[EL] Appearance of recording devices at polling places?

[Gregory Huber]

List members may be interested in this work, which deals with voters' 
perceptions of ballot secrecy:

Gerber, Alan S., Gregory A. Huber, David Doherty, and Conor M. Dowling. 
2012. "Is There a Secret Ballot? Ballot Secrecy Perceptions and Their 
Implications for Voting Behaviour." British Journal of Political Science.

Abstract: Do people believe the votes they cast are truly secret? Novel 
items added to a nationally representative survey show that 25 per cent of 
respondents report not believing their ballot choices are kept secret and 
over 70 per cent report sharing their vote choices with others. These 
findings suggest that standard models of candidate choice should account 
for the potential effects of doubts about ballot secrecy. Consistent with 
this view, regression analysis shows that social forces appear to have a 
greater effect on vote choices among people who doubt the formal secrecy 
of the ballot. This analysis supports the broader claim that the intended 
benefits of institutional rules may not be realized if peoples perceptions 
of these rules differ from their formal characteristics.

http://journals.cambridge.org/repo_A863Mx69

In related unpublished work available here 
(http://huber.research.yale.edu/writings.html), we find evidence of voter 
misperceptions about ballot secrecy protections.

-gh


On Fri, 2 Nov 2012, David A. Holtzman wrote:

>
> In polling places, it's not just talking to people who have come to vote that 
> can be intimidating.Taking pictures, or looking like you might be taking 
> pictures, can be intimidating as well.(Especially when a voter might be 
> carrying a marked ballot, or while a voter is marking a ballot.)
>
> The post below and this 
> <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/01/project-orca-mitt-romney_n_2052861.html> 
> (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/01/project-orca-mitt-romney_n_2052861.html) 
> "Project ORCA" thing (what does that stand for?) made me think.I, for one, 
> would have a hard time not using my phone or iPad's camera if I was sitting 
> all day in a polling place, with the device in my hands, waiting to check in 
> each voter.I'd simply want to document the experience.
>
> But having such a device out could be offensive and intimidating to a voter 
> who knows what it can do.
>
> Can/should/do election officials prohibit the use or display of 
> camera-containing devices at polling places (unless everyone in the room 
> consents to photography)?
>
> How about having opaque tape on hand and asking people to tape over their 
> lenses before they use such devices?How about if people bring and use their 
> own tape?
>
> Then how about microphone-containing devices?I imagine officials ban talking 
> on cell phones inside polling places, but smartphones can record audio.What 
> are the rules, or should the rules be, on cellphones/smartphones/similar 
> devices?Keep it in your pocket/purse?
>
> - David Holtzman
>
> p.sI understand that some smartphone addicts might rather leave the polling 
> place than wait on line if they're not allowed to use their devices while 
> waiting!But most serious line haters probably already vote by mail.And I 
> guess the vast majority of smartphone users are engaged enough with some 
> in-person or online community to be motivated voters, and so would endure a 
> phoneless wait to vote (and vote by mail next time!).
>
>
>
>
> On 11/2/2012 9:28 AM, john.k.tanner at gmail.com wrote:
>>  I am amazed that the VA Democrats are filing suit, in effect, to allow
>>  True the Vote poll watchers to talk directly to voters. This is an
>>  invitation for poll watchers to harassment of minority voters.  Poll
>>  watchers should never talk to voters in the polls, only to poll workers.
>>  Otherwise things can rapidly spiral out of control. This is nuts.
>>  Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
>>
>>  -----Original Message-----
>>  From: Rick Hasen <rhasen at law.uci.edu>
>>  Sender: law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu
>>  Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2012 09:08:42
>>  To: law-election at UCI.edu<law-election at UCI.edu>
>>  Subject: [EL] ELB News and Commentary 11/2/12
>>
>>  _______________________________________________
>>  Law-election mailing list
>>  Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
>>  http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>>
>>  _______________________________________________
>>  Law-election mailing list
>>  Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
>>  http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>> 
>
>
>
> -- 
> David A. Holtzman, M.P.H., J.D.
> david at holtzmanlaw.com
>
> Notice: This email (including any files transmitted with it) may be 
> confidential, for use only by intended recipients.  If you are not an 
> intended recipient or a person responsible for delivering this email to an 
> intended recipient, be advised that you have received this email in error and 
> that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this email is 
> strictly prohibited.  If you have received this email in error, please 
> immediately notify the sender and discard all copies.
>
>
>

==============================================================
Gregory Huber
gregory.huber at yale.edu
http://huber.research.yale.edu

Professor, Department of Political Science
Resident Fellow, Institution for Social and Policy Studies
Faculty Affiliate, Center for the Study of American Politics
Yale University

203-432-5731 (voice)
203-432-3296 (fax)
Office: ISPS, C222, 77 Prospect Street
Mail: PO Box 208209, New Haven, CT 06520
==============================================================