials in  these 13 jurisdictions reported using varying strategies to organize their  bilingual voting assistance program staff and offices, work with CBOs,  recruit bilingual poll workers, determine where to target their bilingual  voting assistance programs, and conduct outreach to the language  minority community. The EAC has taken  recent steps to provide additional guidance and information to  jurisdictions on providing bilingual assistance. Some Forms of Bilingual Voting Assistance Were Perceived as More Useful than Others, but Formally Evaluating Its Usefulness Presented Many Challenges

Although we identified little data measuring the usefulness of various  types of bilingual voting assistance, election officials in eight jurisdictions  and CBO representatives in seven jurisdictions in our study told us that  they believed certain forms of assistance were more useful than others. While  the use of formal program evaluation tools has proven to be a successful  means for federal agencies to improve program effectiveness,  accountability, and service delivery, conducting formal evaluations of the  usefulness and effect of bilingual voting assistance is difficult for a variety  of reasons. Election officials and CBO representatives in some jurisdictions stated  that modifications could be made that would improve the usefulness of the  bilingual assistance currently provided to language minority voters. Some Election Officials and Community-Based Organization Representatives Attempted to Measure Aspects of Bilingual Assistance

None of the jurisdictions we included in our study had formally evaluated  the effectiveness of their bilingual voting assistance programs, although  most had used some means of gathering information about the assistance  provided. Agency Comments

We provided a draft of this report to DOJ and the EAC for review and  comment. Specifically, our objectives were to provide information on:  the ways that selected jurisdictions covered under Section 203 of the  Voting Rights Act have provided bilingual voting assistance as of the  November 2006 general election, and the challenges they reportedly  faced in providing such assistance; and  the perceived usefulness of this bilingual voting assistance, and the  extent to which the selected jurisdictions evaluated the usefulness of  such assistance to language minority voters. Because we selected a nongeneralizable sample of election jurisdictions,  the experiences and views discussed in this report cannot be generalized  to all 296 jurisdictions required to provide bilingual voting assistance  under Section 203 of the Voting Rights Act or to the community-based  organizations (CBO) in these jurisdictions. Using a semi- structured interview guide, we obtained information from the election  offices about    office staff assigned to provide bilingual assistance;  the office’s strategy for identifying needs and providing bilingual  assistance;  the type(s) and availability of bilingual assistance provided at different  stages of the election process for the November 2006 general election  and any subsequent elections, including voter education efforts, voter  registration, early voting and absentee voting, recruiting and training  poll workers, ballot design and voting systems, Election Day activities,  and the usefulness of this assistance to voters; and    supporting documentation as evidence of the types of bilingual voting  assistance (e.g., sample ballots, pamphlets, voter education materials,  etc.)
Why GAO Did This Study

The Voting Rights Act of 1965, as amended, contains, among other things, provisions designed to protect the voting rights of U.S. citizens of certain ethnic groups whose command of the English language may be limited. The Department of Justice (DOJ) enforces these provisions, and the Election Assistance Commission (EAC) serves as a national clearinghouse for election information and procedures. The Fannie Lou Hamer, Rosa Parks, and Coretta Scott King Voting Rights Act Reauthorization and Amendments Act of 2006 mandated that GAO study the implementation of bilingual voting under Section 203 of the act. This report discusses (1) the ways that selected jurisdictions covered under Section 203 of the Voting Rights Act have provided bilingual voting assistance as of the November 2006 general election and any subsequent elections through June 2007, and the challenges they reportedly faced in providing such assistance; and (2) the perceived usefulness of this bilingual voting assistance, and the extent to which the selected jurisdictions evaluated the usefulness of such assistance to language minority voters. To obtain details about this voting assistance, GAO obtained information from election officials in 14 of the 296 jurisdictions required to provide it, as well as from community representatives in 11 of these jurisdictions. These jurisdictions were selected to reflect a range of characteristics such as geographic diversity and varying language minority groups.

What GAO Found

All but 1 of the 14 election jurisdictions GAO contacted reported providing some form of oral or written bilingual voting assistance through such things as the use of bilingual poll workers, and each of the 14 jurisdictions reported challenges in providing assistance. Election offices reported providing similar types of oral and written bilingual voting assistance at each stage of the voting process--from voter registration to Election Day--for the November 2006 and subsequent elections. In nine of the jurisdictions, this bilingual assistance was supplemented by efforts of community-based organizations. In part because DOJ guidance intentionally provides jurisdictions flexibility in how they implement bilingual voting requirements, election offices used varied strategies to implement bilingual programs. Election officials in each of the 14 jurisdictions reported challenges in implementing bilingual assistance programs, including difficulty in recruiting bilingual poll workers and effectively targeting where to provide bilingual voting assistance. Officials in nine jurisdictions also noted they would benefit from additional guidance for providing bilingual assistance. The EAC has taken steps to provide additional guidance to jurisdictions, including plans to develop a set of management guidelines for jurisdictions to use in implementing their programs. GAO identified little quantitative data measuring the usefulness of various types of bilingual voting assistance. Election officials and community-based organization representatives noted that certain forms of assistance, such as having bilingual poll workers, were more useful than others. Some jurisdictions stated that modifications, including outreach to language minority groups, would improve the usefulness of bilingual assistance. While none of the 14 jurisdictions had attempted to formally evaluate their assistance, most reported gathering information about the usefulness of certain aspects of the assistance. While formal evaluations have proven to be a successful means to improve program effectiveness, conducting formal evaluations of the usefulness and effect of bilingual voting assistance is difficult. Key difficulties include identifying the appropriate indicators of success and isolating the effects of bilingual assistance efforts on voters from other influences on election processes. We provided a draft of this report to DOJ and the EAC for comment. DOJ provided no comments, and the EAC's comments described its recent activities on bilingual voting assistance.