Waiting to vote safely: How Covid‐19 safety measures shaped in‐person voter wait times during the 2020 election

Abstract

The aim of this article is to assess the impact of Covid-19 safety measures on voter wait times during the 2020 U.S. election. Methods: Multinomial logistic regression models predicting voter wait times contingent on the presence of Covid safety measures: poll workers wearing face coverings, protective barriers separating voters and workers, voters and booths socially distanced, hand sanitizer, single-use ballot marking pens, and cleaning voting booths between voters, as well as an additive index of these measures. Results: Findings suggest Covid-safety measures significantly affected voter wait times. Effects vary by Covid safety feature, with face coverings, barriers, social distancing, and cleaning booths increasing voter wait times (typically around 10-30 min), single-use pens decreasing voter wait times, and hand sanitizer having no effect. Results are further confirmed using an additive index. Conclusion:Covid safety features likely increased voter wait times during the 2020 U.S. election, potentially accounting for a portion of the increased voter wait time, compared to previous elections.As the Coronavirus disease (2019) 1 pandemic carried into the 2020 U.S. November election, state and local election jurisdictions took tremendous steps toward increasing safe voter access. Many states increased absentee and mail voting access, while others outfitted their polling places with face masks, protective barriers, and socially distanced voting (National Governor's Association 2020; Sam, Eckman, and Shanton 2020). Though more Americans cast their ballot by mail or absentee voting methods in 2020 than any year before, just over 60 percent of those who voted did so in person at their local polling place through early 1 Also referred to as Covid-19 or simply Covid.

Proper Protective (Voting) Equipment: How Covid-19 Safety Measures Shaped In-Person Voting Experiences During the 2020 Election

“…However, feeling safe and being safe are two separate issues, and this evidence should be used in conjunction with that regarding the participatory effects of these policies as well as their efficacy of these mitigation strategies. Regarding participatory effects, other work has noted that Covid policies have the potential to increase voter wait times (Coll, 2022), which may go on to affect voter reneging and turnout (Lamb 2021). Regarding transmission prevention efficacy, previous research has suggested in-person voting may be linked to Covid spread (Cotti et al, 2021) but that some of the policies examined here can limit the spread of Covid in close contact areas such as schools (Kaiser et al, 2021), suggesting they may limit the spread at polling places.…”

“…Previous work has shown that alterations to the in-person voting experience can affect voter wait times (Stein et al, 2020) and that increased wait times decreases voter evaluations of their polling place (Stein & Vonnahme, 2012). Viewed through this lens, Covid safety policies may increase the burden of administering elections, resulting in increased wait times (Coll, 2022) that may go on to decrease voter satisfaction with the operation of their polling place. However, viewed through a ‘safety of polling place operation’ lens rather than a ‘smoothness of polling place operation’ lens, these same policies may increase polling place operation evaluations.…”

“…Theoretically, these policies also represent a unique alteration to the way elections are administered vis a vis voter wait times and voter evaluations. Covid policies have previously been found to increase voter wait times (Coll, 2022), and other works have shown that changes to election administration that increase voter wait times result in decreased voter evaluations (Stein & Vonnahme, 2012). However, the results presented here run counter to the conventional wisdom that increasing wait times reduces voter evaluations, suggesting voters are willing to put up with increased wait times given the increased wait is accompanied by some other benefit; here, voter safety.…”

“…Last, some of these policies represent seemingly innocuous changes to the way elections are administered, such as single use pens and hand sanitizer. Though many studies have examined how large-scale changes to election administration affect voter evaluations, such as switching to Election Day Voting Centers (Stein & Vonnahme, 2012) or using different ballot casting technologies (Claassen et al, 2013), few studies have examined such small changes to election administration (Coll, 2022). The results of this study suggest that changes to administration big and small can go on to have substantively and significantly large impacts on voter evaluations.…”

Health Risks and Voting: Emphasizing Safety Measures Taken to Prevent COVID-19 Does Not Increase Willingness to Vote in Person

“…Coll (2022a) found that among those who voted in person in 2020, polling place safety measures increased perceptions of safety, although it is not clear if those who did not vote in person were aware these measures were in place or would have been made to feel safer by them. Additionally, Coll (2022b) finds that polling place safety measures increased the amount of time people took to vote, suggesting an important potential downside to these measures if the possibility of longer waits decreased turnout.…”