30/1/2019 Electronic Voting - Arguments in Favor

Electronic Voting

Introduction
Arguments in Favor
Arguments in Favor
Elections are unique. They change the fate of nations, influence participation
and activism in politics, and deeply affect the lives and attitudes of citizens.
Arguments Against
Electrons demonstrate a clear importance for our society- so not only must
election systems work, the people must believe that they work.
Case Studies
Accordingly, ethical concerns have become one of the most central elements
of the debate surrounding electronic voting. At times, it seems even that the
    The United States
ethics are the most important factor of discussion- influencing technical
concerns, et cetera. Despite concerns about Electronic Voting Machines,
    France however, companies continue to develop them and countries continue to
adopt them at amazing speed. There must be a large incentive to undertake
    Brazil such risk. We must ask: What are the benefits of electronic voting?

Further Information Electronic voting most directly affects two large parties: the voters, and the
government. Theoretically, in order for electronic voting to be instituted,
there must be a significant advantage (greater than the costs) to one or both
of these groups. Ideally, voters gain a better voting experience at the polls,
are more confident that their vote will be correctly counted, and are able to
vote more easily and efficiently. The government is potentially able to
increase voter turnout, reduce costs, increase voter confidence, renew
interest in the political system (and voting), and ensure the most democratic
process possible.

One of the significant benefits of this new system is the possibility for
increased efficiency. With Electronic Voting Machines voters can submit their
votes, and be reasonably confiedent that their vote will count (namely
avoiding the “hanging chad” problem that handicapped the 2000 presidential
elections in the United States). New Electronic Voting Machines can also stop
voters from common election faults, such as picking too many or no
candidates, also thereby increasing the general effectiveness of voting.

Source: Anonymous/ Wikipedia
Creative Commons
Electronic voting via email also holds the possibility of increasing the ease of
voting for citizens who are otherwise geographically isolated from election
centers. Lorrie Faith Cranor, currently an Associate Research Professor in
Computer Science and Engineering & Public Policy at Carnegie Mellon
University, explained in Crossroads in 1996 that, “Eventually electronic voting
may be a viable solution to increasing voter participation in governmental
elections.” This potential to increase voter participation, ether from increased
accessibility, decreased cost, decreased difficulty, or any other method clearly
has its benefits to the larger community.

Electronic voting also has the ability to reduce fraud, by eliminating the
opportunity for ballot tampering. However, if paper ballots are printed out as
a backup in case of a recount necessity, this threat remains. Michael Shamos
of Carnegie Mellon University, who is in favor of electronic voting but ardently
against paper machines, argues that “Paper voting records have shown
themselves for the past 250 years to be horribly insecure and easy to
manipulate. In practice they have so many flaws that they are as bad as
punched-card voting at its worst.” But if paper ballots are eliminated, so is the
possibility to distort them as a means of election deception. However, some
countries (such as Brazil) have moved in favor of integrating paper printouts
into the voting process.

One thing to consider is that the success of electronic voting rests directly in
the ability of the Electronic Voting Machines to function in the way the voting
district needs and prefers. Some of the greatest features of Electronic Voting
Machines may still be to come with developments in software and mechanical
functionality, especially those that would ensure accuracy, privacy and
verifiability.

© Gloria Lin and Nicole Espinoza 2007

Stanford University

https://cs.stanford.edu/people/eroberts/cs201/projects/2006-07/electronic-voting/index_files/page0001.html 1/1