Interesting People mailing list archives
Re: E-voting in Japan
From: David Farber <dave () farber net>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 09:31:30 -0400
Begin forwarded message: From: Jonathan Thornburg <jthorn () aei mpg de> Date: May 29, 2007 3:21:59 AM EDT To: David Farber <dave () farber net> Cc: Jonathan Thornburg <jthorn () aei mpg de>, ip () v2 listbox com Subject: Re: [IP] Re: E-voting in Japan Geoff Kuenning wrote
[[details of complicated set of overlapping districts/things-being- voted-on]]A typical ballot in the U.S. includes 5 to 40 different votes.
It's certainly _possible_ to count ballots by hand, but it's inefficient, expensive
This is simply not true. If you run the system properly, hand vote-counting is efficient and no more expensive than elections already are (i.e. uses no personnel who are not already being payed to run the elections). The key is to (a) Have a sepraate ballot for each thing-being-voted-on (e.g. a ballot for the presidential election, a separate ballot for city council, a separate ballot for school board, a separate ballot for the state lawm-mowing commission) Typically different ballots are printed on different-colored and/or different-sized pieces of paper, to reduce the risk of confusing them. and (b) Have a separate ballot box for each thing-being-voted-on (with prominent signage saying "presidential ballots", "local dog-catcher ballots", etc). Then at the end of the day, you count each separate ballot box (by hand), with the counting watched by representatives of all the different political parties.
and slow.
In Canadian elections (which use just the system I described above), the typical time from polls closing to results being phoned to the central office is around 1 to 1.5 hours. The key *advantage* of hand counting is that it's *very* hard to commit widespread fraud -- or at least widespread fraud at at the vote-casting- -and-counting stage -- without getting caught: * Representatives of each political party get to inspect the ballot boxes before polls open, to verify that they're empty. * Representatives of each political party get to inspect the blank ballot papers to see that there's nothing prejudicial about them. * Representatives of each political party get to watch the voting process during the day to see that there are no political ads in voting booths, pressuring voters, running out of ballots, etc etc. * Representatives of each political party get to watch the ballots being counted. (The actual counting is done -- by hand -- by non-partisan election officials, but party representatives are right there watching.) It would take a fairly skilled "card-cheat" to palm ballots without being seen (given that s/he is being watched by several other people from all angles, including sometimes some standing behind and looking over the counter's shoulders). But more important, it would be *very* hard to do this on a scale massive enough to influence a major election, without getting caught -- this would require a network of thousands of "card cheats" being infiltrated into the election administration.
One could argue that it would be better to adopt the system used by some other countries, where the voter has to fill only one office, and parallelized hand counting can be completed in an evening. But that's not how things work in the U.S. right now.
Of course it's not how they work in the U.S. _right_now_ -- I thought this whole discussion was about how the system could be changed to reduce its vulnerability to <<insert well-known list of problems with current U.S. voting technology>>. ---- Jonathan Thornburg (remove -animal to reply) <J.Thornburg () soton ac- zebra.uk>
School of Mathematics, U of Southampton, England "Washing one's hands of the conflict between the powerful and the powerless means to side with the powerful, not to be neutral."-- quote by Freire / poster by Oxfam
------------------------------------------- Archives: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now RSS Feed: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/ Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Current thread:
- E-voting in Japan David Farber (May 26)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: E-voting in Japan David Farber (May 27)
- Re: E-voting in Japan David Farber (May 27)
- Re: E-voting in Japan David Farber (May 29)
- Re: E-voting in Japan David Farber (May 29)