September 22, 2003
e-voting: Just say no.

All the right people are objecting to a proposed e-voting standard. The standards effort is apparantly railroaded by the voting machine industry (and doesn't the fact that they're already doing this immediately disqualify the same industry from the trust we need in their product?) and the standard lives under the hideous assumption that voting is a technological problem in need of a technological fix. Of course not. Voting is politics and emotions, and the old adage on justice applies: 'Justice must not just be done, it must also be seen to be done'. In the same way our ability to understand and failure proof and manually verify the voting process is essential to the integrity of the vote. There is no technological fix to guarantee that. The only possible verification is bi-partisan verification of paper ballots. No amount of crypto, and certainly no signed guarantee from a closed source voting software company can provide the same assurance.
When democracy is at stake, price is just not an issue.

Posted by Claus at September 22, 2003 02:05 PM | TrackBack (0)
Comments (post your own)

ok, but certainly there can be advantages in e-voting? Faster, more reliable (no human errors), cheaper? If the software is secure - it's not software for launching a space shuttle so that should be possible right? - I would not oppose to e-voting. You simply cannot approach e-voting in such a single faceted manner. I would prefer not to oppose to e-voting a priori, but I would insist on adequate arrangements to benefit from technology without putting democracy at stake...

kind regards, Floris Leurink (The Netherlands)

Posted by: Floris on December 8, 2004 2:23 PM
Help the campaign to stomp out Warnock's Dilemma. Post a comment.

Email Address:


Type the characters you see in the picture above.

(note to spammers: Comments are audited as well. Your spam will never make it onto my weblog, no need to automate against this form)


Remember info?