Social Government » Going Stateside http://www.socialgovernment.com Turning Government into Government 2.0 Sat, 30 Jan 2010 22:40:05 +0000 en hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 State Election Web Sites: The Good and Bad http://www.socialgovernment.com/2009/03/21/state-election-web-sites-the-good-and-bad/ http://www.socialgovernment.com/2009/03/21/state-election-web-sites-the-good-and-bad/#comments Sat, 21 Mar 2009 21:41:15 +0000 Ethan Klapper http://www.socialgovernment.com/?p=303 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)

]]> http://www.socialgovernment.com/2009/03/21/state-election-web-sites-the-good-and-bad/feed/ 4