The World's First National Internet Election 297
InternetVoting writes "Expanding on the limited 2005 Internet voting pilot successes, the small European nation of Estonia will become the first country to allow voting in a national parliamentary election via the Internet. Fresh off the news of France's successful primary election using Internet voting and the announcement of 12 new UK election pilots, is Europe leaving the U.S. behind?"
Well.. (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Well.. (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm not sure which is worse:
a) a general election using faulty touch screens, or
b) a "secure" online election, but voting is easy enough that we have 90% turnout... which includes the 45% of the population that has absolutely no clue about anything to do with the election, and vote based on whatever (mis)information they read on a blog that morning.
Re:Well.. (Score:5, Interesting)
No. When people don't vote, it is not usually because they know so little about politics that they don't know who to vote for, but rather because they know so much about politics that they know there is nobody to vote for.
I have never voted. No party respects the values of equality, freedom and democracy that I have.
If all the non-voters came out, they would boost the slightly-progressive vote considerably, and perhaps prevent the worst excesses of the craziest parties.
Re:Well.. (Score:5, Interesting)
That brings up a good point. If there were an "abstain" column, then you could show your interest in politics by participating, but also show your disdain for the available candidates, by choosing neither of them.
If it is the case that a large portion of America doesn't vote because they don't like the choices, this would be an interesting way to track that.
Vote blank (Score:2)
Re:Vote blank (Score:5, Interesting)
Surely there must be a way for you to vote for "none of the above" as Per Abrahamsen says. For example in Mexico you can cross out the whole ballot to make your vote null. It is still counted but it's not alloted to anybody. And it is usually a good measure of protest. High intentionally nullified vote count is always given a lot of air time and puts pressure on the government to take some corrective actions.
The problem I see with this is that they just know you are not happy, but there is no other mechanism to provide feedback as to what are you actually upset about. Best way is always to get involved. Support those that most closely resemble our values (in the real world nobody will ever match our values 100%), or if they are truly appalling, start our own, join one and change it from inside, etc. Inaction only gives the fascists currently in power to continue turning the US in a police state and that is bad for you and bad for the rest of the world given the USA's power and penchant for meddling in other people's affairs :P
I'm not trolling, if somebody disagrees please reply, don't just mod me down =P
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Blank votes (known as "undervotes") are recognized and counted as such. An entirely blank ballot is processed as-is, and generates an "undervote" for each election contest.
The undervote rate varies -- typically it is around 1% for major contests, but much higher for minor ones, e
Re:Vote blank (Score:5, Interesting)
The logic behind that kind of statements escape me. If we have the half the population of LA, we also have the same population as half of LA. So have a paper ballot in one half of LA, and another paper ballot in the other half of LA, and add the results.
Hvor svært kan det være?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Of course (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Then organize your own party. Run for an election. Prove that you have something worthwhile to offer. But forgive me for suspecting that you are altogether too prissy to survive in the down-and-dirty world of politics and compromise.
If all the non-voters came out, they would boost the slightly-progressive vote considerably, and perhaps prevent the worst excesses of the craziest parties.
The ever-elusive "si
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know about the Estonians, but I know that I, for one, plan to vote that day, as I'm sure do most of the other people here on Slashdot. :-D
Re:Well.. (Score:4, Funny)
They will be leaving the US behind...right up until their "secure" internet election elects "That goatse guy"...
Ladies and Gentleman... (Score:4, Funny)
They guy got his name at the top of the list for a bridge somewhere. Named a team mascot somewhere 'Cobeagle The Eagle' or some such. Why? Presidency is the next logical step! He is quite well versed in addressing 'the nation'. And this is the perfect opportunity. He has got to be planning this in his secret lair somewhere.
Re: (Score:2)
That is absolutely right. I might not agree with the person behind me in line at the polls, but at least I know that they had the political savvy to A) know what day the polls were open, B) find the polls, and C) actually vote. If actually getting to the polls poses a problem then in most areas you can vote from the comfort of your own home with just a bit of planning and foresight. If this is too much of an obstacle then I honestly don't think that your vote should count as much as mine does. I am tota
Perhaps we can do away with parliments (Score:3, Insightful)
We no longer have those communications restrictions. With TV, www etc, you can find out everything you want to know about pretty much any issue immediately. So, why have representatives and parliments?
Instead of voting in representatives, why not just have an online referendum for every law change
Re:Perhaps we can do away with parliments (Score:5, Insightful)
A really, really bad idea. It's called mob rule, or the tyranny of the majority. Unpopular, difficult decisions are (occasionally) made by governments. For example, in the US, the civil rights reform in the 60s.
Plus government funding would end up solely going to the most populous areas. Government services, on the other hand, generally cost more in rural, rather than urban, areas (for example, rubbish collection is cheaper in a city, where the truck has to go less distance between pick ups, than in remote locations).
Of course, the status quo is hardly nirvana either...
Re: (Score:2)
In the US, at least, the Democrats and Republicans have come to rely on each other. One doesn't get into power on its own merits, but rather when the other messes up badly enough that the voters (apparently with short memories) think they'll do a better job.
To implement that system would put most of those "public servants" out of jobs, and that's the one thing that both parties can agree to NOT let happen.
Re:Perhaps we can do away with parliments (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
This should be modded informative.
I am feeling chattery tonight. The reasons you give are the ones that are usually given, but I am not convinced by them. One thing is for sure though: not only there are no direct democracies anymore, there hardly has ever been any, so we really have nothing to compare with.
USA, for example, has a very thick dossier [wikipedia.org]. Soviet Union, one of the least democratic countries out there, was a huge fan of a military action as well. Chinese states w
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I think that parliaments were set up by the elite because they wanted to be in control and had an ability.
As for your proposal, it would indeed make any existing country more democratic; but few (if any) countries were founded as true democracies. Many have some degree of democratic participation, but it is widely believed, among us serfs as well as among the elite, that a direct unbridled democracy is about as good of a way to govern as setting the whole country on fire. I, personally, think that it is w
Re: (Score:2)
Plato? Democratic?
Plato's Republic rests in the hands of a philosopher-king who alone has the insight and understanding to rule.
The entire structure of the state is designed to insure that his authority and that of the governing elite can never be effectively questioned.
Re: (Score:2)
You are right, and I am confused here. It is not Republic, but could swear it is Plato. I remember something about an ideal city state... You may not care, but I will come back on that. Elsewhere, he describes an ideal city state with direct democracy and citizens who have to be farmers, the whole shebang.
No, that is not the reason (Score:5, Insightful)
The idea behind representative democracy is to avoid the "heat of the movement" decisions. In fact, the major problem with representative democracy these days, is that with the constant polling and professional politicians who adjust their views to follow the vims of the (voting part of) the population, we are getting closer to direct democracy. Representative democracy works best when politicians actually stand for something.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Guys, in case you haven't noticed - history has shown that represen
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Representative democracy works best when politicians actually stand for something.
i guess you wanted to say "..stand for something GOOD". If they stand for corruption and their own pockets, it doesnt really work.
in the end, it comes down to the quality of the people, the system does not matter that much ... representative democracy is only better than direct democracy if you elect the right people ... in fact, even a totalitary regime can be just as good if done by the right people... the only inherent advantage of democracy is that it's better suited for the long run.
but anyway...
Re: (Score:2)
A good example of this is the creationism vs evolution debate as concerning the US school system. I can't remember which state it was, but they, a whil
Re: (Score:2)
Also, more importantly, I don't think you realize just how much voting would have to be done in order to make this system feasible. Without elected representatives, there would be literally hundreds of decisions to be made each day by the voting populace. It's the equi
Re: (Score:2)
There is something to be said for distance and perspective, knowledge and experience. There is in the American political system an elemental distrust of the mob. Capricious, irresponsible, living in the moment.
It actually works that way in Switzerland (Score:5, Interesting)
It's called direct democracy.
And it's already the case in Switzerland. By law an change in the constitution must be approved by a referendum. Any law proposed by the public (a public initiative with enough signarutes) must also undergo mandatory referendum. Same goes for any international treaties (when Switzerland accept some treaty it's not in fact the country but the actual swiss population !). And any petition that collects enough signature can ask any other proposed law to undergo referendum, which happens almost always. Thus almost no law haven't been voted before being applied.
Although that sometimes people aren't interested about the vote, there's always at least one third of the population that participate in any vote (that's still a much more important and more representative part of the population than any assembly), and much more citizens get involved in more important votes (up to two third approximately. There's always a third that don't give a damn shit about what's happening and accept whatever the other want).
And unlike other
And the fact that we constantly vote (each few months) has three results :
- The population isn't fed up with voting. In fact at least one third of the population is getting used to the idea of always, no matter what, giving its opinion on the voted law.
- Being used to give its opinion makes that the population more often votes according its opinion of the law. The votes aren't used as ad hominem attacks to express disagreement with the politicians that are proponents of them (unlike what happened in France where the EU constitution was also partly refused because people disliked the politicians that encouraged the pro-EU vote, and note only because of the content).
- In the USA because the biggest part of the population contribution to politics are election and they only happen seldom, the different parties pile up a lot of money and then deploy campaign that start to look as marketing. In Switzerland nobody could afford spending that much money every couple of month and therefore, most of the information the public has comes from debates, from (non-paid-for by the government) journalists' articles, experts on the subject (economists / scientist / or whatever is related to the subject of the law being voted) from both camps give opinions, etc. Therefore the population tends to vote being more informed as enticed by ads, and end up accepting difficult decisions, fully knowingly the implications.
The only difference with what you said is that we don't use internet that much for voting (except for some pilot projects). Only as an information medium.
Voting is still mainly done by dropping an envelope in an urn, or by mail. But there are active development done to introduce e-voting in order to facilitate the voting procedure and attract a higher participation)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, if everybody else is doing it.... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
- Succeptability to man in the middle attacks.
- Network outages / succeptability to DDoS attacks.
- Possibility of ISP censorship of votes.
In a paper-ballot election, it takes a lot of effort from a number of people (usually at least one insider) to fake a win. With electronic voting, a single person can do the job.Re: (Score:2)
Vote 1 Robin Williams [imdb.com], I say. :-)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Because he didn't win enough popular votes in Florida to secure the electroal votes he needed to achieve a majority.
Anything contrary to that is a loony's conspiracy theory and a political party's inability to comprehend that they lost.
Though to be absolutely fair, he'd have been a 1-termer anyway, so he still wouldn't be president today.
Re: (Score:2)
The second could be an issue even if there are other means of casting your vote. If the plan is for 50% of the (voting) population to vote online, the polling centers would likely be ill prepared for a rush of voters when the site goes down. This could be resolved by having online-voting available during the same period absentee voters receive their ballots - if there is a problem with
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Have your voting period over the course of a week. There's no rea
Re: (Score:2)
Well, when you finally get your shit together and legislate mandatory voting like we've (Australia) done, it won't impact you so badly. The craziest part about your whole electoral system is you don't realise how fucked up it is. Seriously, electoral colleges? What's up with that?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
This is America buddy. We take pride in the fact that we don't realize how fucked up anything is. Except, of course, for other countries. We have a couple of sayings: "If it's not broke, take it apart and screw around with it, then it will be." and "If something's broke, throw it in the shed out back and go have a beer."
Re: (Score:2)
Whoa... (Score:5, Insightful)
I didn't know they were related...
Nice dis of the US though [for no reason whatsoever]. I should point out that Canada doesn't have voting over the net either. Neither does most of the free world. [and yes, I'm Canadian...]
Tom
Re:Whoa... (Score:5, Funny)
Thanks for pointing that out , I guess the words World's First in the headline was not enough. [You have my sympathy.]
Re:Whoa... (Score:5, Interesting)
Apples and oranges. Many of the same factors that make a national election possible in a country like Estonia make it impossible in the US.
For one thing: The United States does not have a national election. The US has 50 concurrent state elections for federal offices. At the same time, there are 50 separate elections for state-level offices, and thousands of elections for county, city, schoolboard district, ward, etc offices, not to mention ballot initiatives, referenda, multiple-selection judicial contests, and so on.
A national election in a country like Estonia involves only one choice -- for party. Parliamentary seats are divided among parties based on the percent of returns for each party, and the party decides which of its candidates sits in Parliament. The party with the most seats nominates a Prime Minister who then appoints a government, which assumes power provided it has the approval of the Parliament.
If the party with the largest number of votes is unable to persuade the whole assembley to approve its nomination, the chance goes to the party with the next largest share of votes, and so on. Thus you can get some quite strange bedfellows in European coalition governments (like the Red-Green coalition in Germany until recently). But this is all separate and distinct from the voter, who has no say beyond party preference as to how the government is comprised or who the Prime Minister is.
Thus a national election in Estonia is one question on one ballot that is the same for the whole country.
In Maricopa County, AZ, last November there were 19 different initiative and referendum measures in addition to the usual slate of federal, state, county, city (Phoenix, Mesa, Tempe, etc), judicial, school board, etc. races that varied according to ward, precinct, township, jurisdiction, school board district, etc. While their ballot was one of the longest in the country in November, the same complexity and range of contests is true in any big city.
When you have one question on one ballot for the whole voting population, then internet voting is feasible. When your ballot is much more complex, much longer, and requires strictly validating voters according to location and eligibility, it becomes much more problematic.
Apples and oranges.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Actually, none of those are really problematic. The Estonians had a national ID card, which was used to verify the voters. If you have a national ID card, it's trivial to attach address information (to validate location) and age (to vali
Re: (Score:2)
And they may never know if it didn't.
Re: (Score:2)
The American election is a social experience that helps draw a community together.
Last November our village firehall had a voting booth for kids, and a Girl Scouts' bake sale. Turn-out was excellent and the opportunity for everyone of every age to participate added interest and excitement to the process.
Re: (Score:2)
Elections in Europe are not as simple as you would think. Take Austria for example: There are 9 states which are each divided into a couple of regions. Based on the last census, every region is assigned a number of seats in the legislative assembly. For each of these regions, states and at the national level the parties make a list of their candidates. Voters can now vote for the party of their choice, but they can also pick 2 people from that party's regional and state lists to give them a premi
Re: (Score:2)
WHO GIVES A FLYING FUCK (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Like it fucking matters, if you have so many goddamn elections why is it YOU STILL ONLY HAVE TWO MAJOR PARTIES TO VOTE FOR.
The question isn't why there are only two major parties, the question is why are all the third parties run by extremist wackos.
secure voting (Score:2)
at least you can look stuff up.
Internet voting is also a lot easier than the ballot box when it comes to multiple regions. You can vote thousands
of times in thousands of regions all from the comfort of your home. Thats the rub. Validating voters
is fairly easy. Validating that the vote being transmitted is the actual vote of the person in front of the computer,
when there are millions of co
Dude, let's have an online election... (Score:3, Funny)
Well this is scary... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
This whole thing is wildly inaccurate. Rounding errors, ballot stuffers, dynamic IPs, firewalls. If you're using these numbers to do anything important, you're insane.
Paper trail? Independent audits? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Paper trail? Independent audits? (Score:5, Funny)
Election promise 37: "Sure we'll lower taxes!" (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The auditing facility described there basically amounts to "assume the system is not compromised, then check to see if the vote is still there". Regardless of design, this audit process is a black box and has no value for ensuring a fair election. It does not even come into the ballpark of a citizen-auditable voter-verified paper trail.
Perhaps, but... (Score:5, Insightful)
I think the biggest question is, what problem is this trying to solve? What's wrong with non-internet voting that internet voting will fix? And will whatever that is be worth the consequences? I'm one who feels like the days of a pen-marking-paper ballots should come back (hey, we still have them in my district) and leave behind all of these more modern, more easily hacked systems. Is it really that important that the results of the election be known the of the election? Important enough that we're willing to sacrifice the security of the balloting?
Come to my voting party on election day (Score:3, Interesting)
How do you safeguard against me holding a voting party on election day? I'll sit next to my partner and make sure the newfangled voting technology doesn't confuse her into making an incorrect vote. Me and my friends will keep note of who doesn't attend my election day voting party, we'll all watch each other vote so we know we agree on who to vote for. I'll also make s
From TFA (Score:3, Informative)
Xix.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
At least half the population ARE stupid. More if you're of above average intelligence.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
How much discomfort would you endure for a war? (Score:2)
Suppose the issues were so important that, in the absence of the election, you'd have volunteered to fight in a civil war over them. How much discomfort would you endure to fight for your beliefs in that war?
Elections are NOT about being nice, or being fair, or because
Even more problems solved! (Score:2)
Benefits of electronic voting:
* Convenience: no need for risky, ballot-box-at-a-time, physical-vote tampering
* Participation: more corporations can now be involved in helping to bring about the right result, making those pesky "political donation" caps irrelevant.
* Fewer errors: once a computer is involved there's no reason any vote should ever be disqualified (currently a significant proportion of ballot tampering is eventually discovered)
How to stop bribery !? (Score:5, Insightful)
What measure did they take to ensure that no one looks over the voter's computer screen and bribe/threaten the voter ?
Re: (Score:2)
Democracy (Score:3, Interesting)
Getting rid of the middleman, so to speak.
I always thought voting for some guy who might have ideas that might be more to your liking than some other guy's is far from 'democracy'.
And how about some sort of incentive for people to vote on laws, like tax returns?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not that politicians are much better, but do you expect the public at large to have enough knowledge on a particular subject to make an informative vote for every measure they choose to participate in creating?What would prove most interesting is how discussion and amendments would be introduced in such a system. Best of all, we could have special interest groups spending money on attack ads all the time. The broadcast media receiving the ad money would be the winners every time.
Heck, let's make it real
Re: (Score:2)
Fascinating concept, only the middleman is hardly going to vote for a bill that cuts him out of the loop now, is he?
Re: (Score:2)
Nice of them to let the 1337 h4xx0rs vote (Score:5, Funny)
Number of votes that will be cast in next Estonian election: 13,371,337
Bad idea for this reason (Score:4, Insightful)
A significant part of "secret voting" is that not only is the government unable to look into how you personally vote, but it must also guarantee that nobody else can look into it, so that the vote is yours and yours alone.
When you vote from home, this guarantee cannot be fulfilled, as you can be pressured into voting for whatever by whomever else happens to be in the house with you at that time. That is not necessarily a very pleasant experience.
Leaving behind secret ballot, security (Score:5, Insightful)
Likewise if these are terminals at home, secret ballot goes out the window. If these are terminals in a secured location just using the internet as a platform for encrypted communication with a server, you can still have secret ballot.
But in any case, voting over the internet presents real problems in auditability. Where is the paper trail?
It's good to be left behind in these areas.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't agree that any state's mail-in system is particularly vulnerable in terms of secret ballot issues. What's important is the system and processes that are used in how the ballot envelope is handled.
When the envelopes are received, individuals check the outer envelope to see if it meets the identification/verification criteria. Once that is done, the ballot is in a second envelope and tha
Are those IIS servers? (Score:4, Funny)
I think you should have some geography lessons (Score:2)
Say no to electronic voting (Score:2, Insightful)
In my country (as in many countries) you go to a booth, you vote in secret, you drop your vote in a transparent box, the votes ar
Yes. (Score:2)
Estonia != USA (Score:2)
In the US, and the most populated of its constituent states, it's difficult for someone to be reasonably certain they've got a handle on the situation, much less do something about it. This is due, in part, to the vast dispa
Re: (Score:2)
I dunno about you, but I voted for the breasts.
Re: (Score:2)
Local assemblies? Is that the same as "Soviets"? I am sure "all power to the Soviets" will do really well in Estonia. FYI, "soviet" is Russian for "advisory committee"... which were composed of... you guessed it... members elected by local assemblies.
Re: (Score:2)
Soviet, Municipality... a rose by any other name is still a rose. Does it really matter what you call it? Or are you so blind that you can't see it?
Re: (Score:2)
Much of the US doesn't vote or wouldn't be comfortable with new technology anyway...
But make it an option. Postal votes, or absentee votes are a nuisance when traveling with no fixed address. As a citizen of a continent in the southern hemisphere, my experience was only certain embassies/consulates offered voting on the day. e.g. why in Switzerland but not Europe's third biggest city, Madrid?