Election integrity and speed election results publication

 

A full week after polls closed in the US midterm elections of 2022, the counting had yet to wrap up in many counties and states. The drawn-out count had the nation on tenterhooks as it awaited results in battleground states that could dictate the makeup of Congress. For many Americans, the delay brought back fraught memories of 2020 when it took several excruciating days for the winning presidential candidate to be determined.

News consumption has changed drastically in recent years. With social media circulating information worldwide at lightening speeds we have become accustomed to immediate access to information. In this context, election authorities are asking Americans to wait an entire week while diligent poll workers process paper ballots – an impossible ask.

The speed of election results is a variable that needs to be evaluated urgently by election commissions. It’s no longer enough for election officers to facilitate voting and counting votes accurately. Together with voter participation, or the security and accuracy of results, speed is a key variable to preserve election integrity. In the absence of results, information voids will be filled with conspiracy theories of all kinds.

One of the main causes of the delay in the US is the large number of voters who choose to participate using the modality of voting by mail. According to data from the US census, in 2020, 43% of voters exercised their right by sending their ballot by mail. The rising popularity of vote by mail is clear evidence that voters appreciate convenience. Yet, this is a voting method that presents many challenges for those who administer the election. Each envelope received must be reviewed to validate the voter's signature, and then be passed through an optical scanner that registers the voter's vote. The use of drop boxes in some jurisdictions also holds up the process as it necessitates physical retrieval of ballots and segregation into correct precincts.

Although participation rates in the US soared in the last couple elections, for decades it trailed that of many other industrialized nations. According to a Pew Research Center study, election participation in the US ranked 31st among OECD countries. Facing participation declines, election authorities prioritized participation and promoted voting by mail. The increase of division and polarization that surround our elections, and the ubiquity of disinformation should make election officials reconsider their priorities.

The 2022 midterm elections have made it abundantly clear that authorities need to implement technology-based solutions to speed up vote counting and processing. It is time to give voters who want the convenience of casting their ballot remotely the option to vote online. Estonia, a Baltic nation with a long-standing tradition of fighting Russian hackers could be a good example to emulate. Since 2005, Estonians have had the option to securely cast a ballot online or to head to a polling station to cast a ballot with pen and paper. Online voting is now the preferred voting option.

Allowing voters to cast their ballot online would decrease the number of ballots election workers process manually. Results could be immediately published on election night. This small, yet important reform could go a long way fighting the disinformation that abounds in the critical hours of election night.

Uneventful Brazil polls silence critics

 

Despite dire predictions, Brazil’s first round of elections proceeded smoothly and concluded without hitches. The country’s election system proved to be up to scratch as it was able to count over 100 million votes by midnight, enabling poll authorities to publish results online without delay.

A mission formed by observers from the Organization of American States (OAS) has released a report lauding the “orderly and normal manner” of the vote.

“The mission salutes the people of Brazil, who turned out to vote yesterday, Sunday, to express their will in a peaceful and democratic manner. Under a highly tense and polarized atmosphere, Brazilian citizens showed maturity and civic commitment,” the report said.

Similarly, markets were upbeat about first-round results. In a note to investors, J.P. Morgan sounded guardedly optimistic about the polls.

"The risks around political polarization, with non-acceptance of the ballot results must be monitored, but so far there have been no notable events to report," it said.

The undramatic polls contrast markedly with the gloom and doom scenario being painted by incumbent president Bolsonaro during the run-up. It might be recalled that Bolsonaro went after the election system hammer and tongs, relentlessly questioning its credibility, and warning of widespread unrest should he lose.

Analysts had feared that Bolsonaro’s polemics was a dangerous tactic to hold on to power, as the incumbent had trailed his rival, ex-president Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, in all pre-election surveys. Yet Bolsonaro mustered 43.2% of the votes to Lula’s 48.4%, an impressive showing for the perceived underdog. Under Brazil’s election laws, if no candidate gets 50% of the vote in the first round of voting, a runoff election between the highest scoring candidates will be held.

Analysts note that the stronger-than-expected showing of Bolsonaro had seemingly silenced his rhetoric against the voting system. With the prophesied anomalies turning out to be duds, the whole narrative appeared to have been defanged.

Bolsonaro’s sudden silence on the matter is likely to be taken by the public as a walk back and an acknowledgement that the election system he had been denouncing in fact works. This tacit retraction could prove crucial to the country’s post-election stability as Da Silva, despite failing to score an outright win, still pulled 6,000,000 more votes than Bolsonaro, and enjoys an advantage going into the taut mano-a-mano matchup set on Oct. 30.

Filipinos buck pandemic, heat; hold successful elections

 

Despite the oppressive summer heat that peaked at 90°F and the lingering presence of Covid, voters turned out in record numbers as officials staged an efficient Philippine 2022 election with minimal disruptions.

The 2022 elections were accurate and fast. On election night, results were published with 85% of election returns electronically transmitted to canvassing centers. The process was the fastest yet in the country’s history, which international observer election watchdogs have deemed to be above-board.

US State Department spokesman Ned Price said the May 9 elections were conducted according to international standards and without any major incident.

Turnout exceeded 53 million – or 80% of eligible voters – a substantial showing in a country that had been averaging a 76% turnout for the past two decades.

Despite the abundance of disinformation, Filipinos trust their election automation. According to two independent surveys, most Filipino voters trusted the results of the country’s 2019 elections (89%) and they are overwhelmingly satisfied with the automated election system (87%). Another survey revealed that 9 out of 10 Filipinos want all their future elections to be automated.

This is a trend that has held fast since the first automated elections in 2010 – and with good reason. The automated system has yielded accuracy above 99.9% since it was first introduced. Further, results are published just hours after the polls close, not weeks or months as it had been with manual elections.

While trust in the electoral process and turnout are seeing a decline in most parts of the world, Filipinos are finding a good reason to be proud of their election.

Spanish tech firm embroiled in Colombian election mess

 

Spanish technology company Indra finds itself in the center of controversy after being involved in the recent Colombian legislative election where a difference of 7% was found between the preliminary count and the final count of the votes.

In the final count announced by the Registrar five days after the election, more than 400,000 new votes were found in favor of Historic Pact, the party of the candidate Gustavo Petro. The discrepancy resulted in the party going from from 16 to 19 senators to the detriment of the Conservative Party, the Green Alliance, and the Democratic Center, which lost one senator each.

The usual difference in most Latin American countries that have preliminary results systems ranges from 0.5% to 1%. In Colombia, the difference between the two counts had never been greater than 1%.

The unusual discrepancy in the results comes as the South American country is gripped by political tension and is feared to erode perceived electoral integrity, an ominous development ahead of the looming presidential elections.

In these cases, international election watchdogs advise electoral officials to declare as clearly and precisely as possible the origin of these discrepancies, in order to ensure that public confidence in the system is maintained. Contrary to this, the Colombian Registry has not given clear answers. Currently the Registrar is being harshly questioned by various political sectors that demand answers, including Senator María Fernanda Cabal, and former President Andrés Pastrana.

Suspicions stemmed from the questionable hiring of Indra on December 29, 2021, while the country was on a break for the holidays. In a bidding process that the Registrar's Office had initially declared void, Indra competed with itself and received the contract to oversee the preliminary counting software at the national level.

Questions deepened after Gustavo Petro and two senior Indra officials had a meeting in Madrid, presumably brokered registrar Alexander Vega. The clandestine meeting was exposed by former president Andrés Pastrana, who filed a disciplinary complaint with the Attorney General's Office against the registrar.

Today, just two months before the presidential elections, Colombia is facing a clamor for a total recount of votes by different political forces and demands for Alexander Vega to resign due to the irregular handling of contracts in the Registry.

Election experts fear this to be the worst legitimacy crises in the electoral process in decades and a stinging reminder of the need for the country to get serious in modernizing its electoral process. With the use of a modern and efficient voting system, Colombia could put an end to the decades-old problem of results manipulation as well as any problems related to ambiguous ballot markings.

Anti-technology groups endangering future of elections in the Philippines

In May 2022, voters in Philippines will go to the polls to elect their new president and other national and local officials.  For this general election, the country is set to use for a fifth time its automated election system, which it has adopted with great success since 2010. 

Popular opinion is that automation has resulted in a pronounced improvement in the credibility of elections, which had historically been marred by controversies due to the slow manual count and the susceptibility of the manual system to manipulation. In a 2019 survey, leading pollster Pulse Asia found out that 84% of Filipinos trusted election results and an overwhelming 91% wanted automated voting in future elections.

But despite the success of poll automation, some small yet loud anti-technology groups have somehow influenced lawmakers to file bills seeking to junk the system in favor of a so-called hybrid method, which purportedly blends manual and automated modes of voting. 

Election experts have been quick to warn that hybrid is just manual elections couched in technology speak, and represents  a significant downgrade that could set off a dangerous backslide toward the dark ages of  the flawed manual elections.
Election watchdog Democracy Watch said in statement that “adopting a hybrid vote counting system in 2022 is a step back for the Philippines in its journey towards transparent and credible elections.”
 
During an end-to-end demonstration at a school in Cavite, a province just south of the capital Manila, the system proved unreliable and inefficient. Witnesses were one in observing that moving back to manual counting, as implied under the hybrid system, would be a significant setback.
 
After the test, lawmaker Rep. Edgar Erice stated “I don’t think [hybrid system] feasible. The test run was not successful. I maintain that the law requires automation both in the precinct voting and transmission.”

Fredenil Castro, Capiz Representative and then House electoral reforms committee chair, stated that the hybrid system test was "miserably [unsuccessful] to even closely match the advantages of a fully-automated election."

As the elections inch closer, all eyes are on the Philippine legislature as it debates the hybrid bill. Will it pass a law supplanting automated polls in favor of the untried hybrid system thereby risking a regression to the benighted days of manual? Or will it uphold the successes of the past four elections and retain the automated election system to ensure that the 2022 polls are marked with transparency and credibility?

The future of Philippine democracy may very well be hinged on this.