Texas held its highly competitive Senate primary elections last week, and local enthusiasm combined with national attention fueled record turnout rates. But because of a late change that left voters confused about their polling location, many citizens in Dallas and Williamson Counties could not cast a ballot on Election Day. And studies show that these types of changes hit communities of color harder.
Typically, voters in those counties can vote at any countywide polling place, no matter which precinct they live in. Many people take advantage of this to vote near their job instead of their home. This setup was in place during this year’s early voting. But in late December, Republican Party chairs in the two counties announced a move to precinct-based primary elections, in which a voter’s polling place on Election Day depends on where they live and their party affiliation. This decision was rooted in unfounded claims about voter fraud pushed by those on the right, and under state law, both parties must agree to using countywide polling places, so the GOP could unilaterally opt out.
Many voters were unaware of the change and showed up to their usual polling place last Tuesday, only to learn that their party’s primary was being held elsewhere. To make matters worse, Texas recently redrew its districts, spurring issues with its new election data management system. As a result, many voters hadn’t received their registration cards, which list their polling location, and online databases with precinct assignments lacked accurate information.
State courts tried to help by extending polling hours after being petitioned by the local Democratic parties, but communication of the extension was unevenly dispersed to voters. Later in the day, the Texas Supreme Court reversed course, closing polling places earlier than the announced new time. Despite relocating and waiting in line, voters who cast their ballot after the original closing time of 7 p.m. still do not know if their vote was counted. Others who made it to their correct location after 7 p.m. were unable to cast a ballot at all.
Changing polling place locations so close to an election would not have been allowed if the full protections of the Voting Rights Act were still in effect — but they’re not, because of the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2013 decision in Shelby County v. Holder. Before that, Section 5 of the law required federal approval of such election changes in certain jurisdictions to ensure they would not have a discriminatory effect. This provision applied to states and jurisdictions that had a history of racially discriminatory election practices, such as literacy tests, poll taxes, and white-only primary elections. Texas was among those states.
This review requirement was effectively ended by the Court, which asserted that times had changed enough for states to be trusted to administer their elections without oversight. But the ruling gave no guarantee of equal access to the ballot. Dallas County has the state’s second-largest concentrations of Black voters and fourth-largest concentration of Latino voters. Last week’s widespread confusion is a harsh reminder that where racial equity is not the goal, racial discrimination can be the result.
While it may be months before we understand how many votes were lost due to the chaos during the primary, previous studies show that changes of this nature disproportionately affect communities of color. Specifically, scholars note that when polling places close and voters’ distance to their new precinct increases, voter turnout declines as people have to travel further, and the effects are larger in minority neighborhoods.
Indeed, changes in polling places are known to be disenfranchising because they require more resources from voters to accommodate the change and get to the ballot box. Having to relocate is particularly burdensome on voters with disabilities, voters who work hourly jobs with limited flexibility, and voters who rely on public transit. Furthermore, political information is a voting resource, and studies show policies that increase the information voters need to cast a ballot result in lower turnout.
The election chaos in these Texas counties illustrates how limited information and administrative barriers can contribute to confusion and, ultimately, exclusion.
The state’s issues in this primary election will not simply dissipate with the passing of time. Events like last week’s are empirically proven to dampen the momentum and energy built among the Texas electorate. Multiple studies show that facing obstacles while attempting to vote — such as having a mail ballot rejected, not having the required ID, or having to wait hours to vote — has negative downstream effects on a voter’s participation in future elections. More plainly, when people face barriers while trying to vote, they’re less likely to try again in the future.
A basic responsibility of any government holding a free and fair election is to inform voters on how they can participate. Well ahead of the election, voters in every county need transparency, clarity, and multiple options for locating their polling place. Moreover, voters must be protected from unregulated and late election changes. Passing federal voting rights reform such as the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act would reinstitute modern accountability systems and promote a more inclusive democracy.
