In a recent New York Timescolumn, commentator Katharine Q. Seelye invited her readers to share opinions about whether Internet voting could be used to bail out Florida and Michigan, the only states that were excluded from the Democratic presidential primary election process. The good news is that more people are starting to think about Internet voting as a real possibility for the U.S. The bad news is that this is not the time to use Internet voting to quickly save the two miscreants from their punishment.
The DNC (Democratic National Committee) did the right thing, and kicked the state parties out of the game by refusing to seat their delegates at the August Democratic Convention in Denver. Now the two states are sorry. They are asking for special treatment, which would allow them to seat their delegates. But the problems surrounding this notion of an Internet-enabled rescue far outweigh any possible benefits of providing justice for the voters.
For starters, if Florida and Michigan implemented Internet voting to remedy this situation, in the future, other states would then try to cheat as well (seeing that there is no risk in it), moving their own primaries to a preferred date. Furthermore, would a hasty Internet election solution really be fair to the voters?
Someone could set up a Website to vote on in a short time. But that still leaves a lot of tough questions unanswered. For instance, who is going to pay for it? The DNC? The state party committees? The state taxpayers? The two candidates?
Even if they can agree on this, do the states have the infrastructure necessary to provide for the non-computer owners, the house-bound, the disabled, the homeless, or the klutzes?
Michigan Dems experimented with a limited online primary vote in 2004. Also, the Dems set up a secure Website for a week this year, which allowed overseas voters to cast a primary vote. Both these efforts tried to provide for secure online voter registration. For example, in Michigan, Dems had to apply for a paper ballot long before the voting started. This was sent to them with an ID number. They could vote by mail or on the special Website using the ID number. About one third of them (46,000 out of a total of 163,000) e-voted.
However, a lot depended on the honor system. Hence, there are no statistics on how many people applied and received multiple paper ballots. All you would need is the name and address of a registered Democrat. It wouldn't matter if he or she were dead; had ever existed; had moved out of the state; were of voting age; or was really a citizen or not. Nor is it known how much vote buying and selling went on.
With all the paperwork this process generated, one wonders what the benefit of Internet voting was in the Michigan primary of 2004. And, who is ready to trust the Florida officials to do this right? Remember the picture of six perplexed Florida officials gazing at one hanging chad? Florida has roughly 4 million registered Democrats. Are they going to have Internet voting on the honor system?
So, the message is clear: We need to do this thing right. A keystone-cops approach to a quick rescue of these two misbehaved states risks giving Internet voting a bad name. I say let Florida and Michigan sit in a corner this August, and let the rest of us start preparing carefully for the inevitable national, state, and local Internet voting we will one day have.
If we are still having problems with voting machines at polling stations, why would anyone believe, even for a second, that Internet voting would fly? (DOS attack anyone?)
A few years ago some Government security agencies took a look at Internet voting. The answer: no way, not ever, not even close.
Spoofing, Tampering, Repudiation, Interference, Denial of Service, and Elevation of Privilege are just too easy. (Remember STRIDE). Not only the contending party bosses, but some anonymous guy in Ugabugastan could bend the election.
The answer is paper ballots, marked in ink, or a ballot marking machine, and read with a scanner.
As an Independent, I'm annoyed every 4 years, as in my state (NY), voting in primaries is only open to Democrats or Republicans. I do believe that all states are not like this, however. So, I never even get to express my opnion on who runs.
The ThinkerNet does not reflect the views of TechWeb. The ThinkerNet is an informal means of communication to members and visitors of the Internet Evolution site. Individual authors are chosen by Internet Evolution to blog. Neither Internet Evolution nor TechWeb assume responsibility for comments, claims, or opinions made by authors and ThinkerNet bloggers. They are no substitute for your own research and should not be relied upon for trading or any other purpose.
“Information wants to be free,” declares Stewart Brand, one of the prophets of Infotopia, a concept advocating the Internet-based potential to pool information and to use that knowledge to improve our lives.He walked the talk, too, by publishing the Whole Earth Catalog. But the real question is: “Do people want information to be free?”
When Democratic presidential candidate Senator Hillary Clinton recently issued a debate challenge to her Democratic rival Senator Barack Obama, she urged him to face off with her in a debate without a moderator, Lincoln-Douglas style. He refused, saying he already debated Clinton 21 times, "the most in primary history." But Clinton may be on to something. With the help of electronic campaigning and Internet voting, here is my suggestion for the right way to use debates to choose a President.
The Internet is causing a titanic change in the power structure of presidential campaign fund raising. In the old model, a few power brokers stimulated the early contributions their guys needed to become viable primary candidates.But the balance of power is shifting. The Internet’s emerging semiotic democracy is empowering grassroots contributors, giving them a greater level of participation and influence in the political process.
Everyone can see it coming. One day, all voting for the President and Vice President of the U.S. will be done over the Internet. Of course, the prospects of such a major change in election technology can stir up a range of feelings, from the anticipatory excitement of the adventurer to the dread of doomsday in the naysayers. For my part, there is really very little to fear, and very much to anticipate with relish.
Smarter Collaboration: How to Thrive in a Challenging Business Environment Market conditions are changing faster than ever, and organizations need to improve their agility and adaptability in order to provide better service and improve processes. The ability to work with customers, business partners, and employees as effectively as possible - while at the same time holding down costs - is a key to success. READ THIS eBOOK
your weekly update of news, analysis, and
opinion from Internet Evolution - FREE! REGISTER HERE
Wanted! Site Moderators Internet Evolution is looking for a handful of readers to help moderate the message boards on our site – as well as engaging in high-IQ conversation with the industry mavens on our thinkerNet blogosphere. The job comes with various perks, bags of kudos, and GIANT bragging rights. Interested?
To save this item to your list of favorite Internet Evolution content so you can find it later in your Profile page, click the "Save It" button next to the item.
What kinds of companies are doing the most innovation in the data center? Turns out it's midtier enterprises that are taking the "Just Right" approach.
Techies are going crazy over the possibility that Google might design and sell its own Android phone. Some writers say it's a very big deal. Reiter questions whether it will happen and, if it does, whether it even matters.
Ever since the iPhone debuted, cellular manufacturers are rushing to incorporate touch screens into their phones. Alas, cellphone touch screens have significant problems that can actually harm business productivity. And doing business isn’t about getting the high score on Super Monkey Ball!
The iPhone has created a new form of the 80/20 rule, according to AT&T, which claims only 3% of iPhone users generate 40% of wireless traffic. But is that really a justification for usage caps and pricing tiers? What did AT&T think was going to happen with the iPhone pricing plan, and are they shoveling something else at us now that we're hooked?
The problem with infrastructure these days is not the cost of the network but the cost of the people managing the network. Sebastian Stadil discusses how he'd like to see companies evolve towards a more manageable infrastructure using cloud computing.
Research shows that the youth of today like Facebook – but not blogging or Twitter. Does that mean Facebook has won, or just that it's not yet out of favor? Will all the services we see today fade into Ovaltine-or-Wheaties status in just a few years?
What kinds of companies are doing the most innovation in the data center? Turns out it's midtier enterprises that are taking the "Just Right" approach.
Ray Kurzweil's Blio and Apple's iPad tablet will make it easier than ever to have books "read" to us, says Dr. Kim, who believes that talking tablets will become interwoven into our consciousness as we "merge" with the increasingly elegant machines we hold in our hands.
Digg
Del.icio.us
Reddit
Email This
TWEET THIS
