Showing posts with label Ballot. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ballot. Show all posts

Monday, August 25, 2014

On political engagement and the youth vote

The topic of low voter turnout among young people has been discussed heavily both online and offline. As a result, many people have assumed that the young people demonstrate a very high level of political apathy, possibly due to a greater perception of corruption among governments or the sense that elected officials do not have their best interests at heart. However, this may not necessarily be the case.


moodboardphotography
Instead, as Jay McGregor of TechRadar points out, it's quite possible that “young folks are more political than ever – just not formally.” They are not making it out to the polls to exercise their electoral right, but a good number of them are taking interest in politics and do want to change the way that government is run. 

A prominent example is Occupy Wall Street, which spurred on several more Occupy movements all around the world. Those groups were led largely by younger demographics following a genuine desire to have their concerns heard by the masses at large. They may have felt that the entire government institution only really had the best interest of the so-called 1% at heart and they were not working for the 99%. 

Young people all around the world also participate in a great number of political protests, as evidenced by the events in places like the Gaza Strip and in Egypt. These are areas with great political turmoil, but we are seeing a surging interest among youth in more stable areas as well. 

A common denominator in all the cases in which young citizens are participating actively in politics, is technology. In the Lok Sabha Elections in India earlier this year, the youth played a major role and social media was the source of great support for the Bharatiya Janata Party. Several grassroots movements, like MumbaiVotes and iForIndia, were also started and run by young people, once again leveraging the power of technology. 

Many youth are passionate about the needs of their country and about politics, but the challenge is to translate this passion into higher voter turnout among this demographic. It has been demonstrated that candidates that do focus on first-time voters can gain a loyal, lifetime following among those young people. And these young people are spending more time streaming videos online, reading blogs and participating in social media, so that's where the political candidates need to find common ground.

The electoral system itself needs to be updated so that it does not feel as archaic and outdated to the youth of today. They need to feel that the political system is relevant and modern, so the manner in which they cast a ballot must also feel equivalently relevant and modern. They make far less use of pen and paper in their everyday lives, so why would they fill out a paper ballot to cast a vote? It should offer the possibility to be electronic, easier and accessible.

Wednesday, April 30, 2014

A serious look at audits of e-voting equipment

Source: Google Images
Citizens want to believe that the practices in place for electing officials into government office are fair and true. After all, what is the point of having a democracy if a voting system can be easily tampered and hacked by outside forces, completely skewing the results of elections? To this end, the Presidential Commission on Election Administration recently recommended in its January 2014 report that “audits of voting equipment must be conducted after each election, as part of a comprehensive audit program, and that data concerning machine performance must be publicly disclosed in a common data format.”

As more and more jurisdictions begin to adopt electronic voting machines, particularly direct-recording electronic (DRE) voting machines that may or may not have a voter-verifiable paper trail for audits, it is becoming a big concern for those seeking more transparency in election administration. The audit trail for the ballots themselves is of great importance, as it provides a means of checking election results in the case of a recount, but there's more to this conundrum.

Indeed, we've seen how electoral audits in the United States are good, but they're not perfect. The Presidential Commission on Election Administration particularly encourages the use of post-election audits to check on the performance of voting technology. The Commission recommends that the election administrations in the various districts audit the voting machines after each election to “ensure both that the vote totals match the votes cast and that any problems related to machinery are reported and resolved.” However, this may be only part of the solution.

If a problem with the voting machines was discovered during the post-election audit, what could they do to rectify the situation? If the security of the voting infrastructure was compromised, what can do then? Instead, a better approach would be the inclusion of pre-electoral audits to ensure the performance and security of the voting apparatus. This way, as post-election audits can detect fraud after it has already happened, pre-election audits can prevent them from happening in the first place.

This approach is gaining steam around the world. Venezuela, a nation that has automated its entire electoral process, took this exact approach, performing a robust set of pre-election audits leading up to the actual voting day. The audits inspected the voting machine during its configuration phase, for instance, as well as the e-voting software, the electoral infrastructure, the biometric authentication system used to verify the identity of voters, the data transmission network, the tallying of the ballots, and the closure of the election, among other aspects. This comprehensive check throughout the election stages helped to provide the transparency citizens need.

The US Presidential Commission did not go into that level of detail with its recommendation, but it does indicate the importance of performing different types of audits for different functions. It endorses the need to audit the ballots cast to ensure the correct result is reported, but also the importance of auditing the performance of the voting technology itself.

The results of the pre- and post-election audits must also be publicized and open to public scrutiny. This would allow other jurisdictions to learn from the problems experienced by other districts, encouraging a more secure, more reliable, more problem-free and more robust voting system for all.

Friday, December 20, 2013

Estonia continues to innovate with new I-voting modalities

Source: emol.com
Most people likely would not name Estonia as their first choice of countries that are cutting edge, technologically advanced, but the demographic republic in the Baltic region of Northern Europe is actually one of the most forward thinking, particularly when it comes to the technology implemented in its government agencies and national voting paradigms.

While Estonia still offers a more traditional way to cast a ballot, it also has a long standing history with the adoption of Internet-based voting. It has even gone so far as to open up its “server side” source code to the public. For security reasons, the client side code remains secret and protected, but the server side is open to public scrutiny. And the Estonian population has embraced the I-voting revolution.

In the most recent parliamentary election in October of this year, over 133,000 voters cast their ballots electronically rather than using the more manual method. This represents over 20% of all the ballots cast in the election and what's even more interesting is that voters had the opportunity to vote online using their choice of no fewer than three different modalities, including one that involved mobile phones.

Measures were taken to ensure that all three of the online voting options were as secure as possible, authenticating the ballot while not necessarily connecting it directly to any individual voter. This worked in much the same way as a double-envelope method may be used with a more traditional ballot; the paper ballot is placed in an unmarked “inner” envelope, which is then placed inside of an “outer” envelope with the voter's information. A clerk can verify the outer envelope information, removing the sealed inner envelope to place it into the ballot box. For the purposes of the online ballot, a digital signature and PIN served a similar purpose.

The first of the Internet voting options involved the voter using the government-mandated ID card with its two public key infrastructure (PKI) based digital certificates. With this secure card and a card reader (available nationwide in many stores), the voter inserts the card and enters their PIN codes while on the government e-voting website and downloads and runs the voting application. They can confirm their identity with their first PIN, select their preferred candidate, and confirm the vote with their digital signature by entering the ID card's second PIN. After that, the person receives the confirmation that the vote has been registered on the system.

The second voting option involved the use of an alternative “digital ID card”, also issued by the government and used primarily for online purposes. Just as the first method, the voter navigated to the government e-voting website using the credentials and security afforded by the digital ID card and its corresponding codes.

The third and newest method of I-voting in Estonia involved a mobile phone and a PC computer. The user registered for a mobile ID by providing the government with the SIM card from their phone, along with their government-issued secure ID card. The two were linked and the user was provided with two secure PIN codes via text message. The voter then navigated to the e-voting website on a computer, entered their phone number and first PIN code, and cast the vote. The second PIN was entered on the corresponding mobile app on the phone and the ballot was then authenticated.

Another innovation tested at the October election was a verification system of I-votes, developed to detect with a device (in this opportunity only Android mobile phones or tablets) if the computer you used to vote was infected with any malware that changed the I-vote or blocked the I-voting.


While there are certainly concerns surrounding Internet voting, Estonia's comprehensive system demonstrates how it can be implemented to great success. Other countries and governments around the world may benefit from collaborating with and learning from Estonia's example.

Monday, October 14, 2013

A psychological approach to election administration

Source: google images
Human psychology plays a role in all aspects of everyday existence. Industrial psychology may look at the layout of controls in an airplane's cockpit, for example, placing certain displays, buttons and levels in specific locations to best accommodate the natural tendencies of pilots. In sales and marketing, advertising executives look closely at the psychology ramifications of their marketing efforts, capitalizing on how to best influence their prospective customers. And psychology also plays a critical role in elections. 

Indeed, there is not only a whole branch of psychology dedicated to this study – appropriately called electoral psychology – but there are also organizations that work closely to best understand what elections mean to voters and how to devise elections such that they are the most efficient and the most fair. One such organization is the International Centre for Electoral Psychology (ICEP), which has put forth several reports and presentations on the subject of a psychological approach to election administration.

The goal of the ICEP is to “help decision-makers to better understand the psychology of voters in a bid to make elections as effective, trusted and democratically fulfilling for citizens as possible.” To this end, the ICEP studies several factors related to the psychology of the voter as he or she heads into the voter booth to cast his or her ballot.

For example, the ICEP recognizes that casting a vote can be a very emotional experience and one that is not taken lightly. Up to 30% of voters do not decide on their vote until the final week before the election with 29% of Americans and 40% of French voters changing their minds on Election Day itself. When administrating an election, it is important to recognize that a voter's choice can be heavily influenced right up to the final moment before casting a ballot. 60% of voters feel excited in the polling booth and 74% feel a sense of pride.

Memories and early experiences also play a very critical role. It is important for election officials to approach youth about elections and democracy, ensuring that they do cast a ballot when they become of age. Early experiences significantly increase the likelihood of participation in future elections. Young people who do not vote in the first two eligible elections are likely to become citizens who habitually do not vote moving forward. That is why early experiences, like accompanying parents to the polling stations and participating in elections when they become of age, are so important. Indeed, 48% of those who accompanied parents to a polling place have voted themselves, compared to 30% of those with no memory of going to a polling station with parents.

Voting is habit-forming and habitual voters are likely to continue voting, even when they shift allegiances or partisanship. Social pressure also plays a role.

These memories and early experiences color all future perceptions of future elections too. If a young voter experiences fraud, organizational problems or other issues related to the legitimacy and professionalism of an election, that citizen will likely recall that problem in the future in a very vivid way. This citizen could become disenchanted and become distrustful of the electoral process.

Deciding on the actual vote itself can also involve many different factors. Some voters have sociotropic thoughts, considering social responsibility and the impact of the vote on the rest of the country. Others may have more egocentric thoughts, focusing more on family and the impact of the vote on their personal situations. Past elections, current emotions, and previous voting behavior can also impact the vote.

There are many responsibilities that fall on the shoulders of election administrators. They must ensure that the logistics of the election are properly carried out, they must hire staff that will be impartial in front of the voting public, and they also have to consider the psychology of the election to make sure the results are fair, unbiased, and democratically fulfilling. The integrity of the election must be upheld and all psychological factors must be addressed to allow for a nonpartisan election.

Wednesday, September 18, 2013

Can e-voting solve the oversized ballot papers problem?

Source: i.usatoday.net
While most major elections around the world feature no more than five major parties, it is not unheard of for a poll exercise to have a whole slew of parties slugging it out for votes.

In Australia, for instance, a total of 46 parties have already registered for the Australian Senate election in September. If the 11 additional applicants up for consideration are approved, that would bring to 57 the number of parties on a single ballot.

Given this scenario, it’s most likely that the ballot paper will measure an incredible 1.02 meters wide or over three feet across.  This makes the supersized ballot paper quite unwieldy not only for voters, but also for election staff who must handle, pack, transport, count and secure the extra large papers.

To make matters even worse for voters, the ballots use extra small six-point type.  The Australian Electoral Commission, in fact, is even issuing magnifying sheets to help staff and voters read the text on the ballots. The oversized ballots would also take much longer to count manually, as the staff would inherently have to spend more time reading and recording each of the votes.
                                               
Aside from problems an over-sized ballot causes on Election Day, it also entails many logistical challenges as the ballots must be properly secured and transported, and requires a much larger space than regular-sized ballots.

Yet as with most problems in this modern age, there is a technological solution to this particular challenge. For instance, Direct Recording Electronic (DRE) voting machines use voting pads which could display an infinite number of candidates, rendering supersized ballots unnecessary as voters could record their vote on a touchscreen display.   

E-voting is definitely a step towards the right direction in making elections more efficient and transparent.  Safeguards like the Voter Verified Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT), where the machine prints out a confirmation receipt, ensure that the voter’s true intent is what is recorded on the ballot. After all, transparency and accuracy can never be sacrificed for efficiency and speed. 

E-voting is not without its challenges and concerns, yet its many benefits make it increasingly attractive to election commissions all around the world. More work is needed, but e-voting can be a viable solution to the problem of supersized ballot papers in cases like this in Australia. 

Monday, August 26, 2013

E-voting saves elections thousands of dollars

Source: Technologyreview.com
Any sort of government or public expenditure is going to be met with a significant challenge. On the one hand, the expenditure has to adequately address a public need of some sort. This could be the construction of a new bridge, providing commuters with a faster and more direct way to get across the city. On the other hand, government funds are anything but unlimited and, thus, the cost of any project must be kept under control. This kind of balance must also be considered when it comes to any referendum or election, in addition to concerns about accessibility, fairness, participation and security.

One of the many potential benefits of changing from a more traditional paper-based ballot to an election that uses e-voting technology is that the latter can save the government a significant amount of money. There are some initial costs involved in purchasing the e-voting equipment and there are costs in maintaining them, but taken as a whole, e-voting is more cost-effective than its pure paper-based counterpart. This cost savings has been demonstrated in many places around the world.

For example, an election was recently conducted by the Irish Medical Council (IMC) and it was outsourced to Electoral Reform Services of the United Kingdom. The final figures are still being calculated, but a spokesperson for the IMC has stated that this election saved the Council approximately €10,000 (over $13,000 US). This savings was secured in the costs that would have otherwise been involved with the printing of paper ballots and the associated postage for mailing them out.

In addition to the cost savings involved in printing and postage, the IMC spokesperson said that the Council also saved money compared to its previous election in 2008 because that election involved "significant staff resourcing" to count all the ballots. With the e-voting technology in place, the counting of the ballots was far more efficient, expedient and cost-effective. There are staffing costs that must be considered for sorting ballots, counting ballots, and other administrative duties. If the paper ballots had to be mailed out, that would be another area in terms of cost for staffing that is saved because of e-voting technology. There are many hidden costs to manual elections.

Even in the relatively small town of Cobourg, located a little over one hour away from Toronto in Canada, significant cost savings were enjoyed in its 2010 municipal election. This election was completely paperless, allowing voters to cast their ballots either online or via telephone. For voters who did not have access to a phone or the Internet, e-voting booths were set up at two polling places in the town.

The total cost of holding the 2010 election was $52,460. By contrast, the election in 2006, which used paper ballots, cost the town almost $90,000. What this means is that by switching to e-voting, the town of Cobourg saved well over $35,000. A similar calculation was done for the town of Meaford--also in Ontario, Canada--and the projected savings were $25,000. These are two relatively small towns in Canada, so it is possible to see how these savings could be further amplified in large cities.

E-voting is certainly not without its share of challenges, but examples like those seen in Ireland and Canada clearly illustrate that e-voting can provide significant cost savings for jurisdictions that are willing to switch to automated elections.