The pandemic made the 2020 presidential election look far different from previous elections: a record number of voters cast their ballots by mail and before Election Day, and the share of voters going to a polling place on Election Day dropped to its lowest point in at least 30 years.
Since then, we have seen a record number of changes to the rules and laws governing our elections — changes that will put our democracy to the test this November. Our team of state election experts have identified five major trends that will impact the in-person voting experience, whether you are casting your ballot on or before Election Day.
To receive weekly updates on election law and policy, subscribe to The Markup. For monthly insights and analysis, subscribe to The Lever.
States Offer Fewer Polling Places
Americans across the country should expect to have fewer places to vote as part of a downward trend over the last decade. In 2018, the United States had over 200,000 polling places available on Election Day compared to 94,793 in the 2022 general election.
Experts worry this trend could have a disenfranchising effect: fewer polling places means fewer opportunities for people to cast their ballots, which can create significant barriers for voters, especially voters with lower incomes or those with limited options for transportation. Fewer polling places can also translate into longer lines at the polls, creating another barrier for voters short on time.
To understand this phenomenon, one need only look back at the Shelby County v. Holder decision, which opened the door for states to pass election laws that restrict access to the ballot with little federal oversight. For more background on this case and its implications, you can read our policy analysis from June 2023.
States have passed a litany of laws that have limited the number of polling places available:
- Michigan: H.B. 4702 (2023) permitted municipalities with 5,000 or fewer voters to consolidate to a single precinct while prior law allowed consolidation only if there were 2,999 or fewer.
- South Carolina: S.B. 236 (2022) required any precinct with 3,000+ registered voters to have its own polling places. Under prior law, the threshold was 500.
- Texas: S.B. 1 (2021) banned outdoor and drive-through polling locations.
On the other hand, we’ve seen a concerted effort in some states to notify voters of any changes to their polling place location. Since 2020, our State Voting Rights Tracker has identified 14 new laws across 10 states improving voter education around Election Day voting sites. For example:
- Virginia: H.B. 1003 (2024) required election officials to mail notice of changes to a voter’s election district or polling place at least 30 days prior to the next election. Prior law required notice at least 15 days before Election Day.
- Wisconsin: A.B. 298 (2024) prohibited the discontinuation of a polling location after an election and 30 days before the following election, unless there is a related public hearing and approval of the governing body.
States Expand Opportunities for In-Person, Early Voting
The availability of early, in-person voting has expanded over the last few years, as many states have passed legislation offering voters this option. Since 2020, our tracker has identified 66 bills enacted across 33 states related to in-person, early voting:
- Connecticut: H.B. 5004 (2023) established an early voting period beginning on the 15th day before an election and ending the 2nd day before an election.
- Missouri: H.B. 1878 (2022) created early voting by allowing all eligible voters to vote beginning on the second Tuesday before an election.
- South Carolina: S.B. 108 (2022) established an early voting period for the two-week period immediately preceding an election.
- Kentucky: H.B. 574 (2021) established early voting through no-excuse “in-person absentee voting,” available during normal business hours on Thursday, Friday, and Saturday before an election. Under prior law, in-person absentee voting was only available to voters with a valid excuse, and was required for at least 12 working days prior to an election.
States Enact Stricter Voter ID Laws
Many states ask that voters show an ID document before casting a ballot, but what happens next varies dramatically. A growing number of states have passed stricter voter ID laws, creating additional barriers for Americans who are not aware of the change and/or lack the required ID to vote. Since 2020, states from Idaho to Arkansas have passed new voter ID requirements:
- Idaho: H.B. 124 (2023) restricted the forms of accepted voter ID for Election Day and early voting by eliminating the use of a student ID card issued by an Idaho high school or institution of higher education.
- Nebraska: L.B. 514 (2023) required an individual to present valid photo ID when appearing to vote in person during early voting or on Election Day. A voter without a photo ID, even if the person has a reasonable impediment to obtaining ID or a religious objection to being photographed, would be required to vote provisionally.
- Ohio: H.B. 458 (2023) restricted acceptable forms of voter ID for in-person voting.
- Wisconsin: H.B. 75 (2021) required voters to show an acceptable form of ID before voting in person on Election Day.
- Arkansas: H.B. 1112 (2021) eliminated the ability of an in-person or absentee voter to file a sworn statement attesting to their identity in lieu of providing voter ID to verify a provisional ballot.
- Iowa: S.B. 568 (2021) required voters to present ID when making an attestation to confirm the identity of another voter who does not have a required form of ID.
However, we are also tracking 11 bills across 10 states that have expanded the types of acceptable voter IDs, including:
- North Dakota: H.B. 1447 (2021) expanded accepted forms of voter ID to include certain student ID documents issued by higher education institutions.
- Mississippi: MI S.B. 373 (2023) broadened the types of student ID accepted for voting, to include IDs issued by professional and vocational educational institutions.
States Change Voter Assistance Requirements
Since 2020, five states have passed laws that will impact voters who require assistance from a third party to vote, with varying effects. Some states passed new requirements that will make it easier for people with disabilities to vote:
- Mississippi: S.B. 2425 (2024) specified that voters with certain disabilities may receive ballot assistance from any person they choose, subject to certain exceptions.
- Texas: S.B. 477 (2023) specified that voters who are physically unable to enter an early voting place without personal assistance or a likelihood of injuring their health must be served by statutory curbside voting procedures.
Still others added new documentation requirements that will make the voting process more burdensome for voters and those assisting them:
- Louisiana: S.B. 218 (2024) required voters or their assistant to complete a “voter assistance form,” providing the assistant’s name, address, relationship to the voter, and an attestation of whether they were paid for providing assistance. Prior law required officials to write the voter’s name in the register, and the name of the person assisting.
- Texas: S.B. 1 (2021) created new documentation requirements for individuals providing assistance to voters with mail ballots and at polling locations and created new criminal offenses aimed at individuals providing assistance.
States Expand Laws around Observing and Challenging Elections
Since 2020, we’ve found 21 bills enacted across 17 states that either change the observation process for poll watchers or the number of authorized observers. These laws must strike a careful balance between increasing transparency around the voting process and protecting the safety of voters and election workers. In addition, any laws around challenging the election process must be narrowly written to prevent harassment or deterrence of voting and must require due process before a ballot is called into question.
States such as Colorado and North Dakota have put guardrails in place to limit election interference by poll watchers:
- Colorado: S.B. 276 (2023) prohibited watchers from taking pictures or recording videos during their service in any place where election activities are conducted and a voter’s confidential or personal information is visible.
- North Dakota: S.B. 2292 (2023) provided that each election observer in a polling place must be positioned where they can plainly view and hear the occurrences of the polling place, without infringing on voter privacy. Prior law required that observers have “uniform and nondiscriminatory access to all stages of the election process,” but provided no further details.
Other states have expanded the authority of poll watchers, raising concerns about harassment and intimidation of election workers:
- North Carolina: S.B. 747 (2023) expressly permitted observers appointed by political parties to take notes, listen to conversation between voters and poll workers, move freely around the polling place, leave and reenter the voting enclosure, communicate by phone outside the voting enclosure, and witness any setup and teardown procedures at the polling place.
- Texas: S.B. 1 (2021) allowed poll watchers to observe curbside voting, including entering the vehicle while the voter completes their ballot; to sit or stand close enough to see and hear election officers conduct observed activity; and to observe all election activities related to polling place closure, including the sealing and transfer of a data storage device.
For real-time updates and analysis of existing state laws and pending legislation, visit our State Voting Rights Tracker.