Why is the United States, one of the, if not the, most technologically advanced, prosperous, and respected democracies in the history of the world, relying on 40 year old technology to decide this most important contest?
It’s pathetic that we are still using punchcards and optical readers. This technology is notoriously inaccurate and inefficient. It should have been retired dozens of years ago.
For years, we’ve been sending ‘observers’ to third-world countries, to certify their elections. We always hear reports about ‘irregularities’, and scoff at those poor stupid disadvantaged people who can’t run a simple election.
Maybe we should ask Mozambique or Latvia for help with our next national election. It couldn’t hurt.
As soon as we have some elected leaders – if that ever happens – we need to push them on this. We should be able to vote with User ID’s and Passwords from anywhere. The powers that be will fight this, because they fear change. But our representatives will listen to us if we complain loudly enough, and long enough.
I think voting technology reform is an issue that can gain total bi-partisan support. Please Let your representative know how you feel about this issue.
“As soon as we have some elected leaders – if that ever happens – we need to push them on this. We should be able to vote with User ID’s and Passwords from anywhere. The powers that be will fight this, because they fear change. But our representatives will listen to us if we complain loudly enough, and long enough.”
It sounds mighty odd to spin Internet voting as a populist “fight the powah” measure, because the simple fact is that Internet-accessible computers haven’t become that widespread yet. Lots of people don’t have a computer, and lots of people with computers don’t have decent 'Net access. Yes, there are computers in the public libraries that anyone can use, but they weren’t intended to be suddenly used over a single day period* by the thousands of people who don’t have Internet-accessible computers.
I’m not saying that it’s not doable. But whay you consider to be an empowerment of the average citizen would most likely be opposed by many as taking power AWAY from the common man. Can you imagine a poor person who can barely keep his electric bill paid asking incredulously “You mean I have to have access to a computer with a fast Internet connection just to be able to vote!?”
*A single election day would have to be retained in any computer voting system. It’s not an artifact of the 19th Century or a result of “fear[ing] change” to require a single election day. The fact that people vote as the vote totals are coming in is already accused of skewing elections. And that’s just the difference resulting from the four time zones, two or three hours. Imagine the bandwagon effect if people could vote over a three day or five day period!
I doubt that the Internet as we know it today has neither the capacity nor the security to handle 100,000,000 voters all on the same day.
Even if you make each state handle its own votes, Internet voting would be daunting. I can’t picture California being able to pull this off. There are just too darn many people here.
I’ve voted in the traditional manner and with an absentee ballot, both with punchcards and Scantron-style fill-in ovals. I’ve never voted online or by phone because I’ve never had to. However, I’m well aware that there are people out there who do need an alternative (as well as those who simply want one, and their views are every bit as valid).
The thing you have to understand is that the oldest methods are also the cheapest ones, and as long as they work, well, if it ain’t broke. The controversy in Palm Beach was caused (probably) by a specific ballot and a handful of careless voters, and maybe unfair time restrictions. (One respondent said he had to be out of there in five minutes, which is just outrageous if it’s in fact true.) While they certainly should have had another option, that doesn’t change the fact that the large majority of voters in that state had no problems.
Simply put, we need to have every option available. Like it or not, there are lazy, careless, or just plain dumb voters in our society, and there always will be. If voting from the comfort of one’s computer room is what it takes to get some of the 100 million voters who sat out this election to not sit out future elections, well, can’t find any beef with that.
**
We should be able to vote with User ID’s and Passwords from anywhere. The powers that be will fight this, because they fear change.
**
Actually, I fear this, too, but because I have concerns about the limits of building a secure system that is designed to be used by millions of people. After 10 years of working with computers, I’ve found there is something warm and fuzzy about having a paper trail.
I am working at a major financial institution on the fringes of their digital certificates efforts. I think there is some promise if you can figure out how to deliver smart cards to EVERYBODY. As the technology becomes cheaper it seems that each jurisdiction could issue voter smart cards. Go to a computer with a smart card reader (or a polling place with smart card readers) and be delivered the appropriate ballot for you address.
A lot of kinks to be worked out and it will never be national because by law (part of the constitution, I believe), administration of elections - even presidential elections - are under local control. The federal government can not easily impose national voting standards.
This is why some municipalities are using 40 year old equipment.
Actually, the best current voting technology is, paradoxically, obsolete – the voting machine. They work fine, and it’s easy to catch errors (99% of which are human errors in writing down the totals). You can’t vote twice for the same office and there’s no such thing as hand counting. The only downside is that you have to go to the polling place to vote, but you’re going to need to offer something of the sort (since not everyone has Internet access), and if someone is too lazy to get out of the house to vote, I’m not sure they are the right people to participate in voting.
Currently, no voting machines are being made. After this election, there may be a market for something, especially if it’s cheaper than what the machines used to cost (over $5000 each).
