Once seniors arrive at the polling places, they may face  additional challenges, depending on the availability of accessible parking  areas, accessibility of polling places, type and complexity of the voting  equipment, availability of alternative voting methods (such as absentee  voting), and the availability of voting assistance or aids. Most importantly,  the Voting Accessibility for the Elderly and Handicapped Act (VAEHA),  enacted in 1984, requires that political subdivisions responsible for  conducting elections assure that all polling places for federal elections are  accessible to elderly voters and voters with disabilities (with limited  exceptions). HAVA also contains a number of provisions designed to help increase the  accessibility of voting for individuals with disabilities. Physical Access to Polling Places Was Uneven during Election 2000, but May Have Improved since HAVA Was Enacted in 2002

Our on-site inspections of polling places in the 2000 general election  revealed many impediments that can limit access for older voters and  voters with disabilities. These on-site inspections during the 2000 election revealed that only an  estimated 16 percent of polling places were free of impediments that might  prevent elderly voters and voters with disabilities from reaching voting  rooms. The rest had one or more likely impediments from the parking  area to the voting room, although curbside voting was often made  available where permitted by the state (see fig. 2). New Provisions and Practices May Be Improving Access to Polling Places, although the Degree of Change Is Difficult to Determine

After the November 2004 general election, we found signs of improvement  in access to polling places when we surveyed each state and  representative sample of local election jurisdictions nationwide in 2005  about their state provisions and practices. Our 2000 review of state provisions and practices related to accessible  voting systems and accommodations in the voting room revealed  significant gaps, insofar as 27 states lacked provisions that voting systems  should accommodate individuals with disabilities, 18 lacked provisions for  wheelchairs in voting booths, and many lacked provisions to provide aides  to the visually impaired; for example, 47 states lacked a provision to  provide a large type ballot, and 45 lacked a provision to provide a Braille  ballot. States Have Increased Provisions for Voting Rooms Accommodations, though the Extent of Such Improvements Is Unclear

Our 2005 survey of state election officials revealed a marked increase  since the 2000 election in the number of state provisions related to  accommodations in the voting room. However, GAO found little quantitative data  on the usefulness of various types of bilingual voting assistance. Similarly, in a number of states that  lacked provisions for allowing voters to use an alternate voting place on  Election Day, our 2000 county survey data also showed that some counties  and local governments offered this alternative, while others did not. Conclusions

Ensuring that seniors or individuals with disabilities successfully cast their  votes in an election requires government to think broadly about access,  including access to transportation, access into buildings, access with  respect to voting equipment, and access to various alternative voting  methods. The increase in state provisions and reports of practices to  improve the accessibility of the voting process is encouraging. Understanding and addressing  accessibility gaps is an enormous task for our state and local election  officials who are challenged by the multiplicity of responsibilities and  requirements they must attend to within resource constraints. At the same  time, as our population ages, and with it the percent of voters with  disabilities swells, the expectation of accommodation and assistance to  participate in this basic civic exercise will grow, making accessibility a key  performance goal for our election community. Voters with Disabilities: Access to Polling Places and Alternative Voting  Methods.
Why GAO Did This Study

Voting is fundamental to our democratic system, and federal law generally requires polling places for federal elections to be accessible to older voters and voters with physical disabilities. Following reports of problems encountered in the close 2000 presidential election with respect to voter registration lists, absentee ballots, ballot counting, and antiquated voting systems, the Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA) was enacted. Among other provisions, HAVA includes requirements for the accessibility of voting systems, effective January 1, 2006. In the past, GAO has published several reports on issues related to voting access for older voters. Our prior work, including on-site inspections of a national sample of polling places in election year 2000, a comprehensive review of the election system in 2004, and a review of transportation issues facing seniors, has identified a number of potential barriers to voting for older Americans, as well as accommodations and progress in a number of areas. Drawing from prior work, GAO's testimony will focus on (1) a variety of factors that affect the ability of older voters to travel to polling places, cast their votes in the voting room, or avail themselves of alternative voting provisions and (2) trends and changes regarding the accessibility of polling places and alternative voting methods.

What GAO Found

Ensuring that older voters or other individuals with disabilities successfully cast their votes in an election requires that policymakers think broadly about access. This includes access with respect to transportation, polling places, voting equipment, and alternative voting methods. During the 2000 election, most polling places we inspected had one or more potential impediments that might prevent older voters and voters with disabilities from reaching voting rooms, although curbside voting accommodations were often made available. Additionally, our 2000 review of state provisions and practices related to accessible voting systems and accommodations in the voting room revealed that provisions to accommodate individuals with disabilities varied from state to state and may vary widely in their implementation. A 2004 GAO report also found transportation gaps in meeting the needs of seniors, which may create a barrier to voting for many elderly voters, and a lack of data on the extent of unmet needs. Since the passage of HAVA and the subsequent 2004 election, we have identified a number of reported efforts taken to improve voting access for people with disabilities. In particular, our 2006 report on election systems shows a marked increase in state provisions addressing the accessibility of polling places, voting systems, and alternative voting methods. However, the degree of change in accessibility is difficult to determine, in part because thousands of jurisdictions have primary responsibility for managing elections and ensuring an accurate vote count, and the complexity of the election system does not ensure that these provisions and reported practices are reflective of what occurs at polling places on election day. Understanding and addressing accessibility gaps represent enormous tasks for state and local election officials who are challenged by the multiplicity of responsibilities and requirements they must attend to within resource constraints. At the same time, as the population ages and the percentage of voters with disabilities expands, the expectation of accommodation and assistance to participate in this basic civic exercise will grow, making accessibility a key performance goal for our election community.