Social Government

GOING STATESIDE

State Election Web Sites: The Good and Bad

Read the author’s clarification to this post here.

Editor’s note: Welcome to Going Stateside, a regular feature that will look at state and local governments. This coverage was added at the request of a number of users who come from such backgrounds.stateside

One of the most important functions of state government is to administer elections. A good Web site for a state elections body is essential to make the entire electoral process go smoothly. Users should be able to find voter registration forms, rules, absentee ballot information and results with ease. The Web site should not be cluttered and should be accessible.

After reviewing 49 of 50 Web sites (Iowa’s was not reachable), I can say without much hesitation that North Carolina has the best election Web site in the country. The Tar Heel State’s Web site uses a clean and crisp design that is organized without any clutter. All of the inncformation is easy to find. As a bonus, voters are even able to look up provisional ballot information. The top bar of the Web site contains current voter registration counts — a nice touch.

In second place comes Alabama. The easy to use Web site contains the features of North Carolina’s site (even the provisional status) in a somewhat less fancy design.

That being said, I encountered many issues when browsing across other sites. Here’s a sampling.

  • Make the Web site accessible — immediately! While Section 508 only applies to federal Web sites, it certainly doesn’t hurt to apply those requirements to the state level. At least make the text in your Web site readable! I have 20/20 vision, yet I had some trouble reading the navigation bar for the Kansas Secretary of State’s Web site. In contrast, states like Florida allow users to resize the Web site’s text. People with disabilities have every right to use an elections Web site without difficulty, just like they have every right to vote using an accessible ballot.
  • Make sure the Web site has what voters want up front. With the increasing use of the Internet by state and local governments, constituents should always be kept in mind when deciding which content to put on a Web site. However, Mississippi voters can do very little from their Secretary of State’s elections homepage. They’re required to click a link at the bottom of page, then scroll to the bottom of the next page in order to find the link to register to vote.
  • Don’t put too much on the homepage though. I’m able to look at election data dating to 1996 from the Oklahoma homepage. Voters must scroll to the middle of the page to find voter information, too.

In reviewing the Web sites, I categorized them into three categories: above average, average and below average. Above average sites offer superior functionality and/or design. Average Web sites are usable and offer basic functionality. Below average sites have deficient design and/or functionality.

Above Average Sites (22)

Average Sites (18)

Below Average Sites (9)

Unavailable Sites (at posting time)

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Mixx
  • Google Bookmarks
  • email
  • MySpace
  • NewsVine
  • Technorati
  • Tumblr
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
Related posts:
  1. Clarification to State Election Web Sites Post
  2. Congressional Transparency Starts With Web Sites
  3. HHS Asks For, Posts Suggestions to Improve Pandemic Flu Web Site
  4. White House Strives for New Forms of Engagement with State of the Union
  • These rankings are wrong.

    For instance Utah is ranked as "Above Average" yet Utah's elections are so secretive that the State web site refuses to even publicly post any state-wide precinct-level election results!

    To obtain the state-wide election results in Utah by precinct one has to go to all 29 counties and *try* to get them that way (and they can charge $25 each if they want to) or make a formal government records request, wait two weeks, pay $25 and then *after* the election is certified one receives the vote counts. If anything looks suspicious - too bad cause it's too late.

    And of course there is no possibility of obtaining the precinct counts broken out by ballot type - absentee, early, provisional, and election day - so that it is trivially easy for any insider to pad votes for one candidate in one vote type while subtracting votes for an opposing candidate in another ballot type - and added together any hint of the problems conveniently vanishes before the results are made public.

    As well Utah open records laws do not apply to any election records so that the entire process is secret in Utah - and always has been. In fact even when paper ballots were hand counted in the polling locations, the public were never allowed to observe.

    I could go on, but suffice it to say that Utah may be the most secretive state with respect to the conduct of its elections in the entire US.

    Apparently this ranking system does not care if even the vote counts themselves are kept secret by a state.

    Just what criteria I wonder were important to this ranking system?
blog comments powered by Disqus