
E-voting could use ATM-like
kiosks, as shown in this artist's concept.
|
Wow! Can you believe all of the confusion and
controversy surrounding this year's U.S. presidential
election? Few elections have ever had this many
twists and turns. In most presidential elections,
our next president is usually decided before we
go to bed on election night. Vice President Al
Gore and Gov. George W. Bush must have spent many
restless nights since last week's election, thinking
about the few hundreds of votes that separate
the two men in Florida -- votes which will decide
the presidency, as Florida claims 25 Electoral
College votes.
The 2000 election will always be remembered
for the confusion that developed on election night
and the days following. Early on election night,
TV networks announced that Gore had won Florida,
but then retracted that announcement. Then Florida
was awarded to Bush, only for it to be announced
later that the state was too close to call. Thousands
of ballots were tossed out in South Florida because
some voters couldn't decipher the so-called "butterfly"
ballot. Disputes over just a few hundred votes
are keeping one of these men from claiming the
White House, and legal suits and recounts are
under way to decide who our next president will
be. Perhaps the most amazing thing about the entire
situation is that, in what is arguably the most
technologically advanced country in the world,
Americans are still voting with paper ballots.
Little progress has been made since the American
forefathers dropped beans in a jar to cast their
votes.
We have the technology today to perform computerized
elections. In fact, some companies, universities
and unions already use e-voting to elect
their officials. In this edition of How
Stuff Will Work, you'll learn about how
the next time Americans vote for the U.S. president,
it might be at the breakfast table, checking off
an online ballot on a PC or personal
digital assistant.
Point and Click Voting

Photo courtesy Sequoia Pacific
Voting Equipment
Some voters are already
trying out touch-screen voting computers
like this one.
|
Americans live in a country that is heavily dependent
on millions of computers.
Obviously, you are aware of the impact of computers,
since you are reading this over the Internet,
but computers do more than just connect us to the
World Wide Web. Almost everyone uses an ATM
for a good portion of their bank transactions. Computers
installed on gas pumps allow us to pay at the pump.
We rely on computers to help us perform many everyday
tasks, but there are still things we don't trust
computers to do. And one of those tasks is voting.
As the 2000 election plays out, many political pundits
and techies argue that electronic voting, or e-voting,
will prevent a lot of the problems that have put
the presidential election on hold. The advantages
of e-voting include:
- Streamlining the voting process.
- Preventing ballot errors and confusion.
- Increasing national voter turnout.
Most voters already use some sort of computerized
voting system. Punch
cards, like the ones used in the disputed Palm
Beach County, Fla., precincts, are tallied by a
computerized counting machine that detects the punched
holes in a ballot. This form of voting has been
used since the 1960s. Optical
scanners are used for those voting systems that
use paper and pen, to detect pen marks made on a
ballot. Optical scan vote counters are not as old
as punch card technology, but they seem somewhat
archaic compared to other technologies that we use
everyday. For many, e-voting is the next logical
step for elections.
In the punch card system, if you feed the same
100 ballots through the counting machine seven
times, you get seven different vote counts. These
inaccuracies are a problem when you are counting
millions of ballots, and thousands or hundreds
of votes can decide the election outcome. There
are two e-voting technologies available that could
streamline this process, and make counting ballots
as easy as hitting a key on a computer keyboard.
In Brazil and the Netherlands, many voters already
use an ATM-like machine to cast their vote. Using
these machines, voters gather at their traditional
voting precinct and cast their ballots in a kiosk,
just like the one they have always used. This
kiosk retains the privacy that voters want. Voters
carry in a cartridge and place it in the e-voting
computer, which displays the candidates on a touch-screen,
liquid-crystal
display. Unlike paper ballots, these machines
display information about each candidate aside
from their party affiliation, and might even display
the candidate's photo so that there is less confusion
over identity. A voter makes their choice for
president by touching the screen. Once the voter
makes a selection, a new list of candidates, for
the next office on the ballot, appears on the
screen. If a voter makes a mistake, such as selecting
two candidates for the same office, the computer
points out this error and allows the voter to
correct it. Once the voter has completed the ballot,
the computer allows the voter to review his or
her choices before returning the cartridge to
an election official.
While it's been more than a week since polls
closed on the 2000 U.S. election, and we are still
awaiting the final outcomes in many states, including
Florida, Oregon and New Mexico, paperless ballots
can be counted instantly when polls close. There
is no waiting for overseas or absentee ballots,
because they can be counted along with the other
e-ballots. Everything is electronic, so in addition
to the benefit of timeliness, there is also less
concern over human error in the counting process.
Electronic polling places are considered to
be a stepping stone toward Internet voting, which
would allow people to vote from their home or
work computer -- or any computer with Internet
access. Voters could simply point and click on
the candidate they support. This type of voting
has the potential to significantly increase voter
turnout. In 1998, only 44.9 percent of Americans
of voting age took the time to vote. Many non-voters
say that the inconvenience of registering or voting
is the main reason they did not cast a ballot.
With e-voting, you might eventually be able to
register online. Online voting eliminates the
lines at polling places, and gives us the ultimate
anonymous vote. If no one actually sees you vote,
there is far less chance that they can know for
whom you voted.
Testing E-Voting Technology
Several states were taking a close look at e-voting
even before election day 2000 -- but the aftermath
of this year's presidential election could sway
them toward implementing systems in time for the
2004 vote. You may be one of the few voters who
took part in one of the various pilot e-voting
programs around the country. The success or failure
of these test programs will play a pivotal role
in determining the future of e-voting.
Approximately 350 military personnel stationed
overseas, or in states far from their home polling
precincts, are the first Americans to vote via
the Internet.
This voting program was run by the U.S. Department
of Defense's Federal
Voting Assistance Program (FVAP), and is expected
to be a viable replacement for absentee or mail-in
votes. These military personnel were given a certificate
on a floppy disk, which was inserted in a computer.
That information was paired with a similar certificate
at their home county, allowing the personnel to
log onto the system and vote.
This past election day, Riverside County, Calif.,
conducted the first paperless voting, and it went
off with few hitches. Voters used the touch-screen,
ATM-like voting machines at 715 polling locations.
The e-voting machines are secure, independent
computers that cost about $18,000 each. Voters
used a cartridge to record their votes, which
were then read by a computer. Proponents of electronic
voting say that if the computers in Riverside
had been used in Florida, a recount would have
been instantaneous, if it were needed at all.
Voters in San Diego and Sacramento counties
in California, and in Maricopa County in Arizona
had the opportunity to cast ballots in an online
voting trial on election day. In this so-called
"shadow vote," voters first voted using traditional
methods, and then were given the choice to vote
again on a computer. The second vote was not counted
toward the election, but the online votes will
be studied to see if this method has potential
for future elections. Tabulation of the hundreds
of online shadow votes took only a a few seconds,
while tabulation of traditional votes takes hours
or days.
With problems continuing to plague the Florida
ballot count, it's likely that officials will
give these pilot electronic voting programs some
serious consideration. However, e-voting must
overcome several obstacles before it becomes widely
accepted for use in national elections. In the
next section, we will look at some of the legal
and technological challenges facing the implementation
of e-voting.
Bridging the Digital
Divide
Electronic voting is the first new election technology
to be introduced in years. Of course, this change
doesn't come without criticism. Traditionally,
people are resistant to change, even if it offers
an opportunity to simplifying their lives. And
to be fair, e-voting does have its drawbacks.
Here are just a few:
- Computers will disenfranchise the computer
illiterate, including the elderly, the poor
and minorities.
- It will be very difficult to verify voters'
identities.
- Computers are susceptible to attacks by computer
viruses and hackers.
The digital divide is a rather new term,
referring to the gap between the technology haves
and have-nots. Those with computer knowledge are
typically younger and more affluent than those who
lack computer skills. The electronic voting system
used in Riverside County has already drawn protests
from minority groups who say that this computerized
system intimidates voters who have limited access
to computers. Studies show that whites and Asians
are more computer savvy than blacks and Latinos,
that younger voters have more computer knowledge
than older voters and that those with money have
more access to the Internet than those without money.
The Voting Rights Act of 1965 poses the
biggest legal barrier to e-voting. This act called
for an end to discrimination against minorities
in the election process, and prohibits some states
from making changes to voting procedures without
federal approval. The courts could declare computer-based
or Internet voting a violation of this act.
Another potential problem facing electronic
or online voting will be verifying the actual
identity of the person casting the ballot. Giving
a 10-digit PIN number to voters is one method
of deterring voter fraud; fingerprint, iris and
retinal scanners could also verify that you are
who you say you are when you vote. This would
be a significant improvement over the identification
process used at polling places now. On election
day this year, all that most of us had to do to
verify our identities was recite our address.
We didn't have to show any form of identification
or proof of who we are.
Many people worry that voting on a computer
network may make their votes vulnerable to attacks
by hackers. Security measures developed to protect
other areas of the Internet, including shopping,
have not been able to completely lock out malicious
attacks. You've probably heard of cases in which
someone's credit card number was stolen online,
costing the credit card holder hundreds, if not
thousands, of dollars. So how can we be sure that
our votes are secure? Security may be the weak
link of online voting. Before e-voting becomes
commonplace, developers will need to address the
prospect of hackers jamming an e-voting computer
system and preventing selected groups of voters
from casting ballots.
E-voting has its share of flaws, but it might
draw more interest following the problems that
have plagued this year's election. In a country
that relies so much on technology, we might finally
see that technology easing the political process
in the next presidential election. Who knows?
In November 2004, you could wake up on election
day and cast your ballot at a virtual polling
booth in the privacy of your own home.