A Comparison of The 2008, 2012, 2014, 2016, 2018, 2020, and 2024 elections
Produced by the National Federation of the Blind with funding from the Department of Health and Human Services Administration for Community Living.
May 2025
Introduction
Following the November 5, 2024 elections, the National Federation of the Blind (“NFB”) conducted an online and touchtone telephone survey of blind and low-vision voters who voted either in-person at a polling place or via absentee ballot. The primary goals of the survey were to assess voting experiences and to compare the results of the 2024 survey to the results of similar surveys conducted following the elections in November 2008, 2012, 2014, 2016, 2018, and 2020.
This survey was available in English and Spanish, and could be taken online, by touchtone telephone, or by calling NFB’s Legal program. All of these surveys were conducted with funding from the National Disability Rights Network (“NDRN”).
The 2024 survey was completed using SurveyMonkey* evaluation software and was available from October 22 through December 5, 2024. A total of 639 blind and low-vision voters completed the 2024 survey as compared to 524, 892, 399, 427, 537, and 566 participants in 2020, 2018, 2016, 2014, 2012, and 2008, respectively.
The same questions related to voter experience were asked in all six surveys. Participants in the 2012 through 2024 surveys were recruited in a variety of ways, including weekly posts to the National Federation of the Blind members’ e-mail list, social media accounts, affiliate bulletins called the President’s Notebook, via the monthly presidential address, and an announcement on the NFB website’s homepage, voting rights page, and legal page. This is different than in 2008, when individuals were randomly selected from a list owned by the National Federation of the Blind, contacted, and screened for inclusion in the telephone survey.
Results of the Blind Voter Surveys
In 2024, 502 (78.6%) blind and low-vision respondents voted at a polling place, as compared to 137 (21.4%) participants who voted absentee. The number of blind voters who voted at the polls and who requested, or were offered, an accessible voting machine was 434 (86.5%) in 2024, as compared to 92% in 2020, 81% in 2018, 63% in 2008, 79% in 2012, 88% in 2014, and 92% in 2016. In 2024, 367 (84.6%) voters surveyed used an accessible voting machine and reported that they were able to cast private and independent ballots, as compared to 77% in 2020, 68% in 2018, and 79% in 2016.
Regardless of use of accessible ballot marking devices, the number of respondents able to vote privately and independently was 544 (85.1%). The total number of respondents who required assistance to vote in 2024 was 95 (14.9%), which was better than 2020 (25%), 2018 (29%), and 2016 (17%).
For blind voters who marked their ballots on accessible voting machines, the data from voters surveyed in 2024 indicate some improvement over the experiences of blind and low-vision voters surveyed following the 2016, 2018, and 2020 elections. Only 423 (86.7%) of the blind voters surveyed in 2024 who used an accessible voting machine said that the machine was up and running when they arrived at their polling place, a slight improvement over the 68% in 2020, 66% in both 2016 and 2018, and 74% in 2014, but slightly less than the 87% reported in 2008.
The year 2012 remains the low point for this category with only 63% of survey participants who used an accessible voting machine reporting that the machine was up and running when they arrived at their polling place. In 2024, the percentage of voters who used accessible voting machines and reported that poll workers had problems setting up or activating the machines improved to 118 (29.6%) as compared to the 24% in 2020 and the 33% reported in all 2012, 2016, and 2018. The low reported for this data point was 19% in 2008.
In 2024, 64 (15.1%) blind voters who cast ballots on accessible machines said that poll workers did not provide them with clear instructions on how to use the machines, comparable to the results from 2020 (15%), and more than the 2018 results (21%), and 2016 (20%), but still greater than the 10% from the 2014 survey. However, in 2024, 45.1% of survey respondents said they did not need such instructions, which is slightly less than the 51% from 2020 and 54% who responded similarly in both 2016 and 2018.
61.9 percent of blind voters were able to cast their ballots on accessible machines with no problems in 2024, compared to 54% in 2020, 87% in 2008, 62% in 2012, 60% in 2014, 66% in 2016, and 59% in 2018. The percentage of blind voters who were able to cast their ballots privately and independently using an accessible voting machine was slightly better in 2024 (85.1%) than in 2020 (77%) and 2018 (75%), but is lower than value for all other previous surveys except for the one conducted following the 2012 election (86% in 2008, 75% in 2012, 83% in 2014, and 85% in 2016).
While survey data indicates that voters remained reasonably satisfied with treatment from poll workers, overall improvement in this area appears to be inadequate, especially when compared with the 2008 survey results. The percentage of blind voters surveyed who felt that they were treated with the same dignity as other voters fell from 91% in 2008, to 71% in 2012, 83% in 2014, 79% in 2016, 71% in 2018, 81% in 2020, and 78% in 2024.
In 2008, 85% of blind voters surveyed felt that they were given the same amount of privacy as other voters, as compared to 67%, 75%, 79%, 67%, 73%, and 73% in the 2012, 2014, 2016, 2018, 2020, and 2024 surveys, respectively. Ninety-four percent of blind voters surveyed in 2008 said they did not feel rushed by poll workers, as compared to only 82% in 2024, 87% in 2020, (86% in 2012, 93% in 2014, 88% in 2016, and 86% in 2018). The percentage of blind voters who felt that poll workers treated them with respect declined from 94% in 2008 to 83% in 2024 (compared to, 84%, 81%, 91%, 85%, 81%, and 84% in 2012, 2014, 2016, 2018, and 2020, respectively).
In 2024, 87.8% of blind voters surveyed indicated that they were somewhat to very satisfied with their voting experience, as compared to 83% in 2020, 89% in 2008, 75% in 2012, 78% in 2014, 80% in 2016, and 75% in 2018. The percentage of blind voters who were somewhat or very dissatisfied with their voting experience has increased from 11% in 2008 to 14.1% in 2024 (compared with 19% in 2012, 15% in both 2014 and 2020, 17% in 2016, and 20% in 2018).
The percentage of surveyed blind voters who said their voting experience was better than their previous experience decreased slightly in 2024 to 26.6%, from 32% in 2020, 28% in 2018, 35% in 2016, 33% in 2008, 27% in 2012, and 21% in 2014. However, the percentage of blind voters surveyed who said that their experience was worse than their previous experience remained high in 2024 at 14.1%, continuing the trend of results from the 2012, 2014, 2016, 2018, and 2020 surveys (17%, 15%, 15%, 20%, and 16%, respectively).
This compares with only 7% in the 2008 survey results. Finally, the percentage of surveyed blind voters who said they would vote again remained high at 93.7% in 2024 compared to 99.4% in 2020, 98.8% in 2018, 98.3% in 2016, 100% in 2014, 98.7% in 2012, and 99.8% in 2008. Importantly, a large number of people skipped the question in 2024.
Discussion
In addition to traditional accessibility barriers such as missing, malfunctioning, and unplugged ballot marking devices and poll workers being untrained or disrespectful, only about half of the states delivered an accessible, electronic absentee ballot for the 2024 general election, and only half of those offered accessible, electronic ballot return. Voters who used accessible ballot delivery but not return reported accessibility barriers in printing, signing, addressing, and mailing their ballots, as well as issues in marking their electronic ballot in certain cases.
In one state (Michigan) the accessible absentee ballot experienced a period of inaccessibility during early voting, but was corrected within approximately 48 hours once reported. In 2024, the number of blind and low-vision respondents who cast their ballot at the polls was once again comparable to the pre-pandemic numbers seen between 2008 and 2016. For those blind voters who voted at a polling place in 2024, the vast majority either requested or were offered an accessible voting machine, and only a significant minority experienced barriers with those machines which prevented them from voting privately and independently.
Many respondents reported that ballots from accessible ballot marking devices (BMD) were identifiable due to being different shapes, sizes, or thicknesses than standard ballots, as well as being told by poll workers comments such as “You’re the first person in ten years who’s ever asked to use it.” This supports the observation from prior years that the smaller the number of people who use BMD, the more obvious it is how the one person who used a BMD has voted.
Making the accessible voting machine available to any voter who chooses to use it, and requiring poll workers to offer the accessible voting machine to all voters would help ensure that all voters could be confident in a truly private and independent vote.
The number of blind or deafblind voters who reported being able to connect a refreshable Braille display to a ballot marking device so that they could vote in-person at their local polling place was again zero. That said, the number of blind voters surveyed in 2024 who reported that they were able to cast private and independent ballots increased from 71% in 2020 to 85.1% in 2024. In addition, the number of blind voters who were able to cast a private and independent ballot using an accessible voting machine increased from 77% in 2020 to nearly 84.6% in 2024.
While the trendline is that blind voters are increasingly able to vote privately and independently, it is equally true that blind people who cannot hear ballot marking devices, who cannot understand the large sections of text they offer at one time, or who cannot take large periods of time out of their days to advocate for and wait to use functioning machines are the least likely individuals to report a private and independent experience.
Many of the problems noted by survey participants (unable to adjust volume, unable to adjust audio speed, unable to turn off screen) indicate that many blind voters still may not know how to fully utilize the accessibility features of the voting machines. This is supported by the survey participants who said that more training and clearer instructions on how to use the accessible voting machine would improve their voting experience.
Large print and Braille instructions at each machine, outreach events at NFB chapter meetings and affiliate conventions, rehabilitation centers, libraries for the blind, and other disability-related organizations can help to alleviate these problems. Other problems with the voting machines experienced by blind voters in 2024 included poor audio quality, no audio output, audio volume too low, ballots not printing because the ink was dry, there was no ink cartridge, ballots jamming in the machines, headset did not work or was broken, and buttons not working on the user interface.
Placing the voting machine in a more private or quiet location was indicated as a needed improvement across the board. Headphones that did not work and insufficient volume were noted as well.
Conclusion
Data from the 2024 blind voter survey indicate that a lack of adequate poll worker training has remained stubbornly consistent over the seven post-election surveys conducted by the National Federation of the Blind. While the number of respondents who were offered or requested an accessible voting machine for the 2020 general election dipped slightly to 86.5%, fully 86.7% of 2024 respondents reported that the accessible voting machine was set up and running when they arrived at their polling place.
The percentage of blind voters who reported that poll workers had problems activating or setting up the accessible machine rose by more than five percentage points in 2024 to 29.6%, up from 24% in 2020. It is likely that the continual poor training of poll workers is a contributing factor in the steady decline in the percentage of blind voters who were able to mark their ballots with no problem from 2008 through 2024.
It is not surprising, therefore, that the percentage of blind voters who responded that they were somewhat or very satisfied with their voting experience has never been higher than the 89% reported in 2008, and the percentage of voters somewhat to very dissatisfied with their experience has been higher for every survey than the 11% also reported in 2008. Accordingly, we remain concerned that failure to improve voter satisfaction may eventually impact negatively on the willingness of blind voters to participate in future elections.
This is further supported by the all-time low (93%) that we received in response to the question about whether our respondents planned to vote in future elections. Although this may be due to other factors (lack of trust in the electoral process, political fatigue, advanced age, etc.) we cannot rule out the possibility that accessibility barriers are a primary factor spurring hesitation. Through the information provided by these surveys, state and local election officials, and disability rights advocates can work to improve poll worker training and upgrade systems to ensure that blind and low-vision voters have the same positive voting experience as their sighted peers.
Appendix
Table 1
Comparison of data from 2008, 2012, 2014, 2016, 2018, 2020, and 2024 Blind Voter Surveys
2024
Number of survey participants: 639
Cast their vote at polls: 78.6%
Cast vote absentee or vote-by-mail: 214%
Offered or requested an accessible voting machine (AVM): 86.5%
AVM up and running when arrived: 86.7%
Poll worker had problems activating or setting up the AVM: 29.6%
Poll worker did not provide clear instructions on operation of AVM: 15.1%
Had no problem casting their vote on AVM: 61.9%
Able to vote privately and independently on AVM: 84.6%
All voters able to cast independent vote: 85.1%
Cast vote with assistance: 14.9%
Poll workers treated them with same dignity as other voters: 78%
Given the same privacy as other voters: 73%
Did not feel rushed: 82%
Poll workers treated them with respect: 83%
Somewhat or very satisfied with their voting experience: 87.8%
Somewhat or very dissatisfied with their voting experience: 14.1%
Experience was same as previous experience: 43%
Experience was better than previous experience: 26.6%
Experience was worse than previous experience: 14.1%
Voting for the first time: 5%
Will vote again: 93.7%
2020
Number of survey participants: 333
Cast their vote at polls: 64%
Cast vote absentee or vote-by-mail: 36%
Offered or requested an accessible voting machine (AVM): 92%
AVM up and running when arrived: 68%
Poll worker had problems activating or setting up the AVM: 24%
Poll worker did not provide clear instructions on operation of AVM: 27%
Had no problem casting their vote on AVM: 54%
Able to vote privately and independently on AVM: 77%
All voters able to cast independent vote: 71%
Cast vote with assistance: 25%
Poll workers treated them with same dignity as other voters: 81%
Given the same privacy as other voters: 73%
Did not feel rushed: 87%
Poll workers treated them with respect: 84%
Somewhat or very satisfied with their voting experience: 83%
Somewhat or very dissatisfied with their voting experience: 15%
Experience was same as previous experience: 47%
Experience was better than previous experience: 32%
Experience was worse than previous experience: 16%
Voting for the first time: 8%
Will vote again: 99.4%
2018
Number of survey participants: 892
Cast their vote at polls: 85%
Cast vote absentee or vote-by-mail: 15%
Offered or requested an accessible voting machine (AVM): 81%
AVM up and running when arrived: 66%
Poll worker had problems activating or setting up the AVM: 33%
Poll worker did not provide clear instructions on operation of AVM: 21%
Had no problem casting their vote on AVM: 59%
Able to vote privately and independently on AVM: 75%
All voters able to cast independent vote: 68%
Cast vote with assistance: 29%
Poll workers treated them with same dignity as other voters: 71%
Given the same privacy as other voters: 67%
Did not feel rushed: 86%
Poll workers treated them with respect: 81%
Somewhat or very satisfied with their voting experience: 75%
Somewhat or very dissatisfied with their voting experience: 20%
Experience was same as previous experience: 48%
Experience was better than previous experience: 28%
Experience was worse than previous experience: 20%
Voting for the first time: 5%
Will vote again: 98.8%
2016
Number of survey participants: 399
Cast their vote at polls: 87%
Cast vote absentee or vote-by-mail: 12%
Offered or requested an accessible voting machine (AVM): 92%
AVM up and running when arrived: 66%
Poll worker had problems activating or setting up the AVM: 33%
Poll worker did not provide clear instructions on operation of AVM: 20%
Had no problem casting their vote on AVM: 66%
Able to vote privately and independently on AVM: 85%
All voters able to cast independent vote: 79%
Cast vote with assistance: 17%
Poll workers treated them with same dignity as other voters: 79%
Given the same privacy as other voters: 79%
Did not feel rushed: 88%
Poll workers treated them with respect: 85%
Somewhat or very satisfied with their voting experience: 80%
Somewhat or very dissatisfied with their voting experience: 17%
Experience was same as previous experience: 43%
Experience was better than previous experience: 35%
Experience was worse than previous experience: 15%
Voting for the first time: 10%
Will vote again: 98.3%
2014
Number of survey participants: 427
Cast their vote at polls: 83%
Cast vote absentee or vote-by-mail: 17%
Offered or requested an accessible voting machine (AVM): 88%
AVM up and running when arrived: 74%
Poll worker had problems activating or setting up the AVM: 29%
Poll worker did not provide clear instructions on operation of AVM: 10%
Had no problem casting their vote on AVM: 60%
Able to vote privately and independently on AVM: 83%
All voters able to cast independent vote: 74%
Cast vote with assistance: 21%
Poll workers treated them with same dignity as other voters: 83%
Given the same privacy as other voters: 75%
Did not feel rushed: 93%
Poll workers treated them with respect: 91%
Somewhat or very satisfied with their voting experience: 78%
Somewhat or very dissatisfied with their voting experience: 15%
Experience was same as previous experience: 62%
Experience was better than previous experience: 21%
Experience was worse than previous experience: 15%
Voting for the first time: 4%
Will vote again: 100%
2012
Number of survey participants: 537
Cast their vote at polls: 84%
Cast vote absentee or vote-by-mail: 16%
Offered or requested an accessible voting machine (AVM): 79%
AVM up and running when arrived: 63%
Poll worker had problems activating or setting up the AVM: 33%
Poll worker did not provide clear instructions on operation of AVM: 21%
Had no problem casting their vote on AVM: 62%
Able to vote privately and independently on AVM: 75%
All voters able to cast independent vote: 64%
Cast vote with assistance: 32%
Poll workers treated them with same dignity as other voters: 71%
Given the same privacy as other voters: 67%
Did not feel rushed: 86%
Poll workers treated them with respect: 81%
Somewhat or very satisfied with their voting experience: 75%
Somewhat or very dissatisfied with their voting experience: 19%
Experience was same as previous experience: 51%
Experience was better than previous experience: 27%
Experience was worse than previous experience: 17%
Voting for the first time: 6%
Will vote again: 98.7%
2008
Number of survey participants: 566
Cast their vote at polls: 62%
Cast vote absentee or vote-by-mail: 38%
Offered or requested an accessible voting machine (AVM): 63%
AVM up and running when arrived: 87%
Poll worker had problems activating or setting up the AVM: 19%
Poll worker did not provide clear instructions on operation of AVM: 16%
Had no problem casting their vote on AVM: 87%
Able to vote privately and independently on AVM: 86%
All voters able to cast independent vote: 51%
Cast vote with assistance: 37%
Poll workers treated them with same dignity as other voters: 91%
Given the same privacy as other voters: 85%
Did not feel rushed: 94%
Poll workers treated them with respect: 94%
Somewhat or very satisfied with their voting experience: 89%
Somewhat or very dissatisfied with their voting experience: 11%
Experience was same as previous experience: 60%
Experience was better than previous experience: 33%
Experience was worse than previous experience: 11%
Voting for the first time: 6%
Will vote again: 99.8%