Originally Posted by
Haloti92
Probably somewhat, but the long lines are a result of a slow process not an abnormally large number of voters. The same number of voters at other more well-run, well-planned precincts do not experience anywhere near these delays. Every precinct knows ahead of time what kind of turnout they could potentially face (the number of residents in their precinct is not unlimited and is generally known).
And early voting has some drawbacks. For one, it costs money. Two, it allows people to vote with less than full information (many states allow voting before the debates, for example). And close-to-Election Day early voting opens up the potential for people to vote twice as voter rolls (for Election Day) cannot be updated in the short time between the end of early voting and Election Day. Also, early voting results can discourage voters if they conclude their vote "doesn't matter" due to lopsided margin or perceived settled outcome. On this point, I don't think there has been any evidence that extended early voting increases turnout (in fact, I have seen a couple of studies showing it slightly decreases turnout).
As for people that cannot get off of work or are too ill or disabled to get to the polls on Election Day, I believe every state in the Union allows mailed absentee ballots to be used in these instances (a form of early voting).
At some point, the voter should be required to put in some minimal effort in terms of casting their vote. Making sure you are registered, and planning for an event that occurs about every 2 years (every 4 years for a lot of voters), is not a lot to ask, imo. At least it didn't used to be. Same goes for the election planners/officials.