Online voting increases voter turnout minimum 30%

[Riverwind]

As people vote online their names are still on the list but the computer will stroke out their name when a print out is requested

The current system relies on printed voter lists which are produced before the advance polls. If you vote in the advance polls your name is crossed off and if you tried to vote again they would see this because they use the same physical paper record that was used at the advance polls. There is no need to enter the list of people who voted at an advance poll into a computer.

Your system would only work if the voter lists were manually updated in the computer system and reprinted after the advance polls. This would be huge additional cost and would also be error prone. It is an effort that cannot be justified simply because a few people are too lazy to go the polls.

To make matters worse, the current system is not set up to print and distribute the voter lists the night before. Changing the system to require that the voter lists be printed the night before would create a logistical nightmare which would greatly incovenience the people who show up at the polls only to find they can't vote because the voters lists are not available.

The more you try to explain the more it becomes clear that the only way an online system could work is if it worked like the mail in ballot and people who regisiter for online voting are automatically removed from the voters list at that time. If they lose their PIN or forget to vote online they don't get to vote.

[CAMP]

The current system relies on printed voter lists which are produced before the advance polls. If you vote in the advance polls your name is crossed off and if you tried to vote again they would see this because they use the same physical paper record that was used at the advance polls. There is no need to enter the list of people who voted at an advance poll into a computer.

Your system would only work if the voter lists were manually updated in the computer system and reprinted after the advance polls. This would be huge additional cost and would also be error prone. It is an effort that cannot be justified simply because a few people are too lazy to go the polls.

To make matters worse, the current system is not set up to print and distribute the voter lists the night before. Changing the system to require that the voter lists be printed the night before would create a logistical nightmare which would greatly incovenience the people who show up at the polls only to find they can't vote because the voters lists are not available.

The more you try to explain the more it becomes clear that the only way an online system could work is if it worked like the mail in ballot and people who regisiter for online voting are automatically removed from the voters list at that time. If they lose their PIN or forget to vote online they don't get to vote.

Ok so you're talking about advanced polls of the mail (non electronic type) from people who are overseas or not able to walk in vote. These people would have their ballots done exactly as they are now manually inputted into a computer system. If a mail in ballot is requested the person must use it or lose their voting right. When a mail in vote is requested they are sent out, and at that time it would be entered into the computer system so you can't vote electronically or walk in.

Just a side note: did you know 32000 mail in votes from overseas failed to make the voting deadline due to everything from lost in the mail or just slow mail systems etc. Most of them showed up 2 to 3 weeks too late.

Wouldn't it be great if online voting was available so we could save on all the hubbub of snail mail? There would actually be savings. The logistics would be easily overcome for printing overnight, that's a simple matter of high speed printing which is readily available.

The scenario of lists not being available come walk in time is mute.

Yes if someone loses their pin or forgets to vote so be it... if you forget to walk in and vote you also lose it now. no difference. The main difference or advantage of electronic voting is it allows our soldiers, our students away from home, our snow birds out of country, or any other person who for what ever reason finds out short term they cannot be home for the walk in voting day, they are all able to vote easily and conveniently.

[Riverwind]

Ok so you're talking about advanced polls

No. I am taking about the advance WALK-IN polls. Every election has two or three advance polling days where people who are not able to vote on the election day can walk in and vote. 1.5 million votes were cast in these polls in the last election.

These advance WALK-IN polls require that the voter lists be printed up at a week before the actual vote. Your system could not work unless the online voting was cut off before the advance walk-in polls.

Yes if someone loses their pin or forgets to vote so be it... if you forget to walk in and vote you also lose it now. no difference.

Ok. But that means that people who wish to vote online must mail in a a request for a new PIN each time there is an election. This means the system would only be of interest to people who are willing to use the mail-in ballot system today. IOW, it is unlikely that such a system would increase voter turnout because going through the process of requesting a new PIN is more cumbersome than voting at the polls. Edited July 3, 2009 by Riverwind

[ToadBrother]

The capchas used by intelivote is only one of the levels of security, they also use a long number (Pin) and a password section could also be implemented (I'm going to check with Intelivote and see if it already is) and I know for sure personal questions are. There is also lock out access after 3 tries and a human intervention if necessary. There is a human monitoring of the system and alerted if someone is trying to hack. The online voting logistics works as such..... one week before the walk in polling begins the online starts. (This give 6 days to vote online) This has been shown to eliminate the overload problems. Then the night before the walk in polling begins the online voting is ended. The updated list of who has voted online is printed out and given to the walk in polls with names stroked out of those who have voted. Then the walk in poll carries on for the rest of the time.

Simple straight forward and effective.

Why are CAPTCHAs even being used at all? Are seriously question anyone producing an e-voting system that uses something so trivially breakable. And yes, even systems with lockouts can be cracked.

This just gets more frightening all the time.

[CAMP]

If do something requires that we make new criminal offenses then we should not be doing it all.

River there are laws in place already for selling votes, pins would likely fall under the same catagory.

Here is an email I received from Intelivote on the issue.

Hi Tom;

"One of the newest forms of "vote Selling" is being experienced in the US (and other countries), where voters completing a traditional paper ballot simply use their cell phone cameras and take a picture of their marked ballot behind the privacy screen to "prove" it was voted for the candidate they sold it to. Vote selling and buying has been going on for hundreds of years and irrespective of which method of voting is used, attending the polls, vote-by-mail, electronic voting or direct recording equipment, none of the methods prevents it.

Where voters want to sell their vote, either for a promise of future benefits, (often called campaigning J ), or for anything else, it is an illegal act and we occasionally hear that electronic voting makes the guarantee of a “purchased” vote easier to validate. If the person asking the question is asserting that when illegally buying a vote, the purchaser can now be assured that they are getting the actual vote cast for their candidate, then this is true but the fact of the matter is that the act is illegal. Which begs the question is their concern that there was never “honor amongst thieves” and this makes them feel better about their illegal attempted purchase."

[benny]

The current system relies on printed voter lists which are produced before the advance polls. If you vote in the advance polls your name is crossed off and if you tried to vote again they would see this because they use the same physical paper record that was used at the advance polls. There is no need to enter the list of people who voted at an advance poll into a computer.

Your system would only work if the voter lists were manually updated in the computer system and reprinted after the advance polls. This would be huge additional cost and would also be error prone. It is an effort that cannot be justified simply because a few people are too lazy to go the polls.

To make matters worse, the current system is not set up to print and distribute the voter lists the night before. Changing the system to require that the voter lists be printed the night before would create a logistical nightmare which would greatly incovenience the people who show up at the polls only to find they can't vote because the voters lists are not available.

The more you try to explain the more it becomes clear that the only way an online system could work is if it worked like the mail in ballot and people who regisiter for online voting are automatically removed from the voters list at that time. If they lose their PIN or forget to vote online they don't get to vote.

Paper is comforting only for the powerless. Nothing should be trusted easily in politics.

[CAMP]

Paper is comforting only for the powerless. Nothing should be trusted easily in politics.

That is a very true statement. We are powerless inbetween each 4 year mandate after an election. The only time we the people have the power is when there is an election. Electronic voting will open up the opportunity to quickly hold referendums or polls during a mandate so the people will have the power all the time!

[benny]

That is a very true statement. We are powerless inbetween each 4 year mandate after an election. The only time we the people have the power is when there is an election. Electronic voting will open up the opportunity to quickly hold referendums or polls during a mandate so the people will have the power all the time!

Yes. At first, I was wary that there are out there people who do not have internet access, not even a phone, but it comes to me that that was a static reasoning presupposing and maintaining powerlessness. Right now, people buy computers for all sorts of reason except political participation. When people will come to buy computers mainly to: first debate political matters and then vote (if there is no strong enough consensus), we will know that we have a democracy.

Edited July 3, 2009 by benny

[CAMP]

Yes. At first, I was wary that there are out there people who do not have internet access, not even a phone, but it comes to me that that was a static reasoning presupposing and maintaining powerlessness. Right now, people buy computers for all sorts of reason except political participation. When people will come to buy computers mainly to: first debate political matters and then vote (if there is no strong enough consensus), we will know that we have a democracy.

Those that do not have internet access would still have the walk in polls, as well they could go to their library or and internet cafe and use the computers there.

[benny]

Those that do not have internet access would still have the walk in polls, as well they could go to their library or and internet cafe and use the computers there.

Since, I think, we are entering an era prone to epidemics, elections requiring public gatherings may become shaky political events.

[capricorn]

Since, I think, we are entering an era prone to epidemics, elections requiring public gatherings may become shaky political events.

Do you think I should start wearing a mask when I go grocery shopping? Or am I jumping the gun here.

[benny]

Do you think I should start wearing a mask when I go grocery shopping? Or am I jumping the gun here.

Pandemics are in big part due to the fact that not growing ourselves the food we need has destroyed ecological barriers.

[CAMP]

Pandemics are in big part due to the fact that not growing ourselves the food we need has destroyed ecological barriers.

Actually you do have a point if a pandemic ever were to happen and an election coincided. I'd be voting on line if it were available.

Let's hope that never happens though.

[capricorn]

Actually you do have a point if a pandemic ever were to happen and an election coincided.

If the Liberals would not allow an election to take place during an economic recession, surely they wouldn't allow an election during a pandemic.

[CAMP]

If the Liberals would not allow an election to take place during an economic recession, surely they wouldn't allow an election during a pandemic.

Don't kid yourself, if the liberals thought they could win an election with a pandemic raging or anything else they'd do it.

[capricorn]

You're absolutely right CAMP. My post was tongue in cheek for which we don't have an emoticon.

[benny]

Epidemiologists often say about pandemics the question is not "if" but "when". But if our government is mishandling this next pandemic, it will have to be replaced quickly, in an election hopefully, during this plague.

[CAMP]

Epidemiologists often say about pandemics the question is not "if" but "when". But if our government is mishandling this next pandemic, it will have to be replaced quickly, in an election hopefully, during this plague.

Well at any rate I'd bet most of the population would be voting online if at all.

[benny]

Putting in place e-voting is I think urgent because more and more politicians worldwide right now are, like Ignatieff, what political philosophers call biopoliticians: that are, politicians who believe in the emergent logic of humanitarian or pacifist militarism: war is OK insofar as it really serves to create conditions for distributing humanitarian help.

[capricorn]

Benny, you're losing me here. First, e-voting is good in case of a pandemic, it's also good due to biopolitics which is somehow connected to a new type of militarilism. Keep going. You'll eventually cover the whole spectrum. I must say so far, your arguments have failed to convince me. "E" for effort.

Edited July 4, 2009 by capricorn

[benny]

Benny, you're losing me here. First, e-voting is good in case of a pandemic, it's also good due to biopolitics which is somehow connected to a new type of militarilism. Keep going. You'll eventually cover the whole spectrum. I must say so far, your arguments have failed to convince me. "E" for effort.

Politicians who can use a pandemic to start a world war (on a fake humanitarian motive) could rapidly take control of the world. If you want to die in the middle of this nightmare go on with your ill will.

[CAMP]

Politicians who can use a pandemic to start a world war (on a fake humanitarian motive) could rapidly take control of the world. If you want to die in the middle of this nightmare go on with your ill will.

Online voting if utilized properly can shift the power from the top bosse(s) of a political party back to the people, which will improve democracy greatly.

[benny]

Online voting if utilized properly can shift the power from the top bosse(s) of a political party back to the people, which will improve democracy greatly.

Around the world, people are ready to die for democratic reforms. These people are poor and sick although their countries often have lot of natural resources. More precisely, these people are poor and sick because their rulers have accepted kickbacks from foreign companies for these natural resources. The technologies these countries have are used to finance these rulers' luxurious and exclusive lifestyles. To end this corruption, the people have to take over technologies. The high dose of courage it will take to adopt online voting is the same courage we need to end political corruption. If Canada wants to show the best kind of leadership in the world, Canadians have to open themselves to high tech democratic processes.

Edited July 5, 2009 by benny

[CAMP]

Around the world, people are ready to die for democratic reforms. These people are poor and sick although their countries often have lot of natural resources. More precisely, these people are poor and sick because their rulers have accepted kickbacks from foreign companies for these natural resources. The technologies these countries have are used to finance these rulers' luxurious and exclusive lifestyles. To end this corruption, the people have to take over technologies. The high dose of courage it will take to adopt online voting is the same courage we need to end political corruption. If Canada wants to show the best kind of leadership in the world, Canadians have to open themselves to high tech democratic processes.

Well said benny, I think the UN should adopt and offer online voting as an independent monitor for 3rd world and oppressed countries, who's population are wanting to have a democratic election. Being able to offer this to a population of people who don't trust their government would be another very good way online voting could be utilized. This way the people would feel safe to vote if there is any danger from thugs or their own government. And a true result would be able to be made public. Just look at IRAN.

Edited July 5, 2009 by CAMP

[ToadBrother]

Pandemics are in big part due to the fact that not growing ourselves the food we need has destroyed ecological barriers.

Huh? Pandemics are caused because people move around, thus bringing the diseases with them. Pandemics require two things; mobile populations and a bug not so deadly that its kill rate pretty much wipes out everyone. Thus, the flu and the beubonic plague are perfect contagions for a pandemic, but Ebola is not.

Pandemics have been around forever. Wherever related populations have even marginal contact, there is the potential for the contagion to spread to many of the species' populations. The Black Death started in Asia, for instance, and was carried along the trade routes, reaching Western Europe within a few years, all before the age of modern transportation.

Unless your suggesting that agriculture might reclaim potentially contaminated land, what you've said (as usual) makes no sense whatsoever.