|
Electronically Voting: Overview While a nationwide Presidential e-vote for the masses is still something more of a debate than a reality, it is true that its potential is something of great importance. Only two states- Alaska and Arizona--- have allowed for absentee ballots via the internet in the most recent Presidential elections process. In Arizona, the e-voting that occurred for the Democratic Primary was at least somewhat successful, and the process was definitely not without its problems. Alaska was the first to implement electronic voting last year for a Republican Straw Poll, with little turmoil-and little turnout. Whatever the case, the electronic vote is here to stay in some capacity. How it will be used in the future remains to be seen. More than anything else, implementation of an electronic voting system is about re-engaging the voting process-and voter turnout. Proponents of voting electronically insist it would provide an attractive alternative to the traditional voting method because of the convenience it would create for voters. This, in turn, would likely increase voter turnout. In the same vein, there is also much consensus that voting via the 'net will reanimate the lagging Youth Vote. Jim Adler, president of VoteHere.net, an organization which claims to have developed secure electronic voting software, has said,
Invoking an electronic voting process is also about money. Big Money.
If and when the technology behind
Electronically Voting Via the Web From a Remote Location Enter such firms as Election.com and VoteHere.net. Amidst much media hooplah, Election.com's software hit the 'big time' as its software debuted for the Arizona Democratic Primary last March, and VoteHere.net, ran Alaska's Republican straw poll in January. Though there are others out there (see related links section), these are the big two software firms vying to be the "chosen one" in the race to elect candidates online. Many of the electronic voting software firms have quietly applied for certification with the National Association of State Election Directors, a board that certifies election equipment for 32 states, including Michigan. (Each individual state is responsible for the implementation of its election laws. ) In general, they work with each prospective state's Bureau of Elections or the like within the Department of State. Yet, it is important to note that Election.com has not been qualified by this independent agency overseen and comprised by representatives from varying states, and they're not worried about it. They expect to take the world by a storm, anyway. Election.com president Mel Schrieberg apparently feels its enough to have submitted, for certification with NASED, as well as with other jurisdictions, which he declined to name (Burke 2000). Problems With E-voting Of the many problems associated with voting electronically from a remote location, three remain as the core issues. One is accessability. Not everyone has access to a computer, and there is evidence that only wealthier Americans would benefit fromt this process, as evidenced by some of the research on demographics done for other portions of this site (see 1960, 2000). Among the other proposed 'secure' electronic voting methods, kiosks in public areas are just one suggestion. Of this type of possible e-vote, Deborah Phillips, the chairman and president of the Voting Integrity Project has this to say:
Another problem with the internet vote, as cited by many in the community is the weakening of civic pride. Many, such as Rick Valelly, an associate professor of political science at Swarthmore College, believe voting should be a public activity. He has stated that "Internet voting will not only fail to reverse voter apathy, but will actually lead us in the wrong direction. (Valelly 1999). Internet Bottlenecks could also be a very real concern as the traffic might outweigh the bandwidth. There was mass frustration when this occurred in the Arizona Primary. "It was a farce," complained Arizona voter Bennie Quintana at the time. "I tried for over 24 hours and was unable to vote! I felt dis-enfranchised!" Anecdotal reports seem to suggest Quintana wasn't alone and as yet, there's no official count of how many people were unable to access the site to vote in the election (Burke, 2000). Security is also a central concern. Deborah Phillips of the Voting
Integrity Project, has brought up a number Solutions For the E-voting Process Douglas M. Jones, an Associate Professor of Computer Science at the University of Iowa, proposes quite a simple idea to get around the problem for potential fraud from a remote location by simply installing an approved operating system, which he calls "software version control (Jones, 2000)." This software will have been specifically designed for electronic voting and has been obtained only from a secure archive, as well as this archive being maintained by a secure third party. The problem with this proposed solution is that it underestimates the abilities of the knowledgeable computing populace, as well as the pervasiveness of corruption within the system at the hands of both major political parties. Digital signatures are another proposed solution. A "digital certificate" is an advanced type of account number that is capable of "digitally signing" any document generated by computer, including an Internet ballot (Dictson and Ray, 1999). Here is a Proposal outlining how digital signatures might work in the e-vote capacity if the following deterrents were made serious offenses, for example:
Because of inherent weaknesses in the individual creator(s) of any such program created, regardless of its original integrity, can be altered to corrupt the votes obtained. Conversely, if one were to explore the issues from the traditional voting standpoint, it would not be all that far from impossible to imagine that this can be done within the existing voting method. Thus, one must consider the technologies already employed. As I've stated above, many states have implemented a remote online voter registration procedure--while many precautions have been taken, it is impossible to deem even this procedure entirely secure. The long-held belief that voter fraud at this level is one of the easiest and most common occurrences makes this use of technology all the more dangerous . But it seems to have gone over without a hitch. Why is there a difference with the actual paper ballot? Voter fraud on any level is a very real threat, and the World Wide Web is not the only place where it occurs, or would occur, should further technologies be implemented. American Elections Officials must decide if the ease of use and an increased voter turnout worth the inherent risks. Even though capturing the vote in an electronic form can never replace the security of the voting procedure already in place at this time, the American public must be aware that even the traditional process is not without loopholes. This year's presidential election is the obvious example. Web-based technology is definitely not 100% secure, but neither is the process already in place. If the possibility of voter fraud can take place within the existing framework to the extreme that it appears to have this year, then the general consensus must be to further investigate the possibility and integrity of web-based voting. "In politics, as in business, the Net is not necessarily replacing the old ways of doing things. Rather, it is altering old habits and institutions in countless ways large and small, and creating many new ones. That's a process that's going to continue for many elections to come." (Weber, 2000) Related Resources Election Systems and Software -- http://www.essvote.com E-vote Bibliography Blitzer, Wolf. "Internet Revolution Pushing Way Into Voting Booth." CNN.com. 3 Nov. 1999. Burke, Lynn. "The Tangled Web of E-Voting." Online. Wired Magazine. Available: http://www.wirednews.com/news/print/0,1294,37050,00.html. 26 Jun 2000. Committee of Seventy. "Why Not Internet Voting?" http://www.seventy.org/news/netvote.html. Mar 2000. Dictson, Derek and Ray, Dan. "The Modern Democratic Revolution: An Objective Survey of Internet-Based Elections." http://www.SecurePoll.com/VotingPaper.htm. 18 Jan. 2000 Jones, Bill. "A Report on the Feasibility of Internet Voting." California Internet Voting Task Force. http://www.ss.ca.gov/executive/ivote/final_report.htm#final-2 Jones, Douglas W. "Voting -- Prospects and Problems." Symposium at the University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa. Online. Available: http://www.cs.uiowa.edu/~jones/voting/taubate.html. 13 Apr 2000. Murphy, Jamie. "Florida Trys Voting Via the Net." The New York Times on the Web. http://www.nytimes.com/library/cyber/week/110197voting.html. 1 Nov. 1997. Phillips, Deborah. "Is Internet Voting Fair?" Network World.. Online. Available: http://www.nwfusion.com/columnists/2000/0626faceno.html?nf 26 Jun 2000. Thomsen, Scott. "Arizona Plans Internet Primary." ABCNews.com. 28 Nov 1999. Valelly, Rick. "Voting Alone." The New Republic. September 20, 1999. Weber, Jonathon. "The Election and the Internet," http://www.thestandard.com/article/display/0,1151,20121,00.html. 13 Nov. 2000 Author Unknown. "The Future of Internet Voting." Symposium. http://www.brook.edu/comm/transcripts/20000120.htm. 20 Jan 2000.
[ Home ] [ 1960 ] [ 2000 ] [ Comparison ] [ Timeline ] |
[
the
e-vote should come to pass as the proported medium to measure the American
vote, it will create a "market estimated to be $10-40 billion annually"
(Burke 2000). And who better to meet that demand than third party software
developers and distributors.
of potential problems for Internet voting. These include such things
as hackers trying to crash the system, people attempting to cast someone
else's ballot, loss of Voting privacy, and a lack of computer access
for some communities or social groups that might skew results. (Thomsen,
1999) The possibilities for security breaches are endless. Additionally,
there is an overall distrust in voting electronically, it seems, because
the American Public has a distrust of the voting process in general.
Perhaps the 2000 Presidential Election stands as a perfect example of
why this distrust exists, as well as a proof of a much-needed change
to the existing voting method.