Poll Worker Decision Making at the American Ballot Box

• DOI: 10.1177/1532673X20920266
• Date: 01 November 2020
• Published date: 01 November 2020
• Author: Mara Suttmann-Lea
• Subject Matter: Articles

https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673X20920266

American Politics Research

2020, Vol. 48(6) 714 –718

© The Author(s) 2020

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/1532673X20920266

journals.sagepub.com/home/apr

Article

As the street-level bureaucrats with whom voters most

directly interact when voting in person, poll workers have

substantial discretion in determining whether individuals are

eligible to vote (Alvarez & Hall, 2006; Lipsky, 1980).

Understanding how they make decisions about voter eligibil-

ity is especially important given that voter confidence is

shaped by these interactions (Hall et al., 2009). This article

examines this “human element” of election administration.

Using 24 semi-structured interviews with poll workers from

Chicago, Illinois, I assess how they make decisions about

implementing Illinois’ signature verification voter eligibility

laws.1

Rather that conducting a causal analysis of what predicts

poll worker decisions, this article describes what constitutes

their decisions (Cramer-Walsh, 2012). This type of analysis

provides insight into how poll workers interpret the laws

they are implementing, illustrates the discretion they exer-

cise, and highlights how ambiguity in election codes and

training can lead to varying interpretations of statutes by

their most direct arbiters. Evaluating voter eligibility by sig-

nature comparison is not universal across American states,

although a handful of states (6) also use signature compari-

sons at polling places, and a majority (35) use them in the

counting of absentee ballots.2 While these findings do not

generalize to all U.S. elections, they are emblematic of the

kinds of discretionary decisions that poll workers make

nationwide.

My evidence shows substantive variation in how poll

workers evaluate signatures, as well as what they think they

should do in the case of a questionable signature. These were

largely reliant on personal interpretations of how to match

signatures rather than guidance from manuals or training.

Respondents also offered varying interpretations for how

they might proceed in the case of mismatching signatures

that—with few exceptions—did not correspond with steps

from the Chicago poll worker manual. I conclude by discuss-

ing two patterns that respondents felt may improve the con-

sistency of their performance: working in one’s home

precinct or neighborhood and the same precinct from elec-

tion to election, and serving with the same team over time.

While not a total remedy for the challenges of ensuring qual-

ity poll worker performance discussed in this article, these

are considerations that deserve closer scrutiny in future

research.

Overall, these data highlight the subjectivity with which

poll workers may interpret and apply voter eligibility laws,

especially with criteria as variable as signature matching. This

raises questions about the extent to which voters are treated

equally under the law. It also illustrates the value of speaking

with poll workers themselves about how they interpret the

laws they are implementing. Given the discretion afforded poll

workers, I suggest that future research examining the impact

920266APRXXX10.1177/1532673X20920266American Politics ResearchSuttmann-Lea

research-article2020

1Connecticut College, New London, USA

Corresponding Author:

Mara Suttmann-Lea, Connecticut College, 270 Mohegan Avenue, New

London, CT 06320-4125, USA.

Email: csuttmann@conncoll.edu

Poll Worker Decision Making at the

American Ballot Box

Part of Special Symposium on Election Sciences

Mara Suttmann-Lea1

Abstract

Street-level bureaucrats set the terms for policy implementation and often operate under limited oversight. In American

elections, poll workers are the street-level bureaucrats tasked with implementing a jurisdiction’s laws for verifying voter

eligibility. Using in-depth interviews with 24 poll workers from the city of Chicago, this article assesses how poll workers

make decisions about voter eligibility under Illinois’ signature-matching law. Respondents discussed a range of considerations

used when they examine voter eligibility. The evidence I present suggests they rely on personal perspectives and experiences

in their evaluations. Respondents also offered a range of responses for how they would proceed in the instance of a

mismatching signature—including requesting voters provide identification even though it is not a requirement in Illinois

unless a voter is challenged. Broadly, these results illustrate how poll workers’ subjective interpretations of election law

shape their decisions and can lead to idiosyncratic applications of election law.

Keywords

election science, election administration, poll workers, voter identification, street-level bureaucracy