 Internet
Voting in the US
The
2000 presidential election in the United States put its election process
under scrutiny. It turns out to be a very messy, and unorganized system
where voting procedures and voting technology vary from county to county.
The election revealed problems with “over- voting”(voting for too many
candidates), or voting for the wrong candidate due to the ambiguous design
of ballots. There were also problems with vote tallying. Many foreign observers
were shocked at discovering just how the US conducts elections!
(Hill, 2002)
This
paper argues that Internet voting can be highly beneficial for the Unites
States. To be sure it cannot solve the problem of having the winner of
the popular vote lose the presidency, only a change in the electoral system
could address this. In any case, Internet voting can help to ‘clean up
the mess’, so to speak by helping to make elections more legitimate and
uniform across the nation.
One
may wonder why the US could not standardize its elections and use the same
paper ballots everywhere. This is not a bad idea for presidential elections,
but we need to remember that Americans are required to vote often, and
in many different races. In addition, many states also use both referenda
and citizen initiatives. Consequently, ballots in the US are very
long. It would therefore be highly time-consuming to count all the paper
ballots by hand.
The
2000 election dealt a heavy blow to the legitimacy of American elections.
Legitimacy is crucial for a democracy to function. Therefore, while it
is not cheap to initially install and develop secure Internet voting systems,
it may very well be worth it in the long run if it restores confidence
in the election process. Internet voting will also make it easier for people
to vote, and prevent them from voting for more than one candidate.
Will
Internet voting cure low voter turnout in the US? At this point there are
not enough substantial evidence to support this claim (Cranor, 2001). Internet
voting will no doubt make it more convenient for those who already
vote. However, those who do not vote tend to be poorer, less educated,
and less likely to have Internet access (As discussed in the 328 lectures)
than the people who vote. Internet voting may therefore potentially scare
off non-voters since the new technology may intimidate them. This in turn
raises the importance of the population at large to be computer literate
for Internet voting to be truly successful (Cranor 2001).
<<PREVIOUS
NEXT>>
|
