Bill Overview
Title: Election Worker Protection Act of 2022
Description: This bill addresses certain protections for election workers. Among other provisions, the bill (1) establishes grants for the recruitment, training, and safety of election workers; and (2) makes it a crime to intimidate, threaten, coerce, or harass an election worker with the intent to interfere with the official duties of, or retaliate against, the worker.
Sponsors: Sen. Klobuchar, Amy [D-MN]
Target Audience
Population: Election workers involved in election processes globally
Estimated Size: 800000
- The bill is specifically focused on the protection and welfare of election workers.
- Election workers include individuals who are involved in the management and operation of voting processes during elections.
- This bill addresses protections against intimidation, threats, coercion, or harassment, which directly affects those employed or volunteering as election workers.
Reasoning
- The Election Worker Protection Act is designed to address the safety and welfare of a specific workforce: election workers. As such, the simulated interviews focus on this unique group, alongside some general population members who might perceive indirect impacts.
- The budget constraint dictates a targeted approach primarily affecting direct beneficiaries—election workers who face harassment or intimidation—which is estimated at around 800,000 in the U.S.
- Although this policy directly targets election workers, the broader societal appreciation for safeguarded, fair election processes could indirectly influence the wellbeing of the general populace.
- Limitations include the scope of coverage (focused essentially during election cycles) and compliance levels of law enforcement addressing reported incidents.
- Potential impacts vary: for election workers, the security measures alleviate personal and professional stress, potentially boosting their perceived wellbeing; others in society may derive secondary benefits through reinforced trust in the electoral process.
Simulated Interviews
Election Coordinator (New York City, NY)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I appreciate these new protections. The increasing hostility during elections has made recruiting workers harder.
- Feeling safe doing my job will improve my work environment and job satisfaction.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
IT Specialist and Poll Worker (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 32 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I volunteer as a poll worker because I value democracy, but I have felt uneasy due to aggressive attitudes.
- I believe every support or protection is crucial to maintaining peace and democracy.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Teacher / Volunteer Poll Worker (Austin, TX)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm happy something is being done! Sometimes voters can be quite aggressive and intimidating.
- Knowing there are legal backs to support makes volunteering stress-free.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Retired, now election judge (Chicago, IL)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Election times have become more charged. I feel like this law is long overdue.
- The tension can ruin the experience of serving your community. Protections will help.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 3 |
Farmer / Occasional Poll Worker (Rural Georgia)
Age: 37 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I've noticed rising tensions, especially during close elections. Hopefully this act helps calm things.
- As much as I appreciate gratitude from most voters, those protections would make it universally safer.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Election Official (Portland, OR)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The role comes with pressure, and this law fortifies our operations against interference.
- A safer work environment is welcome.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
Retired Engineer / Poll Worker (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 61 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Lately, election day has felt more like a battleground.
- Having protections in place should restore some peace to democracy.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 3 |
Lawyer (Salt Lake City, UT)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 18/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy ensures fairness and safeguards for workers.
- Indirectly, it strengthens our democracy and trust in the electoral process.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Student / Poll Worker (Miami, FL)
Age: 24 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Sometimes feels worried about heated interactions at polling points.
- Encouraged by anything that reduces fear or risk. It's a serious deterrent.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 4 |
Small Business Owner (Raleigh, NC)
Age: 47 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 20/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This bill emphasizes the seriousness of protecting elections.
- While I'm not directly involved, I feel more confident that measures are being enforced.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $150000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $200000000)
Year 2: $100000000 (Low: $75000000, High: $125000000)
Year 3: $105000000 (Low: $80000000, High: $130000000)
Year 5: $110000000 (Low: $85000000, High: $135000000)
Year 10: $115000000 (Low: $90000000, High: $140000000)
Year 100: $120000000 (Low: $95000000, High: $145000000)
Key Considerations
- Ensuring adequate and timely funding for grants and programs to support recruitment and training of election workers.
- Potential administrative challenges in implementing and monitoring new legal protections against harassment.
- Need to assess the impact of the policy on election worker morale and participation rates.