The Irish Labour Party has produced an excellent report on the flawed introduction of electronic voting in Ireland. Shane Hogan and Robert Cochran, both labour members and IT experts, show with elegant precision just what is wrong with how e-voting is being introduced in Ireland.
It is depressing that in Ireland we often wait till a public policy has been introduced and discredited/heavily criticised elsewhere, and then implement it ourselves, taking no heed of others’ criticisms and the obvious problems. Tower-block public housing in the 1970s and the current push for healthcare centralisation come to mind. So too with e-voting.
All the problems that have arisen elsewhere in the last few years are present in Ireland, but with no clear plan to address them;
- absence of proper system testing, meaning the first ‘test’ will be next summer’s local and European elections.
- lack of paper trail for votes
- no formal, specific ‘on the day’ security measures for the software or voting computers.
It seems that in the rush to punch our scorecard on e-government, some basic questions have not been answered;
- is electronic voting better (i.e. more accurate, reliable, faster, cheaper) than hand-counting?
- if it’s not better on all fronts, then are the trade-offs worth it?
- if so, then what are we doing to make sure it really works?
The answers so far would seem to be ‘not sure’, ‘maybe’, and ‘diddly squat’. Hardly the ringing endorsement we should need for fiddling with tried and tested democratic processes.
The Labour report suggests that there won’t be any actual cost-savings on e-voting, because each machine will require a supervisor (what that does for anonymous voting, I couldn’t say.). It’s probably too early to say, but it looks like any cost savings may be marginal. So we’re not saving money. We might even lose some. What else are we going to lose?
I don’t know how other countries run things, but in Irish elections, the votes are counted in public. It’s actually quite an event. In a public hall, the votes are counted by the official counters, sitting at a large table which is cordoned off but visible to the public. Anyone can go and stand within three or so feet of the counters and count over their shoulders. And they do. Each political party or candidate makes damn sure to have their own ‘tallymen’ doing their own count. It means that at the end of the day (or more like 2 in the morning), everyone knows just how many votes and transfers each candidate won, and democracy lives to fight another day. Tallies are also an invaluable source of information for political parties and candidates, as they can let you know exactly where and how many your and your opposition’s votes were. They’re also extremely handy if your electoral system is the rather complex proportional representation with a single transferable vote in multi-seat constituencies. Multiple counts, eliminations and transfers are usually called for, and the wealth of experience and knowledge that passes from hand to hand goes a long way to ensuring the system works.
Foul play still happens of course, but it is easier to ferret out because you don’t have to be a statistician or a computer genius to spot it.
So again, the question, what do we gain with e-voting? Not to be too much of a luddite about it, but I don’t see that current e-voting systems add much to the democratic mix. They introduce what Mr. Ashcroft might call ‘unknown unknowns’, reduce transparency, have a marginal effect on costs, and create a whole new host of security concerns.
Shane Hogan and Robert Cochran propose a number of recommendations for the successful Irish adoption of e-voting. I support them all, and add that any such system should be independently run by an agency that is fully compliant with the security standard BS7799 / ISO 17799.
But above all, I would love for someone to tell me - ‘what is so wonderful about e-voting that we ditch a system that works, and works well, in favour of an unproven unknown?’
I had this exact discussion with a co-worker just the other day. I was talking about how it should be relatively easy to build a system with a paper trail, etc. and he asked me why we should go electronic at all. I’ll admit I was stumped. In Canada, all counting is done by volunteers (the theory being that any party with a non-trivial percentage of the vote can certainly muster up a volunteer or two for each electoral district). So electronic voting only adds cost (the only potential argument I can see).
Frankly, I don’t think that there is a good answer to your question. I think that — like myself before talking with my friend — folks just assume that it has to go electronic just like everything else. No one thinks to question why. Just imagine if Florida didn’t have any electronic voting equipment; we wouldn’t have had the butterfly ballot contoroversy or the chad controversy. And nothing was saved since they had to do hand counts in the end anyway.
You can pry my laptop from my cold, dead hands, but I think putting an X on a piece of paper next to my preferred candidate’s name is a fine way to choose government.
My own feeling - based purely on the anecdotal evidence of working as an election judge in an election that was partially electronically counted and partially hand counted - is that electronic systems are almost certainly more reliable. The possibilities of accidentally pulling two ballots instead of one (and thus missing a vote), or mistakenly viewing a stack of ballots as already counted, are great enough in hand counting that I have more faith in an electronic system. It is also clear that hand counting of a full U.S. ballot (with all of the different offices, ballot measures, etc.) would require a substantial time investment on the part of official counters. Assuming that official counters are paid employees (even though they are typically not well-paid), there would be substantially higher day-of-election expenses associated with hand-counting (although whether those costs increase enough to justify the use of moderately expensive voting systems could still require analysis)
Thus, I would slightly revise the answer to the first of Maria’s questions to “Unsure, but probably so”. Of course, that still leaves the problems tied to her second two questions, for which I would not quibble with her “maybe” and “diddly squat” answers.
Just to provide a point of comparison - in my experience in the State of Minnesota, the polls had to be staffed by a mix of people from each party. When we did the hand counting of ballots - one representative of each party sat next to each other, and counted the ballots together. This sounds like it may be slightly more costly than the Irish model (there are 2 official counters on the time clock - rather than just one overseen by volunteers from the parties), but should yield results of comparable reliability.
Finally, the question of how many hand counts were actually done, let alone should have been done, is fraught with some contention. However, dete is slightly incorrect - hand counts were not done in general across Florida (I believe that they were only conducted in three counties, and at least one of the three (Dade) did not complete the hand recount. I am not certain, but I seem to recall that in Dade county, none of the hand recount was included in the final official totals, since the Secretary of State would not allow a partial update.)
À Gauche
Jeremy Alder
Amaravati
Anggarrgoon
Audhumlan Conspiracy
H.E. Baber
Philip Blosser
Paul Broderick
Matt Brown
Diana Buccafurni
Brandon Butler
Keith Burgess-Jackson
Certain Doubts
David Chalmers
Noam Chomsky
The Conservative Philosopher
Desert Landscapes
Denis Dutton
David Efird
Karl Elliott
David Estlund
Experimental Philosophy
Fake Barn County
Kai von Fintel
Russell Arben Fox
Garden of Forking Paths
Roger Gathman
Michael Green
Scott Hagaman
Helen Habermann
David Hildebrand
John Holbo
Christopher Grau
Jonathan Ichikawa
Tom Irish
Michelle Jenkins
Adam Kotsko
Barry Lam
Language Hat
Language Log
Christian Lee
Brian Leiter
Stephen Lenhart
Clayton Littlejohn
Roderick T. Long
Joshua Macy
Mad Grad
Jonathan Martin
Matthew McGrattan
Marc Moffett
Geoffrey Nunberg
Orange Philosophy
Philosophy Carnival
Philosophy, et cetera
Philosophy of Art
Douglas Portmore
Philosophy from the 617 (moribund)
Jeremy Pierce
Punishment Theory
Geoff Pynn
Timothy Quigley (moribund?)
Conor Roddy
Sappho's Breathing
Anders Schoubye
Wolfgang Schwartz
Scribo
Michael Sevel
Tom Stoneham (moribund)
Adam Swenson
Peter Suber
Eddie Thomas
Joe Ulatowski
Bruce Umbaugh
What is the name ...
Matt Weiner
Will Wilkinson
Jessica Wilson
Young Hegelian
Richard Zach
Psychology
Donyell Coleman
Deborah Frisch
Milt Rosenberg
Tom Stafford
Law
Ann Althouse
Stephen Bainbridge
Jack Balkin
Douglass A. Berman
Francesca Bignami
BlunkettWatch
Jack Bogdanski
Paul L. Caron
Conglomerate
Jeff Cooper
Disability Law
Displacement of Concepts
Wayne Eastman
Eric Fink
Victor Fleischer (on hiatus)
Peter Friedman
Michael Froomkin
Bernard Hibbitts
Walter Hutchens
InstaPundit
Andis Kaulins
Lawmeme
Edward Lee
Karl-Friedrich Lenz
Larry Lessig
Mirror of Justice
Eric Muller
Nathan Oman
Opinio Juris
John Palfrey
Ken Parish
Punishment Theory
Larry Ribstein
The Right Coast
D. Gordon Smith
Lawrence Solum
Peter Tillers
Transatlantic Assembly
Lawrence Velvel
David Wagner
Kim Weatherall
Yale Constitution Society
Tun Yin
History
Blogenspiel
Timothy Burke
Rebunk
Naomi Chana
Chapati Mystery
Cliopatria
Juan Cole
Cranky Professor
Greg Daly
James Davila
Sherman Dorn
Michael Drout
Frog in a Well
Frogs and Ravens
Early Modern Notes
Evan Garcia
George Mason History bloggers
Ghost in the Machine
Rebecca Goetz
Invisible Adjunct (inactive)
Jason Kuznicki
Konrad Mitchell Lawson
Danny Loss
Liberty and Power
Danny Loss
Ether MacAllum Stewart
Pam Mack
Heather Mathews
James Meadway
Medieval Studies
H.D. Miller
Caleb McDaniel
Marc Mulholland
Received Ideas
Renaissance Weblog
Nathaniel Robinson
Jacob Remes (moribund?)
Christopher Sheil
Red Ted
Time Travelling Is Easy
Brian Ulrich
Shana Worthen
Computers/media/communication
Lauren Andreacchi (moribund)
Eric Behrens
Joseph Bosco
Danah Boyd
David Brake
Collin Brooke
Maximilian Dornseif (moribund)
Jeff Erickson
Ed Felten
Lance Fortnow
Louise Ferguson
Anne Galloway
Jason Gallo
Josh Greenberg
Alex Halavais
Sariel Har-Peled
Tracy Kennedy
Tim Lambert
Liz Lawley
Michael O'Foghlu
Jose Luis Orihuela (moribund)
Alex Pang
Sebastian Paquet
Fernando Pereira
Pink Bunny of Battle
Ranting Professors
Jay Rosen
Ken Rufo
Douglas Rushkoff
Vika Safrin
Rob Schaap (Blogorrhoea)
Frank Schaap
Robert A. Stewart
Suresh Venkatasubramanian
Ray Trygstad
Jill Walker
Phil Windley
Siva Vaidahyanathan
Anthropology
Kerim Friedman
Alex Golub
Martijn de Koning
Nicholas Packwood
Geography
Stentor Danielson
Benjamin Heumann
Scott Whitlock
Education
Edward Bilodeau
Jenny D.
Richard Kahn
Progressive Teachers
Kelvin Thompson (defunct?)
Mark Byron
Business administration
Michael Watkins (moribund)
Literature, language, culture
Mike Arnzen
Brandon Barr
Michael Berube
The Blogora
Colin Brayton
John Bruce
Miriam Burstein
Chris Cagle
Jean Chu
Hans Coppens
Tyler Curtain
Cultural Revolution
Terry Dean
Joseph Duemer
Flaschenpost
Kathleen Fitzpatrick
Jonathan Goodwin
Rachael Groner
Alison Hale
Household Opera
Dennis Jerz
Jason Jones
Miriam Jones
Matthew Kirschenbaum
Steven Krause
Lilliputian Lilith
Catherine Liu
John Lovas
Gerald Lucas
Making Contact
Barry Mauer
Erin O'Connor
Print Culture
Clancy Ratcliff
Matthias Rip
A.G. Rud
Amardeep Singh
Steve Shaviro
Thanks ... Zombie
Vera Tobin
Chuck Tryon
University Diaries
Classics
Michael Hendry
David Meadows
Religion
AKM Adam
Ryan Overbey
Telford Work (moribund)
Library Science
Norma Bruce
Music
Kyle Gann
ionarts
Tim Rutherford-Johnson
Greg Sandow
Scott Spiegelberg
Biology/Medicine
Pradeep Atluri
Bloviator
Anthony Cox
Susan Ferrari (moribund)
Amy Greenwood
La Di Da
John M. Lynch
Charles Murtaugh (moribund)
Paul Z. Myers
Respectful of Otters
Josh Rosenau
Universal Acid
Amity Wilczek (moribund)
Theodore Wong (moribund)
Physics/Applied Physics
Trish Amuntrud
Sean Carroll
Jacques Distler
Stephen Hsu
Irascible Professor
Andrew Jaffe
Michael Nielsen
Chad Orzel
String Coffee Table
Math/Statistics
Dead Parrots
Andrew Gelman
Christopher Genovese
Moment, Linger on
Jason Rosenhouse
Vlorbik
Peter Woit
Complex Systems
Petter Holme
Luis Rocha
Cosma Shalizi
Bill Tozier
Chemistry
"Keneth Miles"
Engineering
Zack Amjal
Chris Hall
University Administration
Frank Admissions (moribund?)
Architecture/Urban development
City Comforts (urban planning)
Unfolio
Panchromatica
Earth Sciences
Our Take
Who Knows?
Bitch Ph.D.
Just Tenured
Playing School
Professor Goose
This Academic Life
Other sources of information
Arts and Letters Daily
Boston Review
Imprints
Political Theory Daily Review
Science and Technology Daily Review