Technology, we're told, can and will make lives easier. That's true -- but only partially true. When it comes to elections, what happened in Iowa proves that our faith in technology has been misplaced. Robin Sears writes:
The debacle in Iowa, like the one that struck Democrats and Republicans there before, and most infamously the one that denied Al Gore the presidency in 2000, have one feature in common. The increasing reliance of American elections on electronics, not paper. Bytes not bits, as it were.
Yes, sometimes they have “hanging chads” debates where human eyes try to second guess a computer’s count. Sometimes they have an informal paper record of local votes by precinct captains. But rarely do they have the almost religious ritual and security procedures that protect the integrity of Canadian paper-based balloting.
Ballots can be stolen, stuffed, burned, and forged, yes. Even that’s hard to do in a system where they are protected by a praetorian guard of election officials. But they can never, in their thousands, be made to disappear at a key stroke. Or worse, be made to generate a different outcome and victor than voters intended — as malfunctioning technology or malign interference can do in a microsecond.
Technology can be useful. However, in elections, Canada has developed a middle ground:
A paper ballot remains the foundation, but it is often electronically counted. That count, however, is backed by a paper ballot and a paper tally sheet generated by the computer. Let’s experiment with online voting, but build it so there is a full reconstruction possible on paper.
When it comes to elections, we need a paper trail. And we need paper trails in other parts of our lives:
There is a reason that as heavily technologically dependent a nation as Japan favours cash more heavily than any other rich country. Yes, it is probably tax “management” in some cases. But mostly it is the security that comes from giving or receiving “real money” as incontrovertible proof of payment or sale. There is a reason that Americans cling to cheque writing more than any other rich nation. You sign a piece of paper yourself, and your bank is compelled to return it or a facsimile as proof of payment.
The underlying fear is often, bits versus bytes, once more. A bank’s computers can fail or be made to. Successful fraudulent digital transactions happen a lot. Or as we saw in the Libor currency trading scandal, verbal signals between conspiring traders can be transformed into digital fraud undetectably.
Of the billions lost to credit card fraud annually, how much would be possible with an ability to create an end-to-end paper trail of every step? Some argue blockchain technology offers the same level of accountability as paper documents, but millions of bitcoins have already been fraudulently traded successfully.
As with banks, paper guarantees legitimacy. As anyone who has lived through a Canadian winter knows, when the power goes down, lots of things don't work.
Image: CDPH-CA.gov
10 comments:
The Americans have been having mucked up elections for so long that I assume malicious interference is intended.
It goes back a long way, Toby. But Richard Nixon put electoral maliciousness on the map.
Our balloting is demonstrably superior to America's voting machine system. But there's more. We provide far more polling stations. The Americans don't seem to consider polling stations desirable, especially in minority neighbourhoods. Voters don't have to wait for hours in long lines at the mercy of the elements as is often the case in the States. We mandate time off on election day for voting.
From gerrymandering to voter suppression, even electoral fraud, the US has no tradition of free and fair elections. And, as near as I can tell, they're fine with it.
High Tech
....another present-day deity, majority-worshipped obsessively.
Over the last twenty years, the Republicans have worked very hard to supress votes, Mound. I read last week that the 47 senators who voted for witnesses in Trump's trial represent 53% of the American population.
And it is a god that frequently fails, Tal.
My suspicion has always been some one or several some ones decided to take the U.S.A. into electronic voting for the express purpose of fraud. Its so much easier. If you want to rig an election a computer is the best way to do it.
Personally don't trust computers and use money to pay for most of my purchases. It makes it less easy for fraudsters to access my account. Japanese consumers are much smarter than we are.
The news in the past week or so has been reporting on how banks are avoiding responsibility for technical fraud. when computers first came into banking, they banks usually "ate" the cost, but now that consumers have "drunk the cool aid" the banks have new "agreements" and its the consumer who is ripped off and then forced to pay again. Banks will still make their profits but consumers are being hit hard. It may be time for people to go back to using real cash. Banks like it when there are electronic methods of banking. It requires less staff and less staff means higher profits.
Voting in the U.S.A. was never meant for the average person. It was meant for the landed males. When voting had to be extended to women, minorities, etc. out came the electronic methods which would/could be "fixed" to ensure the white males continued control of government. Some of the line ups I've seen on election day in the U.S.A. simply boggles the mind. Even in rural areas of B.C. you could hop on a bike to get to your polling station. America has never been a democracy.
Sometimes, e.a.f, the old methods are still the best methods.
I have no faith in the process when machines are involved in voting. They just have to cheat a little to reverse the margins. Moreover, to avoid attention minimizing the cheating is a necessity. I'd like to see valid cost comparisons.
Anyone who owns an electronic calculator knows that all you have to do to screw things up is to press the wrong button, John.
Post a Comment