What Maryland Voters are Less Satisfied With

Our new statewide survey of Maryland voters shows high satisfaction with election operations. But it also reveals gaps that merit attention.

The vast majority of Maryland voters of all backgrounds reported being satisfied with their voting experience.

As Maryland voters head to the polls for Tuesday’s primary election, researchers with the University of Maryland Center for Democracy and Civic Engagement asked a random sample of 1,001 of them to think back on their past voting experiences.

Overall, 95% of those who had voted in person on Election Day said that they were very or somewhat satisfied with their experience. So did 93% of voters who cast their ballots early in person and 92% who voted by mail.

But some voters are, of course, more satisfied than others. We looked to see who was less satisfied and why, and a few things stood out.

Hispanic and Black voters are less satisfied than White voters with the physical condition of their polling place.

More than half of White voters rated the condition of buildings used for voting on Election Day as excellent (52%). Significantly fewer Hispanic voters (43%) and Black voters (38%) rated the condition as excellent. Voters in these groups were more likely to rate the condition of their polling place as ”fair” and were also more likely to report waiting in line to vote. Baltimore City voters were the least satisfied; younger voters gave lower marks than older voters.

Maryland law requires election officials to use buildings that are within precinct boundaries for Election Day, unless no suitable location for a polling place can be found within that precinct. If policymakers want to address racial disparities in the voting experience, they may wish to explore whether the schools, libraries and other public buildings used for polling places in areas with a higher concentration of Black or Hispanic voters are smaller, less well maintained or have less parking than buildings in whiter communities.

There is no one solution to addressing disparities. Options may include giving election officials more discretion to select higher quality polling places even if they are not inside precinct boundaries, or expanding voters’ ability to choose from among in-person voting locations on Election Day. The findings may help explain why support for such vote centers is higher among Black voters than among White voters. If White voters are happier with the status quo, they may not see as much of a need to change current laws.

The most commonly cited concern was limited availability of touch screen ballot marking devices.

17% of voters said there were not enough typically available, including more than 20% of voters in the following groups: Hispanic voters (25%), those with incomes under $50,000 (24%), those aged 35 to 54 (20%), and those living in Baltimore City (29%), Baltimore County (24%), Prince George’s County (24%), and Anne Arundel County (20%).

When Maryland initially replaced its electronic voting equipment with paper ballots, the initial procurement intended widespread use of these touch screen ballot marking devices. But after concerns came to light about the layout of contests on the screen, the State Board of Elections decided to limit their use. A planned upgrade would address that issue, giving policymakers an opportunity to make these devices more widely available after the 2026 election.

Younger voters were less thrilled than older voters with poll worker performance and wait times.

Only 39% of voters under age 35 rated poll worker performance on Election Day as excellent, compared to 69% of voters age 55 or older. Younger voters were also more likely to report unacceptable wait times to vote. The reasons for these generational differences are not immediately clear, but they raise questions about how younger voters experience the polling place differently from their older peers. Younger voters are more likely to be newer voters, to move more often, and to be unaffiliated with a political party. Each of these factors may affect how they experience the polling place.

There is good reason to celebrate high voter satisfaction. But paying attention to where voters are less satisfied tells us where to look to improve election policy.

Modest changes to Maryland’s polling place laws could give local boards more flexibility to select voting locations based less strictly on precinct boundaries that may not mean much to voters, and more on the condition of the facility, available parking, accessibility, voter flow, and connection to the community.

More expansive reforms, such as Election Day vote centers, would require more than a change in law. Vote centers must be able to offer different ballots for voters from every precinct in a county. Maryland currently manages that challenge during early voting by preprinting large quantities of paper ballots for each early voting site, a practice that would be infeasible at every polling place on Election Day.

Used as originally envisioned, ballot marking devices could allow election officials to bring up the correct ballot style. But that would require Maryland to revisit its limits on the use of ballot marking devices and the technology needed to connect each voter to the correct ballot.

Voters are giving policymakers useful information. Some are less satisfied with the polling places available to them, some want more access to ballot marking devices, and some may be more open than policymakers assume to voting models that give them more choice. As Maryland considers the future of its election system, lawmakers should weigh those preferences alongside the infrastructure needed to support them.

Alysoun McLaughlin is a former election official and Director of the Election Resilience Lab at the University of Maryland’s Center for Democracy and Civic Engagement.