Over the years and with lots of experience under my belt, I have learned the truth behind this old adage: “Don’t discuss religion or politics.” It seems that these hot topics are even more volatile during campaign seasons as people, locked into their religious beliefs and/or political affiliations, try to change another’s opinions, beliefs, or indoctrination. Unfortunately, these initial discussions can begin as an attempt to garner support for a particular candidate who shares one’s views on a subject of importance to them, but in fact, then leads to an argumentative confrontation.
When I presented this topic to Chris Pirillo here at LockerGnome for his perusal, he supported me in my decision to write the article, but pointed out that it was a hot topic that needed to be handled in a sensitive manner. To do this, I knew that it would be necessary for me to present this topic with the pros and cons specifically spelled out.
Our right to vote, guaranteed by the US Constitution, has undergone many changes over the years and today, with social networking sites affecting almost one billion of us, we find ourselves interacting in the world arena in unprecedented numbers. For many of us, staying constantly connected to online political updates, financial news, or keeping up with social networking sites has taken on the status of electronic survival. For others, it means that one device isn’t going to be enough to stay in touch with family, friends, and associates, and these individuals have, therefore, found it necessary to surround themselves with one, two, or three electronic devices (in my home we have eight of these toys).
In addition, high-speed Internet connections are paramount if we are to be successful in our quest to communicate important events quickly. While I firmly believe that all Americans should have the right to pursue liberty, we must acknowledge that at times this liberty is going to come at a cost. For those of us on the Internet nearly 24/7, we all need to be aware that any information put out there is basically open for the world to see. This information is a collection of data about our habits, our personality traits, our surfing habits, and our family lives that we may have unwittingly made available for anyone — good or evil — to access via the big computer in the sky.
It is this problem — the accumulation of data about you and me — that is perhaps the main objection to allowing online election voting. Those in the against camp tend to adhere to the following beliefs as to why online voting should be banned:
- Security is the paramount reason for those who are opposed to online voting. They are of the opinion that any system can be hacked and that no security system is 100% secure.
- With millions of computers already compromised by viruses and in the hands of unscrupulous individuals, these controlled systems could actually alter voter results to gain political office for a candidate of their choice.
- Opponents of voting online further offer that using HTTPS connections cannot be trusted since they can also be breached in an attempt to manipulate voters.
- One such form of these viruses occurs when someone clickjacks your input. We know that this happens on common issues, but when it comes to voting online, an entire election could be controlled from behind the scenes as your vote is hijacked and you vote yes for no and no for yes without your consent.
- Last, opponents are quick to point out the cost of adding new equipment, training voting personnel, and tabulating the results. They know, as do we all, that with tax revenue being down from federal to local governmental agencies, there is already an economy toll being taken as we strive to work under the newest budget cuts.
While opponents of online voting present a solid set of reasons as to why online voting should not be allowed, proponents present an equally compelling set of reasons as to why online voting should be allowed:
- First on the list is the belief that online voting is an economically wise choice when compared to the traditional voting methods. Advocates state that, with this method, there would no longer be a need for a vast array of polling places or for a multitude of paid voting officials.
- Green effect. The advantages to the environment are obvious since there would no longer be a need to print millions of ballots, millions of registration cards, millions of absentee mailing forms, or ballot initiative information (sometimes in multiple languages).
- In addition, since voters could stay at home, the green effect would also be felt in the saving of gasoline.
- Last, they purport that online voting would make it easier for the elderly, the disabled, the disenfranchised to participate from the comfort of a Wi-Fi cafe or their own home. This could mean that the election would more clearly result in the wishes of the people rather than in the wishes of the rich minority. This factor alone could be critical in local elections where the passage of a municipal bond or school bond proposal may require a certain percentage of voter support.
In my personal opinion, until security issues can be dealt with, I don’t believe that online voting is a practical alternative to our traditional methods. My concerns are most likely due to my being recently contacted by my credit card’s fraud department. During the conversation I learned that someone had made a charge, in the amount of $1,040, to purchase women’s clothing from an out-of-state mail order service. Thankfully, the people in the department were on their toes and caught this before my card was used to purchase additional items.
However, while this was frustrating, I know I am only one of the millions who will have their credit card information compromised. That being said, the most disturbing thing to me was the nonchalant attitude displayed by the issuing credit card company. It seems that it is making so much money off the retailer and consumer that it is not taking this problem seriously enough.
But how would any of us feel if our right to vote was stolen? Would we take such a casual approach? Until we can be guaranteed that our voting rights will not be compromised, I personally believe voting online cannot become a reality. However, if and when we can be assured that our security and privacy will not be jeopardized, then — and only then — online voting may become a reality.
What do you think?
Comments welcome.
[...] Why Can’t Americans Vote Online? [...]
I have learned the truth behind this old adage: “Don’t discuss religion or politics.” = its bec weather u talk abt it or not politicians no matter which country they belong to are gonna do their thing, i did vote in my country this month we had election but i expect nothing else from politics.
Thanks for sharing.
the problem with online voting is you CANNOT control it, if someone wants to dudd the system it is not hard
the problem with online voting is you CANNOT control it, if someone wants to dudd the system it is not hard
With illegal aliens/immigrants voting and other instances of election fraud going on across the country now, some of our votes (not necessarily our right to vote) are being cancelled out and thus effectively stolen today already.
The crazies on the left are still spinning their conspiracy stories of how Diebold electronic voting machines were hacked to change votes for Al Gore to votes for George W Bush back in 2000 – and the hysteria flares up anew every time there’s a close election where a Democrat loses to a Republican. There are people out there agitating to ditch electronic voting machines and going back to paper ballots. And you seriously want us to consider voting over the internet?
We have vote by mail here in Oregon (which hasn’t appreciably increased the voter participation rate as originally promised… people bitch that the ballots are sent out too early, too late, are confusing, and even that the postage for the ballot submission envelopes isn’t pre-paid – so our elections are evidently continuing to be decided by the ‘rich minority’ willing and able to pay for a stamp)
The system also presents easy opportunity for rampant fraud for which enough circumstantial evidence has been collected over the years to warrant further investigation (campaign volunteers ‘helping’ senior citizens in nursing homes vote, duplicate ballots, ballot caches numbering in the 100s being found in election workers’ cars, etc) However, the state government continues blithely along effectively saying ‘we know we don’t have vote-by-mail fraud so there’s no reason to look for it or investigate if there’s a problem…’
(BTW, there was already a pilot program for some seniors to vote using iPads here in Oregon this past election. Right now, this is more an extension of an electronic voting machine rather than internet-based – but it’s one step down that path…)
With illegal aliens/immigrants voting and other instances of election fraud going on across the country now, some of our votes (not necessarily our right to vote) are being cancelled out and thus effectively stolen today already.
The crazies on the left are still spinning their conspiracy stories of how Diebold electronic voting machines were hacked to change votes for Al Gore to votes for George W Bush back in 2000 – and the hysteria flares up anew every time there’s a close election where a Democrat loses to a Republican. There are people out there agitating to ditch electronic voting machines and going back to paper ballots. And you seriously want us to consider voting over the internet?
We have vote by mail here in Oregon (which hasn’t appreciably increased the voter participation rate as originally promised… people bitch that the ballots are sent out too early, too late, are confusing, and even that the postage for the ballot submission envelopes isn’t pre-paid – so our elections are evidently continuing to be decided by the ‘rich minority’ willing and able to pay for a stamp)
The system also presents easy opportunity for rampant fraud for which enough circumstantial evidence has been collected over the years to warrant further investigation (campaign volunteers ‘helping’ senior citizens in nursing homes vote, duplicate ballots, ballot caches numbering in the 100s being found in election workers’ cars, etc) However, the state government continues blithely along effectively saying ‘we know we don’t have vote-by-mail fraud so there’s no reason to look for it or investigate if there’s a problem…’
(BTW, there was already a pilot program for some seniors to vote using iPads here in Oregon this past election. Right now, this is more an extension of an electronic voting machine rather than internet-based – but it’s one step down that path…)
…the election can be controlled… err, isn’t it that way, NOW?? Limited choices, by the end point -p
…the election can be controlled… err, isn’t it that way, NOW?? Limited choices, by the end point -p
…the election can be controlled… err, isn’t it that way, NOW?? Limited choices, by the end point -p
“Our right to vote, guaranteed by the US Constitution…”
There is no right to vote under the US Constitution:
http://archive.fairvote.org/?page=72
Ron, I am in a great position to give you a new perspective here. I worked for the Minneapolis Minnesota Elections and Voter Registration Department from 1980-1986.
In that time, we put all the voter information into computers for the first time. We encountered numerous difficulties in that effort alone. We also moved from using the old, heavy voting machines to electronic voting machines.
Our political system is based on representation. Each citizen lives in a particular ward and precinct of their city. A census is taken to determine the population within the city. Sometimes the political boundaries are changed if population density changes in a particular area. This process is often highly contested by politicians.
When a voter goes into a polling place, there must be proof the voter is qualified to vote in that Ward and Precinct. How can you duplicate this process online?
Remember too that many people, old and young, don’t have computers. They’re not likely to go to a library or internet cafe to vote.
To summarize, the current system is the best one for the foreseeable future.
The right to vote was by an amendment which in my opinion is part of the constitution.
What if the Government had a web app for citizens. Accounts would be based on Social Security Numbers as they are assigned, helping to better ensure a 1:1 account/user ratio and reduce the possibility of fraudulent accounts. The app could
(among other things) allow voters to set their preference for a Presidential candidate, which they would be allowed to change up until what we now consider “Election Day”. At this point, the votes are locked and counted. The results of an election could be provided instantaneously.
In terms of security – while there’s certainly always a possibility of a breach, I wonder how much of a risk it would really be. From what I’m aware of, the U.S. intelligence agencies do a pretty solid job of locking their systems up, and they pay a lot of money to have bright employees. If the same level of care would be taken for a voting system, then I think I would be able to relax about it. Of course, if corruption is disrupting the natural democratic process, I think that’s going to happen regardless of the manner of collecting votes.
On the other side of things, having votes digital – if locked down properly – is going to inevitably be MORE secure than paper. With paper, you can’t really be sure who’s seen or handled the votes. With a secure digital system, though, it will be able to strictly enforce who is able to access data.
Ultimately, I don’t think you should equate the risk of an online voting system to the risk of getting your credit card information stolen. Chances are, you’ve given out your credit card information to more than a dozen online vendors. Each of these vendors are likely to have entirely separate databases and computer systems, and each has the possibility of having poor security (because a lot of people don’t think about security – it’s definitely true, and unfortunate). But you’re comparing that to a system that could be maintained by the government the same way that the government maintains CIA and FBI networks and databases.
Did you give any thought to how many different organizations have your Social Security Number? It’s hardly a secure means of ID today (and is not supposed to be used for ID purposes anyway…) – and would become even more of a target for ID theft if it became attached to a voting web app. I’m not rejecting your scheme out of hand but it would need to be based on something other than Social Security Numbers. The genie is out of the bottle for the latter.
I only meant to use SSNs as a primary key for a database table so that there is less concern of bogus accounts being created. SSNs would not be used as a password in any capacity. Passwords would meet extremely strict requirements – minimum of 16 characters, no words/1337 speak, variation of lower case, upper case, numbers, symbols, etc. Passwords could potentially be printed on a citizen’s SSN card since no one would remember them. Not sure how password resets might work, if even an option at all.
Early may be useful for elderly, but it is not correct. On the election day, all of us know position of the candidates for a particular Office will be clear, but distinct disadvantage to some of the candidates, who will have spent time and money to contest. I do not believe this constitutionally correct
I think that 3 things MUST be in place for electronic voting: 1) Open Source (as Chris said); 2) A computer that is NOT connected to any network, locked away, and the results taken directly from the machine; and 3) A printed, human-readable receipt–actually, the best system I think would be a ballot printed in an OCR font which the voters could review and turn in themselves. A separate computer would read the OCR and tally the results (also Open Source).
So our country cannot produce and hire programmers for our own voting system? Computers cannot be trusted more then people? We cannot make internet more secure then our mailboxes? Even thought the military/government and the pentagon all have their files on the web under relatively secure network. LETS FACE IT! We cannot vote online because we do not want people to vote at all. 50% of America actually cast vote. About 1/3 of minorities ever uses the polls, and among the youth…. LOL, as if they have time between student loans and facebook. The majority of people that actually vote are senior citizens. Seniors have the time, the patience and they have been following this practice for years. The conservatives that are in our gov. are afraid of change and will never vote for IT. They will try to slow down the internet age and will never adapt a voting system until they have total control it. The voters simply do not want others to vote. This is the reason why we cannot vote online. But don’t be afraid while senior citizens are getting older the youth is getting wiser. The change is imminent, people demand simplicity and one day we will chose our president with a click of the mouse or a phone app. One day 95% of America will vote.