6 things wrong with NYC’s ballot design
A look at design issues, how they impact voters, and what should be done to fix them.
The 2020 general election was the first state or federal election I voted in as a New York resident. I decided to vote by mail due to concerns about COVID-19 and long lines on election day. When I received my ballot, I was shocked by the errors and terrible usability. In a large, cosmopolitan city full of design professionals and rich with civic resources, how could the ballot be so bad? As a voter, I was confused. As a user experience (UX) researcher, I was horrified. Below are the six ballot issues that stood out to me the most. This is by no means a comprehensive list.
1. Incorrect instructions
The instructions tell voters to fill in the oval to the left of the candidate’s name. These instructions are just plain wrong. The ovals on the ballot are ABOVE the candidate’s name, not to the left of the name. If you followed the instructions literally you would actually be marking the oval for the candidate to the left of the candidate you intended to vote for. To further confuse the voter, the illustration does not match the layout of the ballot.
2. Missing party header on congressional race
Every other race has a party header. Why is this one missing? The ballot should be consistent. Simple design errors can confuse voters and make the ballot difficult to navigate.
3. No “turn the page” indicator at the bottom of the front page
Critical information (like the fact that there are more races on the back of the ballot) should be placed where the voter is looking. In this example, the indicator should be at the bottom of the ballot, because that’s where you’re looking when you’re done filling out the front of the ballot.
4. Hard-to-read race title and vote quantity
The race title and the directions telling you how many candidates to vote for are way too small. These two pieces of critical information are needed to orient the voter. They should not only be printed in a larger font, but clearly separated from each other by space or other design elements. Bonus issue — the wording and capitalization aren’t consistent from one race to the next. In the presidential race, the instructions say, “Vote Once.” In the congressional race the instructions say, “Vote for one.” This is just sloppy.
5. Candidates are shown multiple times
If a candidate has more than one party affiliation, they are listed more than once on the ballot. If they have only one party affiliation, they’re listed only once. This increases what we call “cognitive load” for the voter, making them spend time and mental energy trying to figure out why some candidates are listed in several places and which oval they should mark. Thankfully, if a voter marks the same candidate in two different boxes this does not constitute an overvote in New York and their vote is still counted. Still, this is unnecessarily confusing and could easily be remedied by presenting each candidate once and listing all of their party affiliations underneath.
6. Races are presented across multiple rows
This design confused almost everyone I talked to. Due to the layout, voters may incorrectly assume you are meant to vote once per row. This is wrong, but it’s easy to understand why people would assume this based on the way the ballot is designed. Problem #5 comes up again here because some candidates are listed once, some are listed twice, and some are listed three times. Worse still, the candidates in the first row share a row whereas the rest of the candidates have their own row, regardless of how many parties they’re affiliated with. This pairing is arbitrary but it leads voters to think that the first two candidates are running against each other. (That is, if they noticed Beth Parlato at all. Some people miss her completely because hers is the only name not listed in the first column.) The repeated names and multiple rows cause cognitive overload and lead many voters to settle on the easiest interpretation — that they’re meant to vote for one candidate per row. In addition to being confusing, this gives a clear advantage to the candidates who have their own row and disadvantages the candidates who share a row. Again, this problem is easily remedied by presenting each candidate once in a single column.
Ballot design is a critical aspect of voting with the potential to influence the outcome of elections. Something this important should be subject to the same quality assurance and review practices used by design professionals. While some of these issues require only small revisions in text, others require a more fundamental design overhaul. Regardless, New York needs to seriously consider ballot design and work to improve ballots sooner rather than later. Ranked-choice voting goes into effect for New York City primary elections and special elections in 2021, and without a proper redesign of the ballot, voters are bound to be even more confused. This can be avoided by designing ballots with best practices in mind and testing the ballots with users before the election.
It is important to note that ballot design resources already exist. The U.S. Election Assistance Commission published a detailed report on the Effective Designs for the Administration of Federal Elections in 2007. Additionally, groups like the Center for Civic Design have built upon that report with easily digestible ballot design guidelines.
There is no excuse for bad ballot design in 2020.
To the New York City Board of Elections and all New York elected officials — we must do better. We need to enfranchise New York voters by fixing the most fundamental aspect of voting — ballot design.
Alexander Cotton is a User Experience (UX) research & design professional living in Brooklyn, NY. Follow him on Instagram @alexlovesux and Twitter @alexlovesux.
