In short, no.
Voting in the U.S. is run by the individual states, and each one sets their own rules and policies.
The federal government does set some minimum rules that only apply to federal elections, but those rules don’t even require the use of voting booths: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CFR-2024-title11-vol1/pdf/CFR-2024-title11-vol1.pdf
Adding on to this; I’d be very surprised if there was a locality within the U.S. that didn’t require every building to have carbon monoxide detectors, but again, voting doesn’t even have to occur within a building.
I’m super curious why you’re asking.
Carbon monoxide in a voting place could affect which choices are picked by voters who use the booths.
I’m no expert, but wouldn’t that require more longterm exposure? As opposed to a few minutes in a voting place that is.
Ohhhhh. Okay, yeah, so I worked for a data aggregation company for a time and there was absolutely an odd (personally identified) correlation between lead exposure areas of the US and heavily red voting.
I worked for an insurance company in latent bodily injury claims (asbestos, lead paint, etc), and the symptoms of lead paint poisoning include lowered IQ, reduced emotional control, impaired risk assessment, and increased aggression.
There was a black man killed by cops for the crime of impoliteness in response to racial profiling several years ago, who had been one of our claimants. I didn’t find a reference to lead paint on the Wikipedia page, so I don’t think it’s public information and I won’t say who, but it’s unfortunately not a unique story.
Lead paint is nearly exclusively still present in awful apartments rented by slumlords to the poorest people in the US.
There’s also ambient exposure from leaded gasoline, but that’s not really an ongoing problem anymore (for now, I could see this regime fully legalizing leaded gas again). Even though lead hasn’t been legal in house paint since 1978, shitty landlords just painted over it instead of remediating it, so kids get exposed to sweet tasting paint flakes, as well as the dust released when it flakes off ending up in their homes or in the soil surrounding their buildings.
Leaded fuel is still used in small planes so that’s definitely still an issue in some areas
Tell me about it. Every time I get near the planes we use for skydiving, I can smell the damn difference.
Nah, y’all can stop blaming lead.
Lead makes people more aggressive, not transform you into a nazi.
My city still have issues with children getting lead poisoned, but its blue af. People become nazis by choice. You can’t just shift the blame to lead.
I’d be more likely to blame the lead exposure on the deregulation that red areas tend to favor, but I know the truth is more insidious: both are correlated to poverty.
I hope no one is going into the booth without a choice already made.
If there’s carbon monoxide, then someone might fill in a bubble thinking it makes the candidate less likely to win, get the candidates mixed up, forget to fill in the bubble, etc.
Oh, maybe. But then it could go either direction. So that shouldn’t affect results.
It could work if done selectively on key areas that are statistically slanted to one side, but the logistics of pulling that off and keeping it a secret mean it’s just not a logical conspiracy.
I haven’t voted in person for several years, but all the polling places I remember had all the doors open to the outside air. A basketball gym, a church side-hall, someone’s home garage. And the booths are just curtained frames. But then again, I live in Los Angeles so it’s not freezing in November. Maybe it’s different in Minnesota.
…here we just have touchscreen kiosks set side-by-side along open tables, no privacy other than the LCD field-of-view…
How odd! Everywhere I’ve voted in OK, IL and FL had pretty much the same setup, basically a 1/8th scale, standing office cubicle. You got me thinking, I’d be surprised to see anything else!
…you know, now that i’m really thinking about it, there may be a token 12"x18" privacy screen set on the table between displays, but it doesn’t impede adjacent displays from your field of view at all: it’s more about the suggestion of privacy than actual functionality…
CO comes from incomplete combustion and you’d usually only have detectors for it around gas heaters, generators, stuff like that. Maybe you meant carbon dioxide (CO2). I don’t remember ever seeing one around a voting booth. I’d consider them a good idea though, not because CO2 poisoning is a serious concern per se, but because high CO2 means that you’re breathing air that other people exhaled, increasing your exposure to airborne pathogens.
CO2 is a non-issue in open places with people around. The one gas our bodies detects well is CO2. If there’s even a tiny percentage higher than background, people are going to quickly notice.
I mean, voting booths aren’t airtight, you could just have one for the polling place
I LMFAO’ed at this question 🤣
Building code (which generally has regulations for carbon monoxide and other leaks) covers all rooms in a building. Each jurisdiction’s building code will be different, but they’re usually national as a baseline and then added to by states/provinces and municipalities.
You’ll need to look up the building code for your country and/or state/province to see what they require.
Basically, yes. Voting happens in churches, schools, and government buildings, which all have standard safety detectors. Furthermore, the fact voting is distributed across so many different kinds of locations means that it would be much harder for there to be a conspiracy to place faulty detectors in polling places.
I agree with that second bit, but thinking of all the places I’ve voted in life I wouldn’t imagine detectors in most of them. We hardly use gas at all around here, all electric, can’t see how anything else would be a CO source.
I believe any such regulations would be on a state by state basis, though I doubt any are actually enacted.
