A New Approach to Accessibility Standards
for Electronic Voting Systems
Current Thinking:
Two types of systems at each polling place
- Mainstream (for ≈ 80% of voters) , and
- Accessible voting machines (for 10 to 30% of voters)
New Approach:
Extended Usability
Moving to extended usability machines can result in a situation where you have
- Extended usability mainstream machines - usable by 99% of voters, and
- Special plug-in modules* - needed by less than 1% of voters
(needed by those with no vision at all, or those requiring special switches)
* These special input modules could plug into any of the mainstream voting units.
By adding simple (essentially software-only) modifications to all DREs, the usability of the mainstream machines can be extended to cover most disabilities - particularly those experienced by older individuals.
Why and How
Many individuals who are older may have trouble with mainstream voting systems, but do not want to use a "disability enabled" voting machine. By adding just touch-to-hear and voice-confirm to all DREs, you can end up with extended usability machines that work for people
- Who are older.
- Who have low vision.
- Who left their reading glasses at home.
- Who are legally blind but can still see where names are (but not read them).
- Who cannot read (for whatever reason).
- Who do not recognize ethnic names when printed.
- For whom English is a second language.
- Who might misread or mis-mark a name, but would catch the mistake immediately if it were read aloud.
For more information, please visit our page on Accessible Voting.
 |
This work is primarily funded by the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR) through the U.S. Department of Education, under grant number H133E030012. The opinions expressed here do not necessarily represent the policy of the U.S. Dept. of Education. © 2004 Trace R&D Center, University of Wisconsin |