IP: Re: vote trading and Internet voting

[Dave Farber <farber () cis upenn edu>]

> X-Sender: >X-Sender: brett@localhost
> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2
> Date: Fri, 03 Nov 2000 10:16:34 -0700
> To: farber () cis upenn edu, ip-sub-1 () majordomo pobox com
> From: Brett Glass <brett () lariat org>
> Subject: Re: IP: vote trading and Internet voting
>
> At 04:36 AM 11/3/2000, Ed Gerck wrote:
>
> > I also think that enforcement of no vote trading would require as a
> > minimum a violation of individual privacy.
>
> It is often the case that movements which advocate the violation of
> law are telltale signs of bad law and/or a badly engineered system.
>
> In this case, the problems with existing law are twofold. First, the
> archaic mechanism known as the Electoral College effectively
> disenfranchises voters in states which are dominated by a single
> political party and/or wish to vote for third party candidates. I
> live in the state of Wyoming, and know that it matters not one bit
> how I vote; my state's Electoral College votes will be cast for
> Republican candidate du jour regardless of whom I would choose.
>
> The second, related problem is that voters cannot indicate a
> second choice. A "single transferable vote" system would allow
> a voter who favored a third party candidate to say, "This third
> party candidate is my first choice, but if s/he cannot win, cast
> my vote for this second choice." This system avoids the dilemma
> being faced by voters in this election who endorse the views of
> Ralph Nader, but realize that if they vote for him they may
> compromise their second choice (Al Gore) and send the politician
> they LEAST favor (George W. Bush) to the White House.
>
> --Brett Glass