Swiss citizens abroad push for a reform to allow e-voting

The Council of the Swiss Abroad (CSA) has decided to find mechanisms to increase the voting turnout of younger generations and enfranchise Swiss citizens abroad by means of online voting. 

  

Therefore, the Council would like to implement this technology, already successful in countries like Estonia, a trailblazer and a leader in Internet voting, employing the practice in their national elections since 2005. 

During their annual congress, held in early August, the CSA debated about electronic and online voting, taking into account the constant requests to the Swiss government to employ innovations that make it easier for Swiss citizens abroad to vote.  

The CSA’s leading committee considers that broadening the possibility to vote for their members will grant the organization greater legitimacy. “The models applied by the UK and Belgium can serve as models for our communities in other countries”.  

Those promoting e-voting have argued that some Swiss expats lack the possibility to cast their votes, since postal voting is not reliable enough in some of the countries they reside in. 

With an Internet voting model it is possible to guarantee that citizens have access to the vote from anywhere in the world by using a smartphone, a tablet or a computer. This technology guarantees that the will of each citizen is recorded securely, transparently and precisely, doing away with the human errors that commonly take place during traditional manual voting.  

The CSA, which convenes every two years, represents the interests of over 760 thousand Swiss citizens residing abroad to the authorities and the media. 

Estonia continues e-voting growth

Computers and technology play an integral role in just about every aspect of modern life. Smartphones allow people to connect with one another from all around the world through social networks. Computerized point of sale machines allow companies not only to track the transactions coming through the cash register, but also have real-time inventory information at their fingertips. However, for any number of reasons, many elections around the globe are still conducted in an analog format with paper ballots counted by hand. Modern democracies need to be precisely that: modern.

One democratic system that has been leading the charge for electronic voting technology for a number of years already is the one found in the democratic parliamentary republic of Estonia in the Baltic region of Northern Europe. The Estonian i-voting system has been heralded as a shining example of how e-voting can be best adopted, adapted and implemented in a modern democracy. Fantastic checks and balances are in place to verify and authenticate the identity of voters, security is top-notch and performance has been exceptional.

This isn't to say that the early experiences of e-voting in Estonia were completely and utterly problem-free and this isn't to say that many Estonians didn't voice their concerns over how e-voting would work and how it would impact their democracy. Since then, e-voting has continued to grow and Estonia's model is a great example of what a digitized democracy can and should look like.

Given this, it should be of little surprise that the adoption rates for e-voting in Estonia are also continuing to grow. According to some of the most recent reports and statistics on the matter, e-voting grew some twenty-five percent in the recent Estonia parliamentary election. A total of 176,328 voters used the online voting system in the Estonian election, offering a positive trend against the parliamentary elections of 2011. More and more people are using the online e-voting system and this trend is projected to continue for the next election too.

E-voting offers “clear benefits to voters, in terms of convenience, accessibility and ease of use.” The e-voting platform in Estonia is based on “tried and true” technologies that have withstood the test of time and survived tremendous scrutiny. This isn't to say that the electoral officials of Estonia are simply sitting on their laurels either, as they continue to innovate with new modalities, even opening up the i-voting source code to the public in late 2013 to encourage further development and innovation for not only Estonia, but also for other elections around the globe.

Indeed, the Centre of Excellence for Internet Voting was established in Estonia in 2014 by Smartmatic and Cybernetica. It works with the Estonian government to continue advancing Internet voting in the European nation and to export these advances and developments to international democracies too. “Estonia is one of the most digitised countries in the world,” said Smartmatic Internet Voting Director Michael Summers. “And [it] boasts an impressive culture of e-government [with the] backing of the political parties.”

A democracy needs to be truly accessible and transparent, while maintaining a high degree of security and confidentiality. Estonia's growth in e-voting and i-voting is a testament to what a clear vision and dedication to its advancement can create.

Debating Internet voting in the UK

Source: www.cbc.ca

The Internet is used for just about every aspect of everyday life. It is where people go to connect with one another through dating sites and social media. It is where people go to shop for the latest fashions and gadgets. It is where they go to get the most up-to-date news and opinions on world events. It's where they do their banking and even use a range of government services.

Given this, it is somewhat surprising that voting over the Internet, sometimes called i-voting and occasionally included in the broader discussion of e-voting, hasn't already been more widely implemented in more countries around the world. To further this discussion, Senior Political Correspondent Jason Farrell of the UK's Sky News recently engaged in an online webchat via Google Hangouts with three guests on the merits and challenges of casting a ballot via the web. The full replay of the 22 minute debate has been uploaded to YouTube.

In that discussion, WebRoots Democracy founder Areeq Chowdhury points out that it's almost a common sense point to modernize the democracy in the United Kingdom and bring it up to date by offering an online option for voting in elections. The Internet, as mentioned above, already infiltrates such a wide range of daily activities and to retain the archaic pen-and-paper method of casting a ballot as the primary method of voting feels incredibly outdated.

Indeed, just as Sir Richard Branson feels that the Internet is the future of voting, all of the guests on the program also support its adoption, but not without some hesitations. There is the risk of security threats for “hacked” votes that would compromise the integrity and legitimacy of election results. Chowdhury agrees that there are risks and there will be flaws. He also agrees that the lack of a paper trail to verify votes cast can also be worrisome, but he feels that the bigger risk at play is the risk of losing even more voters. The drop in voter turnout has been alarming and it needs to be address. The electorate needs to be more engaged with the political process and taking the vote online, along with other tools related to the election, can help to keep the modern political system relevant for voters both young and old.

To this end, Emma Mulqueeny of the Speaker's Commission on Digital Democracy feels that should an i-voting system be implemented in the United Kingdom, it makes more sense to look at the things that people are already engaging with online. She uses the example of social media, like Facebook, as a possible route for developing an online voting system rather than spending excessive amounts of money to develop a brand new system from scratch that could just as easily be riddled with flaws and problems.

In response to critics and naysayers who fear an online voting system that can be hacked by criminals, Mulqueeny says it is actually far easier to trace a digital footprint online, looking through servers and IP addresses, than it is to trace any ill-doing and tampering through paper ballots. It is harder to be completely anonymous on the Internet. Chowdhury agrees that everything has flaws and nothing is 100% secure, but people are still willing to utilize services – online and offline – that are equally as insecure as an online voting system. The issue is whether or not you can secure it to an adequate level.

Perhaps one of the most telling perspectives came from National Youth Council in Estonia member Marju Tamp as Estonia has been a leader in the I-voting revolution for a number of years. She says the security has been “flawless” and the Internet-based voting has been a very positive experience overall. Surprisingly, the older generation is actually accepting i-voting more happily than youth in her country.

Internet voting offers a compelling possibility in the United Kingdom and throughout the rest of the democratic world. Watch the full 22-minute Stand Up Debate from Sky News on YouTube.

British politician makes strong case for e-voting in UK

Source: www.bbc.co.uk

E-voting technology is quickly gaining in popularity in many countries all around the world, but the United Kingdom continues to lag behind. At least one British politician is aiming to change that. Commons Speaker John Bercow is making a major push toward updating the British electoral system to integrate more e-voting technology and innovations. While some of his opponents worry that this would dramatically change the electoral process, Bercow says that the shift to e-voting as an option should not be seen as “earth-shattering,” but rather as a natural step in moving the nation forward.

There are many possibilities for how e-voting could be implemented in Great Britain and Bercow is open to exploring a range of options. He understands how many people, particularly young adults, have come to seen smartphones, tablets and other digital devices as extensions of themselves. These devices can already be used to handle a range of private and confidential information, including e-mail and banking, so why can't the electoral process also be included in this? Bercow says that allowing citizens to vote via their mobile devices is a natural step.

However, this isn't to say that the shift should be taken lightly. Security measures must be in place to maintain and protect the “integrity of the ballot box.” The voting process for the citizen should also be painless and easy, as to encourage greater voter turnout. The recent European Union elections only saw a 33.8 percent turnout. That is far too low to be a truly representative democracy.

To Bercow, a 21st century democracy in action should be epitomized by a good citizen who must pick up a postcard weeks in advance before “dragging themselves down to an empty community hall or primary school on a wet Thursday to put a cross on a tiny piece of paper.” In line with modern technology and contemporary society, that ballot can be cast and counted in an automated fashion and possibly even remotely. This would also allow for greater access, particularly for voters who may have difficulties getting to the appropriate polling place in a timely and convenient way.

Voters want their voices to be heard, which is also why Bercow is pushing toward “crowdsourcing” ideas and public opinion too. These so-called digital consultations would not be binding, but they would help to advise the Speaker's Commission on Digital Democracy on how best to implement the new technology. “Perhaps the time has come,” said Bercow, “for the House of Commons to allow greater choice, more flexibility and public participation.”

E-voting technology has already been implemented in some fashion in the Scottish Parliament, Welsh Assembly and the Northern Ireland Assembly. An expansion of this into other British elections and votes only makes sense.

It is completely open to debate whether Britain should move forward with full Internet voting by way of web-connected devices like smartphones and computers or if they should start with electronic voting terminals at set polling places. However, the democratic process in the UK is due for an update one way or another.

The next United Kingdom general election is scheduled for May 7, 2015. This will elect the 56^th Parliament of the United Kingdom.

E-voting technology and economies of scale

Source: Google Images

There are numerable benefits to the adoption and expansion of electronic voting technology for a range of governmental and organizational elections. For instance, the electronic ballots can inherently be more accessible to people with physical disabilities or limitations, because the voting machine can be setup to accommodate such challenges. The font on the touchscreen can be increased for the visually-impaired, for instance, and having larger buttons can be easier for those who may lack the fine dexterity to mark a traditional paper ballot. Another major advantage to e-voting technology is that it can help to save tremendous amounts of money.

Indeed, this has already been demonstrated in many elections around the world. We recently wrote on the thousands of dollars saved by the Irish Medical Council when it replaced the printing of paper ballots, along with the associated postage costs, in favour of an electronic ballot instead.

That being said, it is clear that there may be significant costs in the beginning when first making the shift from a more traditional paper ballot to a fully automated election. The government or organization would need to invest in the appropriate DRE voting machines, for example, and the appropriate software and infrastructure to handle such an election. A single DRE machine back in 2005, according to the State of Texas Elections Division, “costs between $2,500 and $3,500 and represents a major economic investment.”

It is very important to note, however, that these costs are hardly linear. There is tremendous value in adopting the electronic ballot, because the initial investment put forward by the government or organization lays the groundwork not only for the upcoming election, but also for many future elections moving forward. The acquisition of software and code is a one-time purchase and its maintenance is not related in a linear fashion to the initial investment.

What results instead is the ability to capitalize on very favourable economies of scale. As a city, district or country grows its population and gains a greater number of voters, the cost of the ballots on a per-voter basis are reduced over time. As The News Tribe's Mirza Abdul Aleem Baig put it, “the increase of the dimensions of the electoral roll doesn’t increase the price linearly.” The election becomes even more cost effective as the electorate continues to grow and mature.

Additional ballots do not necessarily cost any more money the same way that a paper ballot would in terms of printing, distribution, and tabulation, because the digital ballot can be simply displayed on a terminal screen or via some other electronic means. Having 20 copies of a document on a hard drive does not cost any more money than having just a single copy of a document.

By going with an electronic ballot, the “single” ballot can be far more flexible than its printed counterpart. A single ballot can inherently be multilingual, allowing the voter to select his or her language of choice. This is far superior to having an overly crowded single paper ballot (with the added expense of ink used) and decidedly better than printing multiple ballots in multiple languages.

Absolutely, there are initial costs and investments to be made when switching to an electronic voting paradigm, but the initial investment in hardware, code and infrastructure pays for itself in the long run with future elections and an increased need to handle a growing number of voters.