At least 43 states in the USA will use obsolete technology in the 2016 elections

It is estimated that during the 2016 elections at least 43 states in the USA will use voting machines that are already obsolete. In a world where technology is used almost daily, one must wonder why Americans must choose a President using devices running software from the year 2000.  

According to a study published by the Brennan Center most these machines are nearing the end of their useful life, placing the elections at risk by being prone to failures that could generate long lineups, or the loss of votes.   

Lawrence Norden,  Deputy Director of the centre and co-author of the study, wonders how one can think there are no risks  in running elections with technology designed in the 90’s. “No one expects a computer to work optimally for over 10 years”. 

The warnings in the report come at a moment when voter turnout in the US has decreased, given the long lines at the polls and the limited access certain sectors of society have to the vote.  

Before the 2016 primaries, Smartmatic – the leading elections company with experience in five continents – published a research paper that highlights the shortcomings of the American electoral system. 

The general opinion of those consulted shows that the current voting system is inefficient and discourages voters. On their part, Hispanics showed their concern about language barriers, considering that implementing new systems could increase turnout.  

These studies are just the tip of the iceberg of a subject that is gaining traction with American citizens, who see that an obsolete voting system could affect the vision their country projects worldwide about the strength of its democracy. For them, this situation could be reverted easily with the introduction of new and better technology. 

Swiss abroad push for electronic voting

Switzerland is consistently ranked as one of the most desirable places to live in the world, with cities like Zurich and Geneva topping many international lists. Switzerland is one of the richest countries in the world on a per capita basis and it also has among the highest standards of living. The Swiss approach of “armed neutrality” means that the European country is generally very peaceful and safe as well. Even so, Switzerland is still not necessarily the most modern or technologically advanced when it comes to its modern day democracy.

There are a number of Swiss citizens who are living or working abroad, and they are just as deserving to the right of suffrage as their counterparts who live in Switzerland itself. However, access to the democratic process is still quite limited and this is why the Council of the Swiss Abroad are rallying behind the promotion of electronic voting for Swiss expatriates.

The expatriate community is represented by the Council of the Swiss Abroad and at the council's regular meeting in Bern in March, all of the over 120 representatives approved a new 8-point manifesto on the future of elections in Switzerland, particularly as it pertains to voting access for Swiss who are living or working abroad. The approval by the council was unanimous, emphasizing how important it is that expatriates can still participate in the Swiss political process and have their voice heard.

As Organization of the Swiss Abroad (OSA) president Jacques-Simon Eggly indicated at the meeting, this is a critical element in keeping the democratic system alive, transparent, and representative in the country. The OSA is pushing for expatriates to have the ability to elect officials into both the House of Representatives and the Senate. Approximately 10% of the Swiss population live abroad, numbering over 700,000 in total, and this number continues to grow. Most live in neighbouring European nations (462,000), like France, Germany and Italy, followed by the Americas (181,000), Asia (50,000), Oceania (31,000), and Africa (21,000).

However, only 142,000 expatriates globally are currently registered and eligible to take part in votes and elections. Three electronic voting systems have been tested in 14 of the country's 26 cantons, but this means that citizens from the country's other 12 cantons do not have access to the Swiss Abroad e-voting platform. A big part of the problem is that many Swiss expatriates have been denied the possibility of having an account in Switzerland. This leads to problems related to pension payments, for example, as well as access to voting rights. 

Among many other reasons, this is why Swiss Abroad is pushing for the rapid and widespread introduction of a better e-voting system that would empower expatriates with the ability to participate in the democratic process. The tests in 14 of the country's cantons demonstrate a strong interest in e-voting among the expatriate community. This echoes similar sentiments expressed in other international democracies like those in India and demonstrated in Brazil.

Understandably, the Swiss government would not want to rush into the full widespread deployment of a brand new e-voting system and further investigations into the matter are clearly required. As Barbara Perriard of the Federal Chancellery indicates, “Security comes before speed.” Transparency, reliability and the sanctity of the secret ballot must be maintained. 

"All Swiss expatriates," said Jacques-Simon Eggly, "have to be able to have access to e-voting to use their political rights." Given the strong and proud banking tradition of Swotzerland and its high standards forsecurity and privacy, the development of a secure and reliable e-voting paradigm for expatriates should be a top priority.

Students vote via cellphone and laptop in Namibia school elections

Source: Googel Images

The traditional paper and pencil elections, which has been used all over the world to elect presidents, parliaments, or student councils are slowly changing.

One of the more notable examples of late has to do with the Polytechnic of Namibia. At that tertiary educational institution, students have been given the opportunity to utilize a cell phone and laptop-based voting system. More specifically, the tests were conducted with a mobile election system developed by AdaptIT. This provides a far superior level of flexibility for the students, because they are not bound to specific voting locations at specific times of the day.

Instead, according to Polytechnic of Namibia computer services department manager Juanita Frans, students were “afforded the luxury of casting their votes via cell phones or laptops, from wherever they were and at any time during the stated election period.”

When a traditional paper ballot-based election is held at any other school, students would normally need to take time away from class and other educational activities in order to cast their ballots. This takes away from valuable school time that could otherwise be spent. With the mobile election system, students can easily cast their ballots from home, during a meal break, or just about anywhere else. Unsurprisingly, the young people are very much embracing technology in elections as technology is increasingly becoming a part of everyday life for youth all around the world.

Perhaps even more notably, because an e-voting system was used where ballots were cast electronically, the tabulation of the votes was far more expedient. We should mention Accuracy. People make mistakes, computers don´t.

Also, manual counting implies somebody interpreting what the voter marked. It is not always obvious. When elections are electronic, no interpretation is needed. The intent of the voter is recorded directly. In fact, the results were available immediately after the election period officially closed. By contrast, the physical counting of paper ballots in the same election the previous year took several days to complete and this was with the electoral committee and the various staff members working through the night to complete the process. Instant results are naturally far preferable to waiting for days to get the results, not to mention the added expense and use of time by staff to tabulate the votes with paper ballots.

During the three and a half-day voting period, a total of 2,600 students at the Polytechnic of Namibia were able to cast their votes via the mobile system. This system can be similarly used at other institutions for any kind of election. Adapt IT's Amanda Lubbe says that the results “are updated immediately and displayed in a dashboard format” too.

Some have said that online voting may not necessarily increase voter turnout in general elections, but the overall use of electronic voting technology is continuing to grow through 2014 and beyond.  The youth of today embrace technology, particularly mobile and online technology, and this “beta test” in Namibia clearly illustrates the many benefits of using such a system. As schools move toward having more online resources, as well as the use of technology like sending exam results to students directly via SMS or through an online portal (as the Polytechnic of Namibia has been doing since 2006), the same evolution and transition should be made with student elections as well. 

What forms of E-voting are used today?

The term "electronic voting" or "e-voting" for short can actually refer to many different types of technologies. We have discussed many facets of e-voting over the course of the last three years, but we now feel the need to return and visit the term "electronic voting." This should be particularly insightful for those of you who are new to reading this blog.

"Electronic voting" can refer to technology that is used to cast the actual vote, as well as technology that is used to tabulate or count the votes. "E-voting" can also sometimes be used in the context of transmitting the information related to the ballots and votes from voting places to central offices.

The most common use of the term "e-voting" would refer to the concept of using a computerized voting machine with electronic ballots rather than using more traditional paper ballots that are marked with a pen or pencil and tabulated manually. The voting machines are usually referred to as DREs or direct-recording electronic machines. The term "Electronic Voting Machine" or "EVM" is also sometimes used.

There are multiple types of DREs that are currently being used around the world. Some DREs use a touchscreen where the voter casts his or her ballot by pressing the appropriate button on the display. Other DREs may involve buttons, wheels or keys next to a computer screen for voters to cast their ballots. Direct-recording electronic voting machines are typically used under the supervision of government representatives or independent electoral authorities.

Varying types of electronic voting machines may be more accessible to different populations. In the case of a touchscreen display, the words can be enlarged for voters who have trouble reading the smaller print on traditional paper ballots. This can also allow for ballots to be displayed in multiple languages for areas where voters may be more comfortable reading instructions in different languages.

Electronic voting may also include remote electronic voting. This would be the case where the voter can act independently without having to go physically to a specific voting place, as the ballot can be cast remotely. This includes voting over the Internet at a computer or using a mobile phone, either through the mobile web or by sending a text message. Less commonly, votes may also be cast via Internet-connected televisions using special channels and technology. Remote e-voting has also been called i-voting, largely because the votes are typically cast over some sort of Internet connection.

The use of electronic voting in the context of counting up all the ballots has a longer history than the use of DREs and other electronic forms of casting a vote. For example, some paper ballots may be punch cards. What this means is that when a voter casts his or her ballot, the punch card can be entered directly into the counting machine that can then automatically read the ballot and add the vote to the final tabulation. Similarly, optical scan machines can use an electronic reader to record the vote rather than having a human volunteer or official record each individual vote. This can be far more efficient and take far less time than the manual counting of votes. Since there is still a paper ballot, it is easier if there needs to be a re-count or an audit for a set of ballots.

E-voting continues to gain popularity all around the world. It is being used in varying levels of capacity in such countries as Venezuela, Canada, Australia, Belgium, Philippines, Brazil, India and the United States.

The implementation of e-voting in Israel: the need for openness in the process of election automation

Image: FreeDigitalPhotos

Israel, a country known for its fast and continuous development of technology, had the chance to implement e-voting as early as 2008. However, in spite of general approval from the political class, this did not happen, and today the country is still stuck with an outdated voting model. Why? Israel is an example of the risks a country runs when its electoral modernization process is not transparent and open to the people.

In 2008, the Israeli Ministry of Interior published a law proposal for the implementation of electronic voting in upcoming electoral events after a successful trial in parallel to a 2007 local election. Nevertheless, this proposal posed two problems: first, there was no public discussion on the matter, and everything was done behind closed doors; second, the voting machines the country wanted to use did not emit vote receipts, which made the electorate suspicious of its inauditability. 

It is worth noting that people in Israel were open to the possibility of modernizing their electoral exercises. After the positive outcome of the 2007 pilot test, the government assigned TEHILA (a subdivision of Israel’s Ministry of Finance) the task of developing the country’s new electronic voting platform. However, aside from not giving the citizens a proper chance to follow the system’s development process and keeping it in the shadows, the organism completely disregarded the experts’ recommendations to include printed vote receipts to increase the auditability of the electoral exercise under the new method.

Furthermore, TEHILA’s technology was proved to be vulnerable to attacks, and the lack of means for physical auditability only underscored its unreliability. In the end, after protests from the citizens straining the importance of openness in the implementation process, and most importantly, of adopting e-voting only with a highly auditable platform, the e-voting initiative was called off. All the effort was squandered thanks to TEHILA’s stubbornness, and Israel had to go back to manual voting.

Still, hope is not lost yet. On occasion of this year’s presidential election, the Green Party of Israel made a new call for the abolition of paper ballots and the automation of the Israeli electoral system. The party proposes the use of DRE machines, with touchscreens and verifiable vote receipts printed on paper. If Israel learns the lesson from its past blunder, a truly reliable electoral modernization process could be on its way.

How Internet Voting challenged the Oscars

Photo: Miss Karen

As we mentioned on an earlier post, this year’s Academy Awards have been used lately as a cautionary tale against the implementation of Internet voting in precinct voting. So what’s the story of this blunder, and why has it become so significant for larger elections? The damages are weightier than you might think. 

Big productions like “Les Miserables” or “Lincoln” were expected to be favored this year, as had been the case traditionally. However, 2013 unexpectedly opened the doors to independent and foreign movies such as “Beasts of the Southern Wild” and the French “Amour.” This happened not because of a sudden change of mind from the Oscar committee, but because of the new electronic platform that had been adopted for the election. It was denounced that the older members of the Academy—a vast majority—were altogether unfamiliar with the platform and therefore had great difficulty casting their ballots. The Academy moved the voting deadlines, but it failed to provide proper training to these baffled voters. The effect was a list of nominees made of votes that were initially associated to the younger voters’ thinking, and to how these young voters had been able to understand the new system.

However, it surfaced later that even the younger members had problems voting due to a terribly faulty Internet Voting platform. By then, though, it was already too late to recall the results.

At first glance, this looks like a minor mishap, even a welcome one for pop culture. After all, the public would definitely want to see a more progressive Academy instead of watching the same blockbusters win over and over again. However, no matter how positive the result seemed, the fact is that most of the Academy members had been disenfranchised. This does not mean that electronic voting shouldn’t have been implemented altogether, but that the implementation of electoral technology should have been gradual and inclusive, and the Academy failed to accomplish both aspects. Not to mention that the most important poll in the world of cinema was handled with an online voting system of substandard quality.

It goes without saying that a reliable e-voting platform is easier to use than any manual electoral method, and certainly easier than a botched online-based system, which is why blaming the failure to cast an e-ballot on old age is terribly irresponsible. The liability clearly lies on the authorities in charge of its implementation. Not only is it important to know how to choose a proper electoral technology platform, but it is also vital to instrument it gradually in order for everyone to understand it. It does not matter whether the implementation is for small elections, as was the case with the Oscars: a slow immersion with drills and active participation from the electorate defines the success or failure of an automated election. 

When it comes to elections, no matter their scale, choosing an adequate technology is key. It is the duty of the authorities in charge to make sure the electoral platform employed is actually useful, so that nobody is left behind. There are no excuses.

Philippines gears up for 2013 e-voting

When e-voting made its big debut in the Philippines in 2010, most Filipino voters were guardedly optimistic. Although majority was rooting for the new system, the country’s long tradition of electoral fraud seemed an impossible problem to eliminate.  Yet e-voting took everyone by surprise – leaving Filipinos in awe of its speed, accuracy and transparency.

That singularly impressive experience led most Filipinos to become ardent advocates of automation. Some sectors, especially the teachers who ran the polls in the precincts and who have benefited greatly from the introduction of e-voting, have in fact sworn to resist any move to shift back to manual.

This overwhelming national sentiment was affirmed when the Commission on Elections (Comelec) exercised its option to purchase the 82,000 PCOS machines it leased from Smartmatic in 2010.

With barely four months before the elections, the Comelec finds itself with its hands full ensuring that the polls run as smoothly as possible.  There is one major difference in the way things are being run this time, though.  Whereas the 2010 polls had only one provider (Smartmatic) handle the project from end-to-end, this year the Comelec decided to break down the project into several components and bid them out separately.

While some observers perceive some benefit in not allowing a sole provider perform everything, it remains to be seen whether the poll body is up to the Herculean task of orchestrating the various components that make up a project as  technical and as complex as a nationwide e-voting.

Recently, the Comelec conducted a mock election in multiple points all over the country. The dry run had generally been successful despite encountering a few reported glitches which were corrected as soon as contingency measures were put into place.

The exercise tested not just the technology but also the human component of the system, with procedures and protocols undergoing strict scrutiny. The poll body had vowed to use the learning in the exercise to fine-tune its procedures.

Filipino voters are hopeful this year's e-voting will be the next big step towards their dream of a totally transparent and credible election.

Technology makes it possible to vote from space

Sunita Williams at the International Space Station. Source: Space.com

Last November 6th, Sunita Williams cast her ballot for the US presidential elections, just like millions of other Americans did. There is a small detail about this apparently mundane fact, though: she had the option to do it in outer space.

Sunita Williams is an astronaut on board the International Space Station. While she and her colleague Kevin Ford chose to vote from Russia before heading to space, other astronauts don’t have to fret over not being on Earth to cast their vote. This is thanks to a 1997 bill, which has made it possible for astronauts to use technology to exert their right to suffrage even when they are away in orbit. This measure has benefited several people already, and the effectiveness of its implementation points out at the need to modernize voting in order to make it easier for everyone to vote, no matter how geography or mobility affects them. There has been some advancement toward this goal with the implementation of the absentee ballot, but it’s not enough yet.

Absentee ballots have been the answer to citizens’ potential mobility problems. Sometimes it’s impossible for a citizen to reach his or her appointed polling station due to health problems or to being abroad. In order not to lose this potential voter’s ballot and increase voter turnout altogether, various nations have enabled different models of absentee ballots: proxy voting (someone is appointed to vote in the elector’s stead), postal voting, and e-voting.

Voting in outer space is carried out through a form of e-voting involving secure e-mail connections. Mission control at the Johnson Space Center in Houston beams up a digital version of the ballot card for the astronauts to fill up, and they beam it back to Earth via secure e-mail. It wouldn’t be crazy to think that it won’t be long before voting technology is adapted to space stations in order for astronauts to vote exactly the way they would on our planet. 

With e-voting, the right to suffrage reaches out to citizens in such a way that even those in outer space can vote. If the most extreme scenario for accessibility is already possible, why aren’t we making it easier for people in less remote areas to vote? They, too, have the need for voting technology in order to make their voice heard.

“We have to fix that”

Long lines at the Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial Library
on Election Day in Washington, DC (Getty Images)

During his acceptance speech on early Wednesday morning, reelected President Barack Obama addressed the need to fix the US electoral system. Speaking before a crowd of cheerful supporters, he said "I want to thank every American who participated in this election, whether you voted for the very first time, or waited in line for a very long time, by the way, we have to fix that."

Although this was probably one of the few times the electoral system has been part of an acceptance speech, the problems encountered are not new. Since the Butterfly Ballot scandal in 2000, hundreds of incidents have been reported by authorities of all levels, election watchdog groups, media and citizens.

These elections were marred by long lines across the country, but especially in Florida, Ohio and Virginia. Poorly trained election officials were misguiding voters in relation to ID requirements to vote. Deficient voting machines, like the one caught on a video in Pennsylvania giving Romney votes cast for Obama, also made the voting experience cumbersome.

Although President Obama’s intent is quite plausible, the road in which he is about to embark might turn bumpier than expected. HAVA, the Electoral Assistance Commission, Universities across the nation, ONG’s, have all made considerable efforts to improve the US electoral system, yet they have been unsuccessful confronting the conflict of interests that exist between States and the Federal Government, and the inconvenient level of partisanship that electoral bodies have shown across the nation.

In a recent interview by Rachel Maddow, Rick Hasen, Professor of Law and Political Science at UC Irvine, and author of "The Voting Wars," made it quite clear. Although the constitution provides the mechanisms to create a national authority to advance the reforms needed, the political will from all stakeholders to produce such transformation is still missing.

Rachel Maddow articulately stated “voting is a Federal issue, with federal laws to protect it…. Elections are a state affair”. Congress has on its hand the possibility to transform the system, however, letting congress, or any other institution conduct elections, would mean letting go some power and attributions the States hold at the moment. Looking at recent history, both parties have been imposing over the population all kinds of laws and regulations to affect the voter base of the other party. It is part of the Voting War Hasen mentions in his book. For example, and according to Professor Hasen, long lines were a deliberate effort by Republicans to depressing democratic turnout. By cutting back on the number of days and hours early voting was available, Republicans were, allegedly, hurting democratic votes.

In Florida, Republican Governor Rick Scott, signed a law shortening the number of days for early voting to eight from 14. This was one of the main reasons it took Floridians so long to vote and to obtain results.

If Obama is to take Mr. Hasen’s recommendation, he has to create the political momentum to have Congress assume the authority granted by the constitution to set rules for congressional elections. Then, he could proceed to ask States to follow the path of Congress.

In spite of the threat posed by a possible fiscal meltdown, a nationwide debate on the healthcare reform, and a lagging economy, Obama must find the time and energy to impose the political agenda needed to fix the electoral system, if the US is to continue showcasing its democracy as an example to follow.