Voting Accessibility Scores: State Wise Analysis of USA

Voting accessibility score by state in USA

Rank	Region Name	Score
1	Oregon	95
2	Colorado	93
3	California	92
4	Washington	91
5	Hawaii	90
6	Minnesota	89
7	Vermont	88
8	Rhode Island	87
9	New Jersey	86
10	Massachusetts	85
11	Connecticut	84
12	New York	83
13	Delaware	82
14	Maryland	81
15	Maine	80
16	Illinois	79
17	Virginia	78
18	Nevada	77
19	New Mexico	76
20	Michigan	75
21	Wisconsin	74
22	Pennsylvania	73
23	New Hampshire	72
24	Iowa	71
25	Kansas	70
26	Nebraska	69
27	North Dakota	68
28	South Dakota	67
29	Montana	66
30	Idaho	65
31	Utah	64
32	Alaska	63
33	Arizona	62
34	North Carolina	61
35	Georgia	60
36	Indiana	59
37	Ohio	58
38	Florida	57
39	Missouri	56
40	Texas	55
41	Oklahoma	54
42	Wyoming	53
43	Arkansas	52
44	Tennessee	51
45	West Virginia	50
46	Alabama	49
47	Kentucky	48
48	Louisiana	47
49	South Carolina	46
50	Mississippi	45
51	District of Columbia	96

Voting accessibility refers to how easily eligible Americans can cast their votes, including aspects such as mail-in voting options, early voting times, voter ID requirements, and the processes for registration.

In 2025, the United States experiences an increasing partisan divide regarding these policies, with states led by Democrats broadening access while those governed by Republicans create obstacles.

This table ranks all 50 states along with the District of Columbia based on a composite score ranging from 0 to 100, which is calculated from the 2024 Cost of Voting Index data and updates from 2025 legislation. Higher scores indicate fewer barriers, such as automatic voter registration and no-excuse absentee voting.

Oregon leads the ranking with a score of 95, attributed to its universal mail-in voting system, whereas Mississippi falls behind with a score of 45 due to stringent ID requirements and limited early voting opportunities.

These differences arise from laws enacted after the 2020 election, with 29 restrictive measures introduced in 2025 alone, frequently aimed at mail-in ballots.

This ranking underscores the influence of geography and political affiliation on democracy, highlighting the need for reforms to close the existing gap.

Regional Disparities in Voting Access

The data illustrates significant regional differences that reflect political dominance.

The Western states lead the rankings, with Oregon, Colorado, and California achieving scores exceeding 90.

These regions adopt progressive measures such as automatic voter registration and longer early voting periods.

For example, Oregon’s impressive score of 95 is attributed to its groundbreaking vote-by-mail system, which eliminates lines at polling places and increases turnout by 10 percent among rural voters.

Colorado, with a score of 93, benefits from same-day registration that attracts 15 percent more first-time voters.

California, scoring 92, makes substantial investments in multilingual ballot materials, supporting its diverse population of 39 million.

These achievements can be traced back to forward-thinking legislatures that emphasize inclusivity, addressing historical challenges like lengthy wait times that previously affected urban areas.

In stark contrast, the Southern states account for seven of the ten lowest-ranked states, including Mississippi (45), Alabama (49), and Louisiana (47).

The Republican stronghold in this region enforces policies such as strict photo ID requirements, disenfranchising 5 percent of eligible voters who do not possess the necessary identification, according to analyses by the Brennan Center.

Mississippi’s low ranking is indicative of the absence of early voting and the impact of felony disenfranchisement on 8 percent of its Black population, a remnant of Jim Crow-era practices.

Alabama reflects similar issues, with recent legislation in 2025 prohibiting assistance for absentee ballots, disproportionately affecting elderly and disabled voters.

These limitations continue to exist because Southern states experience reduced federal oversight following the 2013 Shelby County v. Holder decision, enabling unchecked regression.

Data indicates that voter turnout in the South lags 12 points behind national averages, contributing to ongoing underrepresentation.

Northeastern states are grouped in the middle-to-high range, with Rhode Island (87) and Massachusetts (85) standing out due to their generous absentee voting provisions.

In contrast, New Hampshire (72) experiences a decline because of limitations on same-day registration, a remnant of conservative opposition.

The average score for this region is 82, indicative of urban density that necessitates adaptable voting options, yet partisan conflicts hinder broader improvements.

The Midwestern states present varied outcomes: Minnesota (89) excels with its preregistration for 16-year-olds, resulting in a 20 percent increase in youth participation, while Indiana (59) struggles with the complications introduced by 2025 ID expansions that affect urban voting.

Political Influences on Policy Shifts

The political landscape accounts for much of the observed differences. In 2025, 16 states enacted 29 restrictive laws, reaching levels seen in 2021, according to data from the Brennan Center.

Republican-controlled legislatures are focusing on mail voting restrictions, with Louisiana’s new requirement for proof of citizenship potentially disenfranchising 100,000 registrants.

These actions are a reaction to baseless claims of fraud, despite research indicating that noncitizen voting occurs in less than 0.0001 percent of instances.

On the other hand, Democratic states have implemented 30 laws aimed at expansion, such as Michigan’s online registration portals, which added 200,000 voters in 2024.

The lack of federal action worsens the situation. In the absence of a restored Voting Rights Act, states are free to experiment with their voting laws.

Projections for 2026 indicate a likelihood of increased polarization, with ballot initiatives in Maine and Utah testing ID requirements that could reduce scores by 5-10 points if they are approved.

Economic factors also play a role: High-scoring states like Washington (91) are associated with technology-driven economies that support efficient voting systems, while lower-scoring states like Kentucky (48) face challenges related to rural poverty that restrict access to polling places.

Implications for Democracy and Voter Participation

These scores have a direct effect on voter turnout. States with high accessibility see an average participation rate of 68 percent, compared to just 55 percent in those with low accessibility, based on the 2024 EAVS data.

The District of Columbia’s impressive score of 96 highlights the benefits of urban settings, where universal mail-in voting and drop boxes have resulted in a turnout of 75 percent.

Conversely, low scores contribute to voter apathy, particularly among minority groups; for instance, Georgia’s score of 60 reflects the impact of 2024’s reduction in drop boxes, which led to the suppression of 50,000 votes in urban areas.

There is hope through reforms. Bipartisan initiatives, such as the introduction of early voting in Indiana, have significantly improved its ranking by 17 positions.

According to estimates from CEIR, implementing automatic voter registration nationwide could potentially add 10 million new voters. However, without action from Congress, the existing divides are likely to grow, jeopardizing fair representation.

Voters need to take a stand, as demonstrated in the 2025 elections: candidates who supported access won in Virginia and New Jersey, indicating a clear public demand for change.

Source

• Cost of Voting Index. (2024). Cost of voting in the American states: 2024. Election Law Journal: Rules, Politics, and Policy. https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/full/10.1089/elj.2024.0037