tag:theconversation.com,2011:/ca/topics/voting-system-14677/articlesVoting system – The Conversation2023-02-22T10:35:24Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2001252023-02-22T10:35:24Z2023-02-22T10:35:24ZNigerian elections are crowded with candidates: use this new tool to decide who to vote for in your area<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/511630/original/file-20230222-18-c8nmnb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">A group of voters showing their cards. </span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/residents-queue-to-cast-their-vote-during-the-edo-state-news-photo/1228601489?phrase=nigeria%20voting&adppopup=true"> Olukayode Jaiyeola/NurPhoto via Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p><a href="https://inecnigeria.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Final-List-of-Candidates-for-National-Elections-1.pdf">Eighteen political parties</a> are contesting for Nigeria’s presidential elections scheduled for 25 February. Yes, 18 parties. But that’s not the highest number of parties in Nigeria’s election history. The record was in February 2019, when <a href="https://www.premiumtimesng.com/news/313139-for-the-record-nigerias-73-presidential-candidates-full-list.html?tztc=1">73 political parties</a> presented presidential candidates. </p>
<p>In the 2023 elections, the Nigerian media have devoted most of their attention to four parties and their candidates. This leaves an information gap about the others. And the presidency is just one position being filled. There are hundreds of other political posts that will be determined. </p>
<p>To fill the gaps, a new election tool has been launched which will help voters decide who to cast their ballot for – and where.</p>
<h2>The tracker</h2>
<p>The tool, called <a href="https://mycandidate-nigeria.opencitieslab.org/">My Candidate Nigeria</a>, is an initiative that falls under the <a href="https://datahub.io/docs/about">Africa Data Hub</a>. Its aim is to inform voters and strengthen democracy. </p>
<p>The tool helps voters in Nigeria identify candidates for the elections based on their location address. </p>
<p>You can try it and discover who the candidates are and where to vote. </p>
<iframe src="https://mycandidate-nigeria.opencitieslab.org/" allow="geolocation" style="border: none;width: 100%; height:100vw" width="100%" height="400"></iframe>
<h2>Focus on a few</h2>
<p>The tool is important because the media has tended to focus on just a few candidates and their parties:</p>
<ul>
<li><p><a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-61732548">Bola Tinubu</a> of the All Progressives Congress</p></li>
<li><p><a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-61865502">Peter Obi</a> of the Labour Party</p></li>
<li><p><a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-47046599">Atiku Abubakar</a> of the Peoples Democratic Party</p></li>
<li><p><a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-64503296">Rabiu Kwankwaso</a> of the New Nigeria People’s Party. </p></li>
</ul>
<p>Some of the other candidates vying for presidency include former student leader <a href="https://saharareporters.com/2023/01/21/aac-flag-bearer-sowore-condemns-lopsided-sitting-arrangement-nigerian-presidential">Omoyele Sowore</a>, contesting under the banner of the African Action Congress, and <a href="https://guardian.ng/news/sdp-elects-adewole-adebayo-as-presidential-candidate/">Adewole Adebayo</a> of the Social Democratic Party. <a href="https://www.vanguardngr.com/2023/01/i-will-deal-decisively-with-secessionists-kola-abiola-vows/">Kola Abiola</a> is contesting on the ticket of the People’s Redemption Party. We also have <a href="https://www.thisdaylive.com/index.php/2022/06/09/abachas-ex-cso-al-mustapha-emerges-action-alliance-presidential-candidate/">Hamza Al-Mustapha</a> flying the flag of Action Alliance, and <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frwqZpuOFug">Dumebi Kachikwu</a> of the African Democratic Congress. <a href="https://businessday.ng/politics/article/an-amazon-in-the-midst-of-17-men-the-story-of-apms-presidential-candidate-chichi-ojei/">Chichi Ojei</a> of the Allied Peoples Movement is the only female presidential candidate. </p>
<h2>Hundreds of choices</h2>
<p><a href="https://theconversation.com/how-to-poll-93-million-voters-the-challenge-of-pulling-off-nigerias-presidential-elections-199761">There are 1,101 candidates for the Senate and 3,122 candidates</a> vying for federal constituencies in the House of Representatives. The elections will be conducted across 176,606 polling stations. </p>
<p>In terms of gender, <a href="https://guardian.ng/news/2023-inec-publishes-final-list-of-candidates/">3,875 candidates are male</a>, made up of 35 for presidential and vice-president, 1,008 for Senate and 2,832 for House of Representatives.</p>
<p>Meanwhile 381 women are contesting: one for president, 92 for Senate and 288 for House of Representatives. There are also 11 people with disabilities in the race.</p>
<p><a href="https://theconversation.com/how-to-poll-93-million-voters-the-challenge-of-pulling-off-nigerias-presidential-elections-199761">A total of 1,265,227 officials</a> have been trained and will be deployed for the elections. They include presiding, collation and returning officers, as well as 530,538 polling unit security officials. The electoral commission will deploy over one million personnel and large quantities of election materials to 774 local government areas, 8,809 electoral wards and 176,846 polling units across the country.</p>
<p>The increased participation of young Nigerians is noticeable. <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-01-12/71-million-young-nigerians-have-registered-to-vote-in-next-month-s-election">Seventy-one million young Nigerians</a> registered to vote in the elections, out of the total of 93.5 million registered voters. Young here means those who are under 50 years. Nearly 40% of those who registered are under 35 <a href="https://www.premiumtimesng.com/news/headlines/575140-2023-polls-youth-population-tops-age-distribution-chart-as-inec-presents-list-of-93-4-registered-voters.html">while over 33 million</a> and 35.75% are between the ages of 35 and 49. It follows that those between 18 and 49 years could determine these elections if enough of them turn out to vote. </p>
<p>And that is why this tracker might help as young Nigerians are more technologically driven. They should be able to navigate their way through the electoral maze using it. It’s intended to help voters make better and more informed choices. </p>
<p><em>MyCandidate Nigeria is an initiative of Open Cities Lab in collaboration with Orodata Science, Accountability Lab Nigeria and OdipoDev. Orodata Science, based in Lagos, is leading the project. Their mission is to establish a data-literate world. Open Cities Lab is a non-profit organisation that creates tools to improve trust and accountability in the civic space. And Odipodev is a market research and data journalism lab based in Kenya.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/200125/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Hakeem Onapajo does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>A digital tool to help citizens know the candidates better has been developed for Nigeria’s 2023 elections.Hakeem Onapajo, Senior Lecturer in the Department of Political Science and International Relations, Nile University of NigeriaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1980432023-01-23T13:23:42Z2023-01-23T13:23:42ZBrazil, US show that secure elections require agreement – not just cybersecurity and clear ballot records<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/505461/original/file-20230119-16-wyk99q.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=48%2C0%2C5395%2C3585&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Protesters who support Brazil's former President Jair Bolsonaro storm the National Congress building in Brasilia, Brazil, on Jan. 8, 2023.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://newsroom.ap.org/detail/BrazilCapitalUprisingUSParallels/44951e0600af437097a3ffecdb1bab34/photo">AP Photo/Eraldo Peres</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>There are a number of ways to run a legitimate election. But the U.S. has learned in recent years, and Brazil learned in recent weeks, that it’s not always simple. </p>
<p>There are technical mechanics and processes of how votes are cast, collected and counted. But those are ultimately less important than the agreement – among opposing parties, and across a society – to abide by the results of those processes.</p>
<p>In 2020, President Donald Trump <a href="https://www.c-span.org/video/?506975-1/president-trump-statement-2020-election-results">alleged</a>, without evidence, that election fraud in several states had caused him to lose. A number of audits in various states <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-courts-election/fact-check-courts-have-dismissed-multiple-lawsuits-of-alleged-electoral-fraud-presented-by-trump-campaign-idUSKBN2AF1G1">found no evidence</a> that irregularities in voting or vote counting processes had any effect on the outcome of balloting in those states. </p>
<p>Some of these results were later challenged in lawsuits seeking to alter the results of the election, and <a href="https://judicature.duke.edu/articles/2020-election-litigation-the-courts-held/">in every case, the election’s outcome was determined to be accurate</a>.</p>
<p>Though the vast majority of these questions and checks and court decisions concluded before Congress met to count Electoral College votes on Jan. 6, 2021, Donald Trump’s supporters and <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2023/01/12/proud-boys-trial-openings/">a number of militia groups</a> stormed the U.S. Capitol in an attempt to stop the counting and have Trump declared president. </p>
<p>In Brazil in late 2022, incumbent president Jair Bolsonaro lost an election to Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, a former president seeking a return to office. Even before the election, Bolsonaro had <a href="https://theconversation.com/brazil-insurrection-how-so-many-brazilians-came-to-attack-their-own-government-197547">cast doubt on the integrity</a> of the country’s voting system. On Jan. 8, 2023, after Lula had been in office for a week, thousands of Bolsonaro supporters, including right-wing militants, <a href="https://theconversation.com/democracy-under-attack-in-brazil-5-questions-about-the-storming-of-congress-and-the-role-of-the-military-197396">attacked key government buildings</a>, including the building that houses the national Congress.</p>
<p>As a <a href="https://fsi.stanford.edu/people/herbert_lin">scholar</a> who studies election integrity and cybersecurity, I see the source of these violent disputes not as the result of procedural or technical flaws in the voting system but rather as a failure of certain individuals living in democratic society to uphold the fundamental principles of democracy.</p>
<h2>A set of principles</h2>
<p>I and others in my field tend to agree, and think most regular people would too, that election officials should aspire to the following basic criteria:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>Every person with a legal right to vote is able to cast a ballot in a given election.</p></li>
<li><p>No person without a legal right to vote is able to cast a ballot.</p></li>
<li><p>No person is allowed to cast more than one ballot.</p></li>
<li><p>Every ballot unambiguously indicates the voter’s preference.</p></li>
<li><p>Every ballot cast by a legally legitimate voter is counted, but no other ballots are counted.</p></li>
<li><p>No ballot cast can be associated with the voter who cast the ballot (that is, voters can maintain the secrecy of their ballots). </p></li>
</ul>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/505463/original/file-20230119-5268-3rswb5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="People, some wearing masks and hats, enter a doorway." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/505463/original/file-20230119-5268-3rswb5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/505463/original/file-20230119-5268-3rswb5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/505463/original/file-20230119-5268-3rswb5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/505463/original/file-20230119-5268-3rswb5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/505463/original/file-20230119-5268-3rswb5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/505463/original/file-20230119-5268-3rswb5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/505463/original/file-20230119-5268-3rswb5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Protesters in Brazil storm the Planalto Palace, the official workplace of the nation’s president, on Jan. 8, 2023.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://newsroom.ap.org/detail/BrazilCapitalUprisingUSParallels/6d12a75274984ef6a4b01d6b855fb747/photo">AP Photo/Eraldo Peres</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>To help uphold these standards, many election security analysts, <a href="https://theconversation.com/iowa-caucuses-did-one-thing-right-require-paper-ballots-131181">including me</a>, believe that paper records are an essential element of electronic voting systems. They leave open the possibility of recounting ballots in the event of a claim that electronic ballots were counted incorrectly. In general, only people who appear to have lost elections make these claims, though some states’ laws require automatic recounts when the margin of difference is small.</p>
<p>But Brazil has <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/10/25/world/americas/brazil-bolsonaro-misinformation.html">done away with paper voting</a> entirely. The nation’s election officials take many measures to ensure that the electronic voting machines are working properly and are not tampered with, including testing a large sampling of the machines on Election Day, obtaining third-party analysis of at least parts of their software, and ensuring they are not connected to the internet, to increase their protection from hackers.</p>
<p>But no combination of these measures, nor any of the other protections, such as public posting of vote tallies and requiring voters to use fingerprints to unlock voting machines or to present photo identification to poll workers, is completely foolproof.</p>
<p>Paper ballots aren’t foolproof, either: <a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/former-congressman-charged-ballot-stuffing-bribery-and-obstruction">Fraudulent ballots</a> could potentially be manufactured and inserted into the counting process without being detected. Ballots can be irretrievably destroyed after being cast. <a href="https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/what-election-officials-think-about-paper-ballots-and-voting-machines">Improperly made marks</a> on a ballot may not clearly indicate the voter’s intent. Humans engaged in the mind-numbing effort of counting thousands of ballots get tired and make mistakes. Counting paper ballots takes considerable time that disgruntled parties can use to sow unfounded doubts about election integrity.</p>
<p>Intelligently designed paper-based voting systems take measures to ameliorate all of these problems. But just as in the case of electronic voting, it is ultimately a matter of human judgment about whether those protections result in an acceptable level of security. And guaranteeing 100% security in an election is essentially impossible.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/505466/original/file-20230119-16562-1oc7rx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="People in masks and hats move through a doorway." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/505466/original/file-20230119-16562-1oc7rx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/505466/original/file-20230119-16562-1oc7rx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/505466/original/file-20230119-16562-1oc7rx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/505466/original/file-20230119-16562-1oc7rx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/505466/original/file-20230119-16562-1oc7rx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/505466/original/file-20230119-16562-1oc7rx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/505466/original/file-20230119-16562-1oc7rx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Supporters of President Donald Trump storm the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://newsroom.ap.org/detail/Brazil%20Capital%20Uprising%20US%20Parallels/dbfb25e37d9649d5a0e1cb1c3fdbc892">AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Elections are necessary</h2>
<p>Despite the inevitable flaws in voting and counting, democracies need to conduct elections. They must <a href="https://theconversation.com/good-faith-and-the-honor-of-partisan-election-officials-used-to-be-enough-to-ensure-trust-in-voting-results-but-not-anymore-189510">choose election officials</a> for whom <a href="https://theconversation.com/im-an-election-law-expert-who-ran-a-polling-station-this-election-heres-what-i-learned-about-the-powerful-role-of-local-officials-in-applying-the-law-fairly-193379">the public’s confidence in the security of the elections</a> is more important than any partisan outcome. </p>
<p>Another key element of election integrity comes from the candidates. It’s important to <a href="https://theconversation.com/this-election-was-not-hacked-but-it-was-attacked-67511">public confidence in elections</a> that candidates be willing to express their own support for the voting system, including whatever measures are set up for integrity and recounting, even if that system delivers them a loss.</p>
<p>The basic proposition of democracy is that all candidates agree to a particular process, election managers do their best to ensure that process unfolds fairly, and everyone abides by whatever the results are, no matter who winds up losing. </p>
<p>Without mutual agreement on process, it is impossible to have an uncontested election, because a candidate who doesn’t like the outcome can always claim – even without evidence – that it was somehow unfair. </p>
<p>True democracies require candidates who agree on election rules and processes in advance and agree to abide by the outcome of elections, even when they wish the results were otherwise. The alternative is continuing instability and doubt in the electorate – an outcome that serves no citizen’s interests.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/198043/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Herbert Lin has received funding indirectly from the Hewlett Foundation through Stanford University. He is a registered Republican but who he supports is a different matter. </span></em></p>The chaos in Brazil’s capital, along with the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection in the US, demonstrate that there is a key human factor in election integrity.Herbert Lin, Senior Research Scholar for Cyber Policy and Security, Center for International Security and Cooperation, Stanford UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1761022022-03-18T12:35:29Z2022-03-18T12:35:29ZSome states are making it harder to vote, some are making it easier – but it’s too soon to say if this will affect voter turnout in 2022<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/451981/original/file-20220314-23-xu0v5d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Mail-in ballots for the California recall election are processed in Pomona, Calif., on Sept. 9, 2021.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://media.gettyimages.com/photos/mailin-ballots-for-the-california-recall-election-are-processed-at-picture-id1235148643?s=2048x2048">Frederic J. Brown/AFP via Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>There’s been a good deal of crying foul about <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jul/08/supreme-court-voting-rights-act-arizona-restrictions">what are being called anti-democratic</a> new state laws that make it harder to vote. </p>
<p>But it turns out such laws might have little impact on voter turnout and vote margins in an election. </p>
<p>That’s according to a <a href="https://centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/articles/why-voter-suppression-probably-wont-work/">February 2022 analysis</a> by Sabato’s Crystal Ball, a newsletter that provides nonpartisan election analysis.</p>
<p>The 2020 presidential election had the highest voter turnout of the past century, with <a href="https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2021/2020-presidential-election-voting-and-registration-tables-now-available.html">66.8% of citizens 18 years and older voting</a> in the election. </p>
<p>Robust voter turnout could be the difference maker in the 2022 midterm election. Voter <a href="https://www.fairvote.org/voter_turnout#voter_turnout_101">turnout for midterm elections</a> is typically lower than for presidential elections. </p>
<p>All 435 seats in the House of Representatives and 35 of the 100 Senate seats <a href="https://www.cfr.org/blog/2022-midterm-congressional-elections-numbers">will be up for grabs during the election</a>. Democrats hold slim majorities in both chambers. If Republicans are able to increase the number, they will likely <a href="https://fiscalnote.com/blog/2022-midterm-elections-preview-predictions">flip control</a> of both chambers in their favor. </p>
<p>As a <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=KWv69ZkAAAAJ&hl=en">political scientist</a>, I study state <a href="https://doi.org/10.1093/publius/pjz013">voting and elections rules</a>. Voting is important to a healthy democracy because it is how we consent to being governed and let elected officials know what policies we want.</p>
<p>Voting laws also protect against voter fraud. Thanks to these laws, <a href="https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/ap-review-finds-far-too-little-vote-fraud-to-tip-2020-election-to-trump">election fraud in the United States is very rare</a> and typically has no impact on the election outcome. </p>
<p>Sometimes these rules can create burdens <a href="https://www.basicbooks.com/titles/alexander-keyssar/the-right-to-vote/9780465005024/">for citizens who want to vote</a>. This can lead to citizens’ <a href="https://www.oxfordhandbooks.com/view/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190274801.001.0001/oxfordhb-9780190274801-e-17">losing trust in their government</a>. Citizens’ losing trust in the government can be <a href="https://news.uchicago.edu/story/why-public-distrust-could-prove-corrosive-us-democracy">harmful to our democracy</a>.</p>
<p>It is too soon to say the full effect that these new voting laws will have in shaping the 2022 elections.</p>
<p><iframe id="4CKbf" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/4CKbf/2/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<h2>New laws might not make voting easier or harder</h2>
<p>During the <a href="https://www.ncsl.org/portals/1/Documents/ncsl/2021_session_calendar.pdf">2021 legislative</a> sessions, 36 states adopted legislation <a href="https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/voting-laws-roundup-december-2021">that change the way citizens vote</a>. </p>
<p>Most of these recent laws don’t make voting easier or harder. They <a href="https://theconversation.com/claims-of-voter-suppression-in-newly-enacted-state-laws-dont-all-hold-up-under-closer-review-165414">make the process easier</a> for the state and local officials who run elections. </p>
<p>For example, <a href="https://www.sltrib.com/news/politics/2022/02/04/utahs-new-voters-would/">a new law in Utah</a> improves communication between the Social Security Administration and election officials to ensure that dead voters are removed from voter registration lists.</p>
<h2>States making it harder to vote</h2>
<p>Nineteen states, meanwhile, enacted 33 laws that can <a href="https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/voting-laws-roundup-october-2021">make it harder</a> for Americans to vote, according to the Brennan Center for Justice.</p>
<p>In Texas, for example, a 2021 law requires voters to provide part of their Social Security or driver’s license number on their <a href="https://capitol.texas.gov/tlodocs/871/billtext/pdf/SB00001E.pdf#navpanes=0">mail-in ballot request</a>. The number must match the one voters used when they registered to vote. Two million registered voters in Texas lacked one of the two numbers in their voter file that <a href="https://www.texastribune.org/2021/09/01/texas-voting-bill-greg-abbott/">they gave when they registered to vote</a>. </p>
<p>A large number of mail-in ballot requests for Texas’ March 2022 <a href="https://www.texastribune.org/2022/02/10/texas-mail-voting-rejections/">primary have been rejected</a> because of this change. Texas has also limited the hours for early voting locations and banned the popular trend of drive-through voting.</p>
<p>In Georgia, voters requesting absentee ballots must now <a href="https://www.ajc.com/politics/new-georgia-voting-rules-bring-changes-to-2021-elections/2IFA5EZ5VBAARIP22PHQKQNMFA/">provide a photo ID</a> when they request a mail ballot and when they return it. </p>
<p>Georgia also joined Texas, Iowa and Kansas in passing a law forbidding county and state election officials from automatically sending mail-in or absentee ballot requests to registered voters. </p>
<h2>In some cases, things are getting easier</h2>
<p>Twenty-five states, meanwhile, have passed 62 laws since 2020 that could make <a href="https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/voting-laws-roundup-october-2021">voting easier</a>. </p>
<p>Delaware and Hawaii joined 20 other states that now automatically register citizens to vote when they turn 18. Early research shows that automatic voter registration may <a href="https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/what-happened-when-2-2-million-people-were-automatically-registered-to-vote/">modestly increase voter turnout</a>.</p>
<p>Some states made it easier for specific groups of voters. For example, in Maine, students can use their <a href="http://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/bills/getPDF.asp?paper=HP1172&item=3&snum=130">student photo ID to vote</a>. In North Dakota, students can share a letter from a <a href="https://ndlegis.gov/assembly/67-2021/session-laws/documents/ELECT.pdf#CHAPTER165">college or university</a> to vote. Indiana now allows a document issued by a Native American <a href="https://legiscan.com/IN/text/HB1485/2021">tribe or band</a> to serve as valid ID to vote. </p>
<p>Ten states – including California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois and Kentucky – increased access to mail ballot <a href="https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/voting-laws-roundup-december-2021">drop boxes and locations in 2021</a>.</p>
<p>Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, New Mexico, Nevada and Vermont passed bills that protect or ease voter access to polling places. Maryland’s bill requires counties to offer a minimum number of early voting centers based on population. Vermont will now allow outdoor and drive-up voting. Starting with the 2022 primary election, all voting in Hawaii will be by mail. </p>
<p>These changes give voters more options or simply make it easier to vote and may help <a href="https://www.pnas.org/content/117/25/14052">increase turnout</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/451982/original/file-20220314-23-8rmefh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="People march in a street, holding up signs that say 'We demand voting rights for all' and 'Scan to demand.'" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/451982/original/file-20220314-23-8rmefh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/451982/original/file-20220314-23-8rmefh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/451982/original/file-20220314-23-8rmefh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/451982/original/file-20220314-23-8rmefh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/451982/original/file-20220314-23-8rmefh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/451982/original/file-20220314-23-8rmefh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/451982/original/file-20220314-23-8rmefh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">People march during a voting rights demonstration about voter suppression on Aug. 28, 2021, in Washington, D.C.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://media.gettyimages.com/photos/thousands-march-during-the-march-on-for-voting-rights-demonstration-picture-id1234930231?s=2048x2048">John Lamparski/Andalou Agency via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>What will happen in 2022?</h2>
<p>Many voting rights activists expect that <a href="https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/voting-laws-roundup-february-2022">turnout will decrease in states</a> that made voting harder and increase in states that made it easier. </p>
<p>The answer may not be that simple.</p>
<p>Scholars don’t agree about how voting rules affect voter turnout. Studies don’t consistently show that individual voting laws <a href="https://doi.org/10.1089/elj.2008.0017">lower voter turnout</a>. </p>
<p>But a state’s overall collection of voting laws can have more sway during elections. Scholars call the combined effect of voting laws “<a href="https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/10.1089/elj.2020.0666">the cost of voting</a>.”
When the cost of voting grows higher, overall turnout decreases. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2021/2020-presidential-election-voting-and-registration-tables-now-available.html">Turnout in the 2020 presidential election</a> was unusually high, even with some state laws that voting rights advocates believe made it harder for people of color and <a href="https://theconversation.com/theres-a-surprising-ending-to-all-the-2020-election-conflicts-over-absentee-ballot-deadlines-158010">other groups to vote</a>. </p>
<p>Voting laws are not the only influencers <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electstud.2005.09.002">of voter turnout</a>. But adding extra hurdles to voting may lead to frustration that keeps some voters at home. The upcoming midterm elections will provide clarity about whether these new voting laws have a measurable impact on voter turnout.</p>
<p>[<em>The Conversation’s Politics + Society editors pick need-to-know stories.</em> <a href="https://memberservices.theconversation.com/newsletters/?nl=politics&source=inline-politics-need-to-know">Sign up for Politics Weekly</a>.]</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/176102/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Nancy Martorano Miller does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Thirty-six states have adopted new voting laws since the 2020 election. But it’s not yet clear if these laws will actually affect voter turnout in the 2022 midterms.Nancy Martorano Miller, Associate Professor of Political Science, University of DaytonLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1650552021-08-09T12:26:34Z2021-08-09T12:26:34ZWhat is ranked choice voting? A political scientist explains<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/414607/original/file-20210804-23-1u7jptk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=14%2C7%2C4892%2C3259&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Absentee ballots for the New York City mayoral primary, which used ranked-choice voting, are counted.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://newsroom.ap.org/detail/Election2021NYCMayor/a2a388c77f0249f980fe38f73f54a444/photo">AP Photo/Mary Altaffer</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Ranked choice voting is <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/10/us/politics/ranked-choice-voting.html">on the rise</a> in the United States, with <a href="https://www.fairvote.org/rcv">nearly two dozen places</a> now using the system for various offices including, most recently, <a href="https://apnews.com/article/eric-adams-wins-nyc-democratic-mayoral-primary-9c564828a29831747f9c2e6f52daf55e">New York City</a> for its mayoral primary elections. </p>
<p>By the end of 2021, <a href="https://www.sltrib.com/news/politics/2021/07/08/ranked-choice-voting/">more than 20 Utah municipalities</a> will be using this method, which lets voters rank candidates in order of preference. Two cities in Minnesota will also try it this year: <a href="https://www.startribune.com/bloomington-and-minnetonka-voters-approve-ranked-choice-voting/572995082/">Bloomington and Minnetonka</a>. By 2022, the state of <a href="https://ballotpedia.org/Alaska_Ballot_Measure_2,_Top-Four_Ranked_Choice_Voting_and_Campaign_Finance_Laws_Initiative_(2020)">Alaska</a> will be using a variation of the system, as will the California cities of <a href="https://www.fairvote.org/rcv">Albany, Eureka and Palm Desert</a>. By 2023, <a href="https://ballotpedia.org/Boulder,_Colorado,_Measure_2E,_Ranked_Choice_Voting_for_Mayor_Charter_Amendment_(November_2020)">Boulder</a>, Colorado, and <a href="https://ballotpedia.org/Burlington,_Vermont,_Question_4,_Ranked_Choice_Voting_Amendment_(March_2021)">Burlington</a>, Vermont, will also be using it.</p>
<p>Although it was new for New Yorkers this summer, Australians have been using <a href="https://ballotpedia.org/Ranked-choice_voting_(RCV)">ranked choice voting</a>, which they call “<a href="https://www.abc.net.au/elections/federal/2004/guide/prefhistory.htm">preferential voting</a>,” for <a href="https://www.rcvresources.org/history">more than 100 years</a> to elect members to their <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/House_of_Representatives/Powers_practice_and_procedure/Practice7/HTML/Chapter3/Method_of_voting">House of Representatives</a>. </p>
<p>Advocates argue that ranked choice voting <a href="https://www.fairvote.org/rcv_for_presidential_nominations">solves the problems</a> of other voting methods, while detractors counter that it makes elections <a href="https://bangordailynews.com/2020/08/05/opinion/contributors/ranked-choice-voting-makes-elections-unnecessarily-complex-and-confusing-2/">unnecessarily complicated</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/414628/original/file-20210804-17-1l3znil.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A person points at an information card labeled 'ranked-choice voting.'" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/414628/original/file-20210804-17-1l3znil.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/414628/original/file-20210804-17-1l3znil.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/414628/original/file-20210804-17-1l3znil.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/414628/original/file-20210804-17-1l3znil.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/414628/original/file-20210804-17-1l3znil.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/414628/original/file-20210804-17-1l3znil.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/414628/original/file-20210804-17-1l3znil.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">New York City spent a lot of time explaining to voters how their new method of voting would work.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://newsroom.ap.org/detail/Election2021-NYCVoteCountBlunder/c68b0ef82f3b496dbf55cee0390eba4d/photo">AP Photo/Mary Altaffer</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Commonly used voting systems</h2>
<p>In the U.S., <a href="https://www.britannica.com/topic/plurality-system">plurality voting</a> is the <a href="https://ballotpedia.org/Plurality_voting_system">most commonly used</a> system to elect people to serve in government. Using this method, whichever candidate has the most votes after a single round wins. Proponents of plurality voting point out that it is <a href="https://aceproject.org/ace-en/topics/es/esd/esd01/esd01a/default">simple to understand</a> and easy to implement.</p>
<p>One <a href="https://electionscience.org/voting-methods/spoiler-effect-top-5-ways-plurality-voting-fails/">problem arises</a>, however, when there are several people running for office. In those cases, the vote could be <a href="http://archive3.fairvote.org/reforms/instant-runoff-voting/irv-and-the-status-quo/spoiler-effect/">split</a> several ways, and the overall winner may not actually be very popular. </p>
<p>For example, in <a href="https://www.pressherald.com/interactive/maine-voted-governors-races-1990-2010/">2002</a>, <a href="https://www.nga.org/governor/john-e-baldacci/">John Baldacci</a>, a Democrat, defeated three other candidates to become governor of Maine after winning 47.2% of the vote. In <a href="https://www.pressherald.com/interactive/maine-voted-governors-races-1990-2010/">2006</a>, when facing four other candidates, he was reelected with only 38.1% of the vote. In <a href="https://www.pressherald.com/interactive/maine-voted-governors-races-1990-2010/">2010</a>, <a href="https://www.nga.org/governor/paul-lepage/">Paul LePage</a>, a Republican, similarly ran against four other candidates, ultimately winning the governorship with 37.6% of the vote. In <a href="https://www.pressherald.com/interactive/maine-voted-governors-races-1990-2010/">2014</a>, when he ran against two other candidates, LePage was reelected with 48.2% of the vote. </p>
<p>In other words, for more than a decade Maine had a governor whom the majority of voters had actually voted against. Both Democrats and Republicans pointed to back-to-back terms where an unpopular candidate from the other party was elected by winning only a narrow plurality.</p>
<p>Some places that have experienced these sorts of results have chosen to adopt an electoral system <a href="https://www.newstribune.com/news/news/story/2021/jul/07/concept-of-runoff-primary-could-be-revisited/878088/">aimed at ensuring that winners have majority support</a>, such as <a href="https://ballotpedia.org/Runoff_election">runoff voting</a>. <a href="https://aceproject.org/ace-en/topics/es/esd/esd01/esd01e/default">Typically</a> if a candidate gets more than half the votes in the first round, that candidate is declared the winner. If not, the two candidates with the most first-round votes face off in a second round of voting.</p>
<p>This method, which can lead to several rounds of elections – particularly if it’s also used during the primaries – can be <a href="https://www.localmemphis.com/article/news/local/runoff-election-could-cost-memphis-taxpayers-over-80-per-vote/522-f41e304f-de3d-42b4-9f90-044dc80462c4">expensive for the government to organize</a>, and it requires voters to take additional time off work and other duties, which can <a href="https://www.fairvote.org/primary_runoff_elections_and_decline_in_voter_turnout">reduce voter turnout</a>. Furthermore, in some parts of the U.S., <a href="https://theconversation.com/a-brief-history-of-georgias-runoff-voting-and-its-racist-roots-150356">runoff elections still carry racist overtones</a>. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/414889/original/file-20210805-21-u7c0hl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Two men in ties smiling." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/414889/original/file-20210805-21-u7c0hl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/414889/original/file-20210805-21-u7c0hl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=558&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/414889/original/file-20210805-21-u7c0hl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=558&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/414889/original/file-20210805-21-u7c0hl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=558&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/414889/original/file-20210805-21-u7c0hl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=702&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/414889/original/file-20210805-21-u7c0hl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=702&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/414889/original/file-20210805-21-u7c0hl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=702&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Both John Baldacci, left, and Paul LePage won the governorship of Maine despite receiving less than a majority of the vote.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/governors-joe-brennan-left-john-baldacci-second-from-left-news-photo/493017989">Andy Molloy/Portland Press Herald via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Pros of ranked choice voting</h2>
<p>In hopes of ensuring that winners have majority support while minimizing the downsides of runoff voting, some places have experimented with ranked choice voting.</p>
<p>For instance, in Maine in 2016, voters were sour from four gubernatorial elections in which the winner got less than a majority of the votes cast. <a href="https://theconversation.com/maine-ballot-initiative-would-let-voters-rank-candidates-67694">This led to the adoption of ranked choice voting</a>.</p>
<p>The way this system typically works is that voters rank candidates in order of preference. A candidate can win outright by receiving the majority of first-preference votes. If that doesn’t happen, the candidate with the fewest first-preference votes is eliminated, and <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rgo-eJ-D__s&t=34s">voters who picked that candidate as their first choice will have their next choice counted</a>. If there still is not a winner, then the candidate with the next fewest votes is also eliminated. This process continues with candidates eliminated one by one until one candidate has obtained a majority.</p>
<p><a href="https://soundcloud.com/tom-johnson-522198218/the-ranked-choice-voting-song">Proponents of ranked choice voting</a> argue that, <a href="https://www.columbiatribune.com/story/opinion/2020/09/19/commentary-donrsquot-waste-your-vote-pick-lesser-of-two-evils/42663915/">unlike plurality voting</a>, voters can vote for their favorite candidate without worrying that their vote might inadvertently help an unpopular candidate get elected with less than a majority, as was the case in Maine with Baldacci and LePage. Although runoff voting helps to solve this problem by allowing for a potential second round, ranked choice voting takes less time and money because all votes are cast on one day on one ballot. </p>
<p>After Maine adopted ranked choice voting, Democrat <a href="https://bangordailynews.com/2018/11/07/news/shawn-moody-concedes-governors-race-to-janet-mills/">Janet Mills</a> became the first gubernatorial candidate in the state to win a majority since <a href="https://www.pressherald.com/interactive/maine-voted-governors-races-1990-2010/">1998</a> and the first nonincumbent to do so since <a href="https://www.nga.org/governor/kenneth-merwin-curtis/">1966</a>. </p>
<p>Given that voters get to rank multiple candidates, another potential benefit of ranked choice voting is that it can encourage <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2018/09/06/ranked-choice-voting-elevate-moderates-reduce-polarization-column/1196693002/">cooperation between candidates</a> as they vie for voters’ second, or subsequent, preferences. In 2018, for instance, Mark Eves and Betsy Sweet, both of whom were competing in Maine’s Democratic primary for governor, <a href="https://www.economist.com/united-states/2018/06/14/in-praise-of-ranked-choice-voting">urged their supporters to rank the other as their second choice</a>. During the recent Democratic primary for mayor of New York, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZqW7solh70">a similar alliance emerged between Andrew Yang and Kathryn Garcia</a>. </p>
<p>Not all candidates seek to form such arrangements. <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2021/07/07/who-is-eric-adams-nyc-next-likely-mayor/7887930002/">Eric Adams</a>, a Black candidate who ultimately bested both Yang and Garcia, decried their electoral alliance as a form of <a href="https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2021/06/adams-likens-garcia-yang-pact-to-jim-crow.html">racist voter suppression</a> meant to prevent a person of color from winning. Historically, however, <a href="https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2021/08/03/ranked-choice_voting_increased_minority_candidates_chances.html">ranked choice voting has boosted the chances of nonwhite candidates</a>. Notably, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/07/nyregion/maya-wiley-mayor-nyc.html">Maya Wiley</a>, a Black woman who was also a candidate in the Democratic primary, disputed Adams’ claim, <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-06-21/nyc-vote-a-day-away-yang-garcia-alliance-election-update">arguing that the Yang-Garcia</a> “partnership is not racist, and we should not be using this term so loosely.”</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/414634/original/file-20210804-27-d8xk7z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="An image of a ranked choice voting ballot from Maine in 2020." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/414634/original/file-20210804-27-d8xk7z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/414634/original/file-20210804-27-d8xk7z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/414634/original/file-20210804-27-d8xk7z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/414634/original/file-20210804-27-d8xk7z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/414634/original/file-20210804-27-d8xk7z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/414634/original/file-20210804-27-d8xk7z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/414634/original/file-20210804-27-d8xk7z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A ranked choice voting ballot, like this one from Maine, lets voters signal in which order they prefer candidates.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://newsroom.ap.org/detail/RankedChoiceVoting/1e01eab4f0c74711a57326dd9cbc6b59/photo">AP Photo/David Sharp</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Disadvantages of the system</h2>
<p>Because ranked choice voting is a different system than most Americans are familiar with, one potential problem is confusion. <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/ranked-choice-voting-is-bad-for-everyone-11625674248">Some critics</a> incorrectly claim that ranked choice voting lets voters <a href="https://www.centralmaine.com/2018/05/30/commentary-one-person-one-vote-at-risk-if-ranked-choice-voting-approved/">cast more than one ballot per person</a>, when in fact each voter <a href="https://www.fairvote.org/how_ranked_choice_voting_survives_the_one_person_one_vote_challenge">gets just one vote</a>. </p>
<p>In each round, each voter’s single vote is assigned – or, rather, <a href="https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/transferable-vote">transferred</a> – to their top preference among candidates who can still win the election, as if a runoff round were to happen instantly. As a result, in some places, ranked choice voting is called “<a href="https://www.house.leg.state.mn.us/hrd/pubs/irvoting.pdf">single transferable vote</a>” or “<a href="https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/instant-runoff">instant runoff voting</a>.”</p>
<p>[<em>The Conversation’s Politics + Society editors pick need-to-know stories.</em> <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/newsletters/politics-weekly-74/?utm_source=TCUS&utm_medium=inline-link&utm_campaign=newsletter-text&utm_content=politics-need-to-know">Sign up for Politics Weekly</a>._]</p>
<p>It is true that voters who are <a href="https://www.doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.12651">unfamiliar</a> with the details may have problems when voting. Ballots filled out incorrectly, such as by <a href="https://aec.gov.au/Voting/How_to_Vote/Voting_HOR.htm">marking the same preference twice</a>, can be <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electstud.2013.07.001">considered invalid</a>. Also, <a href="https://www.aec.gov.au/About_AEC/research/analysis-informal-voting-2016-election.htm">failing to rank all of the candidates</a> may result in the ballot being ignored in later rounds of counting, <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.electstud.2014.11.006">depriving</a> the voter of influence. But <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2009.00425.x">teaching</a> people how <a href="http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.737.9804&rep=rep1&type=pdf">the new system</a> works can likely reduce <a href="http://doi.org/10.1016/j.electstud.2009.11.002">such problems</a>.</p>
<p>In the runup to the primaries in New York City, officials spent <a href="https://www1.nyc.gov/office-of-the-mayor/news/315-21/new-york-city-launch-15-million-ranked-choice-voting-education-campaign">US$15 million</a> to teach voters about ranked choice voting. It’s a substantial amount of money, but the cost should drop – eventually, to zero – as more voters become familiar with the process over time.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/165055/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Joshua Holzer does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>It may be new to Americans, but ranked-choice voting has a long history, and it is spreading rapidly across the U.S.Joshua Holzer, Assistant Professor of Political Science, Westminster CollegeLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1411042020-07-15T12:13:14Z2020-07-15T12:13:14ZThe Electoral College is surprisingly vulnerable to popular vote changes<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/344573/original/file-20200629-155349-g6tthx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C4%2C3000%2C1989&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Staff of the House of Representatives review Illinois' Electoral College vote report in January 2017.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/house-clerk-staff-verify-the-official-electoral-college-news-photo/631100318">Samuel Corum/Anadolu Agency/Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>In the 2000 U.S. presidential election, changing just 269 votes in Florida from George W. Bush to Al Gore would have changed the outcome of the entire national election. Similarly narrow results have happened in nearly one-third of the country’s presidential elections – and five winners of the nationwide popular vote did not become president, including in 2000 and 2016.</p>
<p>The Electoral College divides one big election into 51 smaller ones – one for each state, plus the District of Columbia. Mathematically speaking, this system is built to virtually ensure narrow victories, making it very susceptible to efforts to change either voters’ minds or the records of their choices. In fact, in certain circumstances the Electoral College system is four times more vulnerable to manipulation than a national popular vote.</p>
<p><iframe id="2wvBF" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/2wvBF/9/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<h2>Few votes, big consequences</h2>
<p>In at least 18 of the 58 U.S. presidential elections held between 1788 and 2016, the popular vote count may have seemed to indicate a clear winner, but looking more closely – at the number of votes required to change the Electoral College result – the election was actually very close.</p>
<p>That shows how the Electoral College makes meddling a lot easier, and more effective, when an adversary – whether a vote-machine hacker or a propaganda and disinformation campaign – changes just a small fraction of votes in a few states.</p>
<p>In 1844, for instance, James Polk defeated Henry Clay by 39,490 votes in an election that saw 2.6 million people cast their votes. But if just 2,554 New Yorkers – 0.09% of the national total – had voted differently, Clay would have become the 11th U.S. president.</p>
<p>The closest Electoral College victory ever – except for 2000’s – came in 1876, when Rutherford B. Hayes lost the popular vote to Samuel Tilden by about 250,000 votes but won the Electoral College by a single vote.</p>
<p>The election was disputed, and Northern and Southern states struck a political compromise that gave Hayes the White House <a href="https://www.history.com/topics/us-presidents/compromise-of-1877">in exchange for ending federal troops’ occupation</a> of the former Confederate states. That dispute could have been avoided if just 445 South Carolinians – 0.01% of the national vote – had voted for <a href="https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/statistics/elections/1876">Tilden instead of Hayes</a>.</p>
<p>Even elections that seem like relative runaways are susceptible. Barack Obama won in 2008 by nearly 10 million votes, but the outcome would have been completely different if a total of 570,000 people in seven states had voted for John McCain – just 0.4% of the participating voters.</p>
<p>For outside influence to change the popular vote winner, propagandists and misinformation peddlers would have had to shift 5 million people’s votes – nearly 10 times as many.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/344574/original/file-20200629-155322-186wyfa.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/344574/original/file-20200629-155322-186wyfa.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/344574/original/file-20200629-155322-186wyfa.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/344574/original/file-20200629-155322-186wyfa.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/344574/original/file-20200629-155322-186wyfa.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/344574/original/file-20200629-155322-186wyfa.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/344574/original/file-20200629-155322-186wyfa.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/344574/original/file-20200629-155322-186wyfa.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A congressional staffer opens the boxes containing the Electoral College ballots in January 2017.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/aide-opens-electoral-college-ballot-boxes-during-a-joint-news-photo/631096338">Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Is the popular vote less vulnerable?</h2>
<p>For mathematicians like me, it’s instructive to try to calculate exactly how vulnerable an election result is to changes in one or more popular votes. We try to pick the “best” method, among all hypothetical ways of taking a bunch of votes and determining the election’s winner.</p>
<p>[<em><a href="https://theconversation.com/us/newsletters/the-daily-3?utm_source=TCUS&utm_medium=inline-link&utm_campaign=newsletter-text&utm_content=experts">Expertise in your inbox. Sign up for The Conversation’s newsletter and get expert takes on today’s news, every day.</a></em>]</p>
<p>Suppose we run an election between candidate A and candidate B, in which each has an equal chance of winning. Then imagine that once the popular votes are cast, an adversary looks at the tallies and changes some fixed number of popular votes, in a way that changes the election’s outcome. A majority vote has the <a href="https://arxiv.org/abs/2006.05460">least number of options for an adversary to reverse the outcome</a>. So, in this sense, majority voting is the “best.”</p>
<p>It is, of course, unrealistic to think that an adversary would know the detailed vote tallies. But this scenario provides a useful analogy because it’s extremely difficult to predict how people will vote – and equally hard to calculate how an adversary might target certain voters and not others.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/344575/original/file-20200629-155334-eb746y.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/344575/original/file-20200629-155334-eb746y.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/344575/original/file-20200629-155334-eb746y.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=482&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/344575/original/file-20200629-155334-eb746y.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=482&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/344575/original/file-20200629-155334-eb746y.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=482&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/344575/original/file-20200629-155334-eb746y.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=606&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/344575/original/file-20200629-155334-eb746y.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=606&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/344575/original/file-20200629-155334-eb746y.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=606&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Maine’s electors take their oaths before casting their ballots in December 2016.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/maines-electoral-college-electors-cast-their-votes-for-news-photo/630428196">Derek Davis/Portland Portland Press Herald via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Election corruption from random vote changes</h2>
<p>There is another way to simulate the potential for an adversary to somehow change votes. This time, instead of an adversary changing a fixed number of votes, assume there is a 0.1% chance that the adversary switches any vote to the other candidate. This assumption could be reasonable if there are adversaries working for each candidate. By allowing the vote changes to be totally random, we simplify the calculations and still end up with a reasonable approximation of how all the various factors interact with each other.</p>
<p>Then, using tools from probability such as the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_limit_theorem">Central Limit Theorem</a>, it’s <a href="https://doi.org/10.1145/1374376.1374458">possible to calculate</a> that in elections with large numbers of voters there is, on average, about a 2% chance that 0.1% random vote corruption changes the outcome of a majority vote. On the other hand, for the Electoral College, the chances of a successful interference rise to over 11% – if each state is assumed to be of equal size. By adjusting the states’ sizes to reflect the real number of voters in U.S. states, the chance of interference is still over 8%, four times the chance for a majority vote.</p>
<p>That four-to-one ratio is unchanged, so long as an adversary’s chance of changing a vote is relatively small: The Electoral College system is over <a href="https://doi.org/10.1145/1374376.1374458">four times more susceptible</a> to vote changes than the <a href="https://arxiv.org/abs/2006.05460">popular vote</a>.</p>
<p>Also, among democratic voting methods, the majority voting method is <a href="https://annals.math.princeton.edu/2010/171-1/p05">most resistant to random vote changes</a>. So, under these criteria, there is no other democratic voting method that is better than majority voting at protecting against election interference.</p>
<p>The above calculations examined only elections with two candidates. Determining the smallest possible probability of a changed outcome for democratic elections with <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11856-011-0181-7">more than two candidates is much harder</a>. Building on the work of many people, I have made some recent progress demonstrating that <a href="https://arxiv.org/abs/1901.03934">plurality voting is most resilient</a> to random vote corruption.</p>
<p>There is no one best voting method. Every approach has undesirable flaws, such as the potential for a <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vote_splitting#Spoiler_effect">third-party candidate’s entry in the race</a> to change the winner of the election. <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monotonicity_criterion#Instant-runoff_voting_and_the_two-round_system_are_not_monotonic">Ranked-choice voting</a> has <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_electoral_systems#Comparisons">its flaws</a>, too. But it is clear that when attempting to protect an election from outside influence, the Electoral College is far weaker than a popular vote.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/141104/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Steven Heilman receives funding from the National Science Foundation. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.</span></em></p>Mathematically speaking, the Electoral College is built to virtually ensure narrow victories, making it very susceptible to manipulation and disinformation.Steven Heilman, Assistant Professor RTPC of Mathematics, USC Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and SciencesLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1347612020-03-31T12:19:45Z2020-03-31T12:19:45ZHow to protect elections amid the coronavirus pandemic<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/323683/original/file-20200327-146689-1t9q21z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=26%2C0%2C4424%2C2969&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Voters in line for Illinois primary election ballots keep their distance on March 17.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Election-2020-Illinois-Primary/c046ce2990234f6cbcd843ed2cb17829/33/0">AP Photo/Nam Y. Huh</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>At least <a href="https://www.rollcall.com/2020/03/19/connecticut-joins-states-delaying-elections-moves-presidential-primary-to-june-2/">seven states</a> have <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/14/us/politics/election-postponed-canceled.html">postponed their presidential primaries</a> in the face of the coronavirus pandemic. </p>
<p>That has <a href="https://www.vox.com/2020/3/21/21188152/trump-cancel-november-election-constitution-coronavirus">raised concerns</a> about the <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/views/2020/03/23/it-not-too-early-ask-can-us-pull-november-election-amid-coronavirus">other states</a> that have <a href="https://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/2020-state-primary-election-dates.aspx">state elections and federal primary elections</a> planned for later this summer – and of course the <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/28/politics/coronavirus-2020-election-challenges/index.html">general election in November</a>.</p>
<p>The main concern, in terms of the pandemic, is that elections cause people to congregate at the polling places on Election Day. If it’s not safe to be within <a href="https://abc7.com/6022704/">six feet</a> of someone outside your immediate family, it’s seems ill-advised to line up with all your neighbors to check in, or to visit a small voting booth someone else was just in, or to pick up the same pen or touch the same touchscreen they used just moments ago. </p>
<p>The solution so far has been to postpone elections until some future time when it’s safe to gather again. But it’s <a href="https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2020/t0309-covid-19-update.html">not clear how long</a> that will be.</p>
<p>To hold elections without delays, the obvious solution is to let people vote elsewhere, at other times. </p>
<p>As an election law <a href="https://hq.ssrn.com/submissions/MyPapers.cfm?partid=114356">scholar and author</a>, I have good news: Many people already can – and more people could easily be allowed to – vote before Election Day, or even vote from home, by casting their ballots on paper and mailing them in or dropping them off at a municipal office.</p>
<p>This is <a href="https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/blogs/stateline/2020/03/23/states-begin-prep-for-mail-in-voting-in-presidential-election">already possible in many states</a>, where research has shown it’s good for democracy by making voting more accessible, even when there is not a pandemic. A bill already in the works in Congress would require states to <a href="https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/senate-bill/3529?s=1&r=1">adopt these measures as part of their administration of federal elections</a>. States and municipalities could easily mirror the practices for their own elections. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/323684/original/file-20200327-146671-1nv36x7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/323684/original/file-20200327-146671-1nv36x7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/323684/original/file-20200327-146671-1nv36x7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/323684/original/file-20200327-146671-1nv36x7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/323684/original/file-20200327-146671-1nv36x7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/323684/original/file-20200327-146671-1nv36x7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/323684/original/file-20200327-146671-1nv36x7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/323684/original/file-20200327-146671-1nv36x7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A Wisconsin voter casts a ballot ahead of primary election day, avoiding lines and finding a more convenient time to vote.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Election-2020-Primaries-in-Turmoil/7d9b5eb950704553a6feaf8e00b98406/3/0">AP Photo/Morry Gash</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Voting before the big day</h2>
<p>One way to spread out the Election Day crowds would be to let people vote early, in advance of the day itself. As of this writing, <a href="https://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/early-voting-in-state-elections.aspx">39 states</a> <a href="https://sos.tn.gov/products/elections/early-voting-person">across</a> the <a href="https://www.sec.state.ma.us/ele/eleev/evidx.htm">political</a> <a href="https://dos.myflorida.com/elections/for-voters/voting/early-voting/">spectrum</a> let voters show up at municipal offices or other community centers to cast their ballots in the week or two before Election Day. </p>
<p>The remaining 11 states could do the same, again making voting more convenient and accessible. </p>
<h2>Skip the touchscreen</h2>
<p>For physical safety, it’s probably best that voters use paper ballots, not electronic ones. Computerized touchscreens are exactly the kind of hands-on surface that health <a href="https://www.mercurynews.com/2020/03/20/coronavirus-grocery-pharmacy-touch-screens-can-spread-infection-epidemiologist-warns/">experts have warned</a> can spread the coronavirus easily. Voting on one of them is like shaking 300 – or more – strangers’ hands in a single day.</p>
<p>Advocates of touchscreens argue that the <a href="https://finance.yahoo.com/news/public-touch-screens-coronavirus-expert-121149598.html">screens can be wiped down</a> periodically, but doing so after every voter (or every other voter) would be time- and labor-intensive, risking long lines. Worse, at least some brands of touchscreen machines <a href="https://www.eac.gov/sites/default/files/electionofficials/coronavirus/DVS_CoronavirusCleaningNotice_030920.pdf">have to be turned off</a> to be cleaned, exacerbating the potential for delays.</p>
<p>There might be some people whose physical disabilities <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-universal-design-can-help-every-voter-cast-a-ballot-54373">prevent them from using a paper ballot</a> – but having everyone else do so would free up the machines for those who most need them, and ease the burden of cleaning them between users.</p>
<p>No formal studies have compared whether paper ballots carry or spread fewer germs than touchscreens – it’s a relatively new research question. But it’s useful to note that the government has not shut down the paper-handling postal system, even as <a href="https://www.mercurynews.com/2020/03/20/coronavirus-grocery-pharmacy-touch-screens-can-spread-infection-epidemiologist-warns/">officials have warned</a> the public to be careful around <a href="https://www.cujournal.com/news/are-atms-making-the-coronavirus-crisis-worse">ATMs</a> and <a href="https://www.digitaltransactions.net/how-the-coronavirus-scare-is-leading-some-experts-to-look-for-a-boost-in-contactless-payments/">computer cash registers</a>.</p>
<p>Even if there were not a pandemic, having a paper ballot is a key way to <a href="https://www.nybooks.com/daily/2019/12/17/how-new-voting-machines-could-hack-our-democracy/">protect public trust in elections</a>, <a href="https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3375755">allowing recounts</a> in case machines are <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/30/us/politics/pennsylvania-voting-machines.html">hacked or suffer software or hardware problems</a> that could affect vote counting.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/323686/original/file-20200327-146724-1vwgxkg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/323686/original/file-20200327-146724-1vwgxkg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/323686/original/file-20200327-146724-1vwgxkg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/323686/original/file-20200327-146724-1vwgxkg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/323686/original/file-20200327-146724-1vwgxkg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/323686/original/file-20200327-146724-1vwgxkg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/323686/original/file-20200327-146724-1vwgxkg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/323686/original/file-20200327-146724-1vwgxkg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Election workers sort mailed-in ballots in Washington state on March 10.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/ballot-processing-manager-jerelyn-hampton-sorts-vote-by-news-photo/1206477759">Jason Redmond/AFP via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Voting by mail</h2>
<p>If nearly everyone is voting on paper, they could easily cast their ballots by mail. <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2020/03/25/ohio-vote-by-mail-primary-election-149012">Ohio has already converted</a> its Democratic primary to all mail-in ballots.</p>
<p>All states let people vote by absentee ballot if they won’t be in their voting district on Election Day, for instance if they are traveling. <a href="https://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/absentee-and-early-voting.aspx">About two-thirds of the states</a> let anyone who wants to do the same, whether they’ll be home on Election Day or not. They simply call up their local election office and ask for a paper ballot to be mailed to them. When they get it, they fill it out and mail it back or drop it off at a municipal office before Election Day.</p>
<p>The remaining states require voters to certify that they’re sick, elderly, out of town, or otherwise <a href="https://sos.tn.gov/products/elections/absentee-voting">unable to vote on Election Day</a> before being allowed to vote absentee. Those states could loosen their rules, opening absentee voting to anyone who wants to do it.</p>
<p>Even more effective at social distancing for voters would be a complete system for everyone to vote by mail. Five states – again, <a href="https://voteinfo.utah.gov/learn-about-voting-by-mail-and-absentee-voting/">with</a> <a href="https://sos.oregon.gov/voting/pages/voteinor.aspx">varying</a> <a href="https://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/elections/FAQs/mailBallotsFAQ.html">alignments</a> – automatically mail all registered voters a ballot. Like with absentee ballots, voters can mail them back or drop them off at secure locations.</p>
<p>These methods are obviously excellent for keeping people from flocking to the polls in person on the same day. They also are more convenient for voters, who would no longer have to get to a particular polling place on one particular day, and take their chances on traffic and lines to vote – not to mention shifting work and child-care schedules to make time.</p>
<p>As a general rule, <a href="https://www.memphis.edu/law/documents/01_mulroy.pdf">making voting more convenient</a>, including <a href="https://washingtonmonthly.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/colorado2014voterfileanalysis.pdf">voting by mail</a>, <a href="http://www.umsl.edu/%7Ekimballd/KimballRCV.pdf">boosts turnout</a>, which makes election results more broadly representative of the views of the entire citizenry.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/323689/original/file-20200327-146712-5cbtmi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/323689/original/file-20200327-146712-5cbtmi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/323689/original/file-20200327-146712-5cbtmi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=407&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/323689/original/file-20200327-146712-5cbtmi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=407&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/323689/original/file-20200327-146712-5cbtmi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=407&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/323689/original/file-20200327-146712-5cbtmi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=511&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/323689/original/file-20200327-146712-5cbtmi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=511&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/323689/original/file-20200327-146712-5cbtmi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=511&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A Utah election worker verifies a signature on a mailed-in ballot during the 2018 midterm elections.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/utah-county-election-worker-verifies-signatures-on-mail-in-news-photo/1058239656">George Frey/Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Ensuring election integrity</h2>
<p>Some critics have raised concerns about <a href="https://www.propublica.org/article/voting-by-mail-would-reduce-coronavirus-transmission-but-it-has-other-risks">voter fraud with mail-in ballots</a>. In the few instances that the <a href="https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/6/30/15900478/trump-voter-fraud-suppression-commission">rare problem with voter fraud</a> occurs, it does often involve <a href="https://www.memphis.edu/law/documents/01_mulroy.pdf">using absentee voting</a> to let one person vote on behalf of another.</p>
<p>But security procedures, like matching the ballot signature with a voter signature on file, can address these concerns. Vote-by-mail states have <a href="https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/ef45f5_81a3affd554e4b5b9b5852f8fb3c10fd.pdf">not seen a higher rate of election fraud</a> cases than <a href="https://www.heritage.org/voterfraud/search?combine=OR&state=OR&year=&case_type=All&fraud_type=All">states with strict rules</a> on who can vote absentee, according to a database of fraud cases compiled by the Heritage Foundation, an organization <a href="https://www.heritage.org/election-integrity/commentary/more-proof-voter-fraud-real-and-bipartisan">concerned about voting fraud</a>. </p>
<p>A <a href="https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/senate-bill/3529?s=1&r=1">bill promoting all these changes for federal elections</a> is under consideration in the Senate right now. State and local election officials prefer to have – and voters find it easier to understand – similar practices across all the elections they conduct. A set of federal rules would encourage the states that haven’t done so already to adopt them too.</p>
<p>[<em>Insight, in your inbox each day.</em> <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/newsletters?utm_source=TCUS&utm_medium=inline-link&utm_campaign=newsletter-text&utm_content=insight">You can get it with The Conversation’s email newsletter</a>.]</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/134761/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Steven Mulroy does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Most states have rules that could preserve the integrity of an election while also allowing social distancing.Steven Mulroy, Law Professor in Constitutional Law, Criminal Law, Election Law, University of MemphisLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1286172020-01-13T13:55:04Z2020-01-13T13:55:04ZWhat US election officials could learn from Australia about boosting voter turnout<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/308146/original/file-20191220-11939-13wjgmy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=8%2C0%2C5559%2C1878&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Australian voters check in and cast their ballots in a September 2019 federal election.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/auselectoralcom/48801171148/">Australian Electoral Commission</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Not every country is plagued by rules that limit voters’ participation in elections, as is common in the United States. </p>
<p>In the past five years, <a href="https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/house-passes-bill-to-restore-key-parts-of-voting-rights-act">restrictions on voting</a> and <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2019/12/17/georgia-purged-voters-its-rolls-its-second-state-make-cuts-less-than-week/">voter registration purges</a> have limited the number of Americans eligible to cast ballots.</p>
<p>In addition, the U.S. is the only major democracy that still allows politicians to draw their own district lines, an often-criticized <a href="http://www.lpbr.net/2019/03/rethinking-us-election-law-unskewing.html">conflict of interest</a> in which <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/27/opinion/gerrymandering-supreme-court.html">public officials essentially pick their voters</a>, rather than the voters picking their officials. That <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/10/gerrymandering-technology-redmap-2020/543888/">computer-aided</a> <a href="https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/extreme-maps">gerrymandering of electoral districts</a> reduces the number of districts with competitive races, contributing to <a href="https://harvardpress.typepad.com/hup_publicity/2018/07/why-gerrymandering-matters-allan-lichtman.html">low voter turnout</a>. </p>
<p>Perhaps the fundamental problem, though, is that the system yields results the people don’t actually want. Twice in the last two decades, U.S. voters <a href="https://transition.fec.gov/pubrec/fe2000/prespop.htm">chose a president</a>, George W. Bush and Donald Trump, who got <a href="https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/12/20/why-electoral-college-landslides-are-easier-to-win-than-popular-vote-ones/">fewer votes than his rival</a>, Al Gore and Hillary Clinton.</p>
<p>All these problems are avoidable and don’t happen in countries that have different voting laws. Perhaps the best example is Australia, a country which is culturally, demographically and socioeconomically similar to the U.S. In my book “<a href="https://www.e-elgar.com/shop/rethinking-us-election-law">Rethinking U.S. Election Law</a>,” written while I lived and studied their system Down Under, I outline many of the ways Australia has solved voting quandaries that persist in the U.S.</p>
<h2>Mandatory voting, made easy</h2>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/308149/original/file-20191220-11919-1i3mlrm.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/308149/original/file-20191220-11919-1i3mlrm.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/308149/original/file-20191220-11919-1i3mlrm.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=275&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/308149/original/file-20191220-11919-1i3mlrm.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=275&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/308149/original/file-20191220-11919-1i3mlrm.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=275&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/308149/original/file-20191220-11919-1i3mlrm.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=346&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/308149/original/file-20191220-11919-1i3mlrm.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=346&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/308149/original/file-20191220-11919-1i3mlrm.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=346&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Not voting in Australia? Prepare to part with this.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://banknotes.rba.gov.au/australias-banknotes/banknotes-in-circulation/twenty-dollar/">Screenshot from Royal Bank of Australia</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Australia’s most strikingly different law requires voting. All Australians must <a href="https://www.aec.gov.au/enrol/">register to vote</a> and <a href="https://www.aec.gov.au/About_AEC/Publications/voting/index.htm">actually cast a ballot</a>. Not voting means a small fine (<a href="https://www.news.com.au/national/federal-election/federal-election-2019-what-happens-if-you-dont-vote/news-story/daa05114821daf73288bf0cd422755eb">AU$20</a>, or about US$14) will be imposed. </p>
<p>Australians don’t have to actually vote for a candidate: They can leave it blank, write in “none of the above” or even draw a picture – but they do have to turn in a ballot. As a result, Australia enjoys voter registration and turnout rates <a href="https://www.aec.gov.au/About_AEC/research/files/voter-turnout-2016.pdf">over 90%</a>. </p>
<p>Voting is <a href="https://www.aec.gov.au/Voting/ways_to_vote/">easier in Australia than in the U.S.</a>. All voters can cast their ballots by mail, vote in person ahead of Election Day or show up to the polls on Election Day itself – which is always on a Saturday, when most people are off from work.</p>
<h2>A different way of counting</h2>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/308150/original/file-20191220-11929-z4sfyq.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/308150/original/file-20191220-11929-z4sfyq.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/308150/original/file-20191220-11929-z4sfyq.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=1270&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/308150/original/file-20191220-11929-z4sfyq.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=1270&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/308150/original/file-20191220-11929-z4sfyq.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=1270&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/308150/original/file-20191220-11929-z4sfyq.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1596&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/308150/original/file-20191220-11929-z4sfyq.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1596&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/308150/original/file-20191220-11929-z4sfyq.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1596&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Australian voters get to rank the candidates by order of preference.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:2016-ballot-paper-Higgins.png">Hshook/Wikimedia Commons</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Australia’s vote-counting rules are also different in important ways. </p>
<p>For its House elections, Australia uses what is called “<a href="https://www.aec.gov.au/learn/files/poster-counting-hor-pref-voting.pdf">preferential voting</a>,” a form of <a href="https://theconversation.com/maine-congressional-election-an-important-test-of-ranked-choice-voting-106960">ranked-choice voting</a>. </p>
<p>Voters are allowed to rank their candidates in order of preference – 1st, 2nd, 3rd and so on. If a candidate’s first-choice votes add up to a majority of the overall ballots cast, that candidate wins, just like in any other system.</p>
<p>If no one wins a majority of the votes cast, the candidate with the fewest first-choice votes is eliminated and their supporters’ votes are redistributed according to these voters’ second choices. This process of eliminating candidates and redistributing those candidates’ supporters continues until one candidate has a majority.</p>
<p><iframe id="Mq0VV" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/Mq0VV/2/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p>This system eliminates what is at times called the “<a href="https://theintercept.com/2018/08/10/ohio-special-election-ranked-choice-voting/">spoiler</a>” problem in U.S. elections, where too many similar candidates split the majority’s vote, allowing a less-preferred candidate to win with a minority of the votes cast. For instance, in 2000, people could have voted for Ralph Nader while also showing that they would have preferred either of the other two candidates for president, Al Gore or George W. Bush.</p>
<h2>Independent redistricting</h2>
<p>Even with ranked-choice voting, any system where a single representative is elected for each district is vulnerable to gerrymandering. The lines can be drawn to give one party more seats than its mathematical vote share warrants. </p>
<p>To reduce that problem, Australia’s election districts are drawn by the <a href="https://www.aec.gov.au/">Australian Electoral Commission</a>, a politically independent commission of nonpartisan technical experts. </p>
<p>It’s well respected for being nonpartisan, with a good <a href="https://www.law.uci.edu/lawreview/vol3/no3/stephanopoulos.pdf">track record</a> of keeping politics out of the redistricting process. </p>
<p>But even the Australian Electoral Commission isn’t perfect. As I detail in <a href="https://www.e-elgar.com/shop/rethinking-us-election-law">my book</a>, <a href="http://www.thebigsort.com/home.php">like-minded people naturally cluster together</a> in communities. That creates what some scholars have called “<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1561/100.00012033">unintentional gerrymandering</a>.” In the U.S., for example, Democratic voters overconcentrated in urban areas are unavoidably consolidated into districts with large Democratic supermajorities. That partially explains why, until recently, <a href="https://apnews.com/18d9d490aec84141ab7de31e7fb6cc86/">Republicans controlled the Virginia state legislature</a> for years, even as Democrats won all the statewide and presidential elections.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/308151/original/file-20191220-11924-1p9p0of.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/308151/original/file-20191220-11924-1p9p0of.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/308151/original/file-20191220-11924-1p9p0of.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=383&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/308151/original/file-20191220-11924-1p9p0of.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=383&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/308151/original/file-20191220-11924-1p9p0of.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=383&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/308151/original/file-20191220-11924-1p9p0of.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=481&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/308151/original/file-20191220-11924-1p9p0of.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=481&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/308151/original/file-20191220-11924-1p9p0of.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=481&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">This map of 2019 Australian presidential election results shows the shapes of electoral districts are fairly compact.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:2019_Australian_federal_election_-_Vote_Strength.svg">Erinthecute/Wikimedia Commons</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Proportional representation</h2>
<p>One way to fix the problem of gerrymandering – whether intentional or otherwise – is to move away from the concept of “winner-take-all” elections, in which 51% of the votes yields 100% of the power. In that system, significant minority voting blocs end up with no representation, leading to frustration and alienation. </p>
<p>For legislative elections, one potential solution could be <a href="http://aceproject.org/ace-en/topics/es/esd/esd02/default">proportional representation</a>, in which a party earning 30% of the vote receives approximately 30% of the seats available. Rather than “winner take all,” this is “majority takes most, and minorities take their fair share.”</p>
<p>Proportional representation systems don’t have single-member districts, like having one congressperson per congressional district. Rather, representatives are elected either at-large or in multi-member districts. With districting eliminated, gerrymandering becomes impossible. Australia uses this system for its Senate, using a different form of ranked-choice voting called the <a href="https://aceproject.org/main/english/es/esf04.htm">single transferable vote</a>. </p>
<p><iframe id="D0bST" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/D0bST/1/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p>Like the single-winner ranked-choice voting used in Australia’s House, if no candidate wins enough first-place votes to get a seat, weaker candidates are eliminated and their votes transferred to others based on second and third choices. But single transferable vote systems also reallocate what might be called “surplus” votes of winning candidates – extra votes beyond what candidates need to actually win – to ensure a more proportionate result.</p>
<p>Proportional representation allows third parties to thrive, giving voters more choices. Australia offers a natural experiment between methods: For the last half-century, Australian voters nationwide have chosen single-member House representatives and used proportional representation to elect its Senate.</p>
<p>The result is that the Green Party consistently gets about 10% of the national vote, but zero seats in the House. However, in the Senate it gets about 10% of the seats, giving it a voice in the legislative debate. The difference is the move from winner-take-all in the House to proportional representation in the Senate. In addition, major parties vie to get second-choice support from Green Party backers, so the Greens’ concerns have real influence over national policies.</p>
<p>All these ideas – voting by mail, early voting, Saturday voting, ranked-choice voting, an independent redistricting commission and proportional representation – make Australia’s democracy more inclusive and representative than in the U.S.</p>
<p>[ <em>You’re smart and curious about the world. So are The Conversation’s authors and editors.</em> <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/newsletters?utm_source=TCUS&utm_medium=inline-link&utm_campaign=newsletter-text&utm_content=youresmart">You can read us daily by subscribing to our newsletter</a>. ]</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/128617/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Steven Mulroy does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Many of the problems the US has with its election processes and outcomes are avoidable and don’t happen in countries with different voting laws. Australia is a great example.Steven Mulroy, Law Professor in Constitutional Law, Criminal Law, Election Law, University of MemphisLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1239522019-10-22T11:39:45Z2019-10-22T11:39:45ZVoting could be the problem with democracy<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/297706/original/file-20191018-56203-1fyqtmd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C0%2C4909%2C3275&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Is the voting booth a stumbling block?</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Election-2018-Ohio-Voting/fa59eedda31f4a9a9426f1b66f5202bc/49/0">AP Photo/John Minchillo</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Around the globe, citizens of many democracies are worried that their <a href="https://www.harpercollins.com/9780062945716/they-dont-represent-us/">governments are not doing what the people want</a>.</p>
<p>When voters pick representatives to engage in democracy, they hope they are picking people who will understand and respond to constituents’ needs. U.S. representatives have, on average, <a href="https://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/briefs/c2010br-08.pdf">more than 700,000 constituents</a> each, making this task more and more elusive, even with the best of intentions. <a href="https://news.gallup.com/poll/228281/satisfaction-government-remains-low.aspx">Less than 40%</a> of Americans are satisfied with their federal government. </p>
<p><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Podemos_(Spanish_political_party)">Across</a> <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-is-italys-five-star-movement-69596">Europe</a>, South America, the Middle East and China, social movements have demanded better government – but gotten few real and lasting results, even in <a href="https://www.eurasiagroup.net/live-post/eight-years-on-arab-spring-a-distant-memory-in-egypt">those places</a> where <a href="https://newrepublic.com/article/150529/fighting-democracy-lesson-bolivia">governments were</a> <a href="https://www.thenation.com/article/ecuador-protests-imf/">forced out</a>.</p>
<p>In my work as a <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=pGUCXiUAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao">comparative political scientist</a> working on democracy, citizenship and race, I’ve been researching democratic innovations in the past and present. In my book, “<a href="https://www.rowmaninternational.com/book/the_crisis_of_liberal_democracy_and_the_path_ahead/3-156-9acd3359-4c63-40f6-822d-be21a4c2dacb">The Crisis of Liberal Democracy and the Path Ahead</a>: Alternatives to Political Representation and Capitalism,” I explore the idea that the problem might actually be democratic elections themselves. </p>
<p>My research shows that another approach – randomly selecting citizens to take turns governing – offers the promise of reinvigorating struggling democracies. That could make them more responsive to citizen needs and preferences, and less vulnerable to outside manipulation.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/297710/original/file-20191018-56238-13aziub.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/297710/original/file-20191018-56238-13aziub.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/297710/original/file-20191018-56238-13aziub.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/297710/original/file-20191018-56238-13aziub.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/297710/original/file-20191018-56238-13aziub.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/297710/original/file-20191018-56238-13aziub.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/297710/original/file-20191018-56238-13aziub.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/297710/original/file-20191018-56238-13aziub.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The Bouleterion of Athens, where the randomly selected members of the Council of 500 met.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:BouleterionEntrada.JPG">Jerónimo Roure Pérez/Wikimedia Commons</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>In the beginning</h2>
<p>Democracy started as self-rule, where average citizens took turns in running public affairs. In ancient Athens, democracy demanded many hours of public service and active participation. The <a href="https://www.history.com/topics/ancient-greece/ancient-greece-democracy">Public Assembly</a>, open to all 40,000 adult male citizens, met 40 times a year to discuss laws. </p>
<p>But even with such a small society, some power needed to be delegated to smaller groups. The <a href="https://www.britannica.com/topic/Council-of-Five-Hundred-ancient-Greek-council">executive branch</a> and <a href="https://www.britannica.com/topic/dicastery">the courts</a> each consisted of 500 members who met daily. Those bodies were made up of citizens who were chosen at random.</p>
<p>More recent democratic societies, particularly those inspired by the American model, favored <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/03/america-is-not-a-democracy/550931/">rule by high-minded elites</a>. In <a href="https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed63.asp">Federalist Paper No. 63</a>, James Madison advocated for excluding average people from political power, in favor of elected representatives, who he thought would be wiser.</p>
<p>Madison and fellow Founder Alexander Hamilton feared mob rule so much that they argued against the <a href="https://www.cop.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/briefing/Direct_Election_Senators.htm">direct elections of senators</a> and presidents. <a href="https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/about.html">Indirect methods</a>, using state legislators and the Electoral College, became part of the U.S. Constitution. In 1913, the <a href="https://www.archives.gov/legislative/features/17th-amendment">17th Amendment</a> changed how senators were elected, but the Electoral College remains.</p>
<p>Over time, Americans came to accept this <a href="https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/principles-of-representative-government/B5F086D557F0A0995D6FEB2730C29EC9">rule by elites</a>. They retreated into their private lives and took care of personal and professional business, <a href="https://www.gutenberg.org/files/815/815-h/815-h.htm">leaving public business to others</a>. Much scholarship has chronicled how this mass disinterest in politics has led to <a href="http://doi.org/10.1017/S1537592714001595">manipulation of public opinion and massive abuse</a> by economic elites and corporate interest groups.</p>
<p>Fortunately, some solutions can be found in 2,500 years of democratic experiences. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/297711/original/file-20191018-56220-rs99i8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/297711/original/file-20191018-56220-rs99i8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/297711/original/file-20191018-56220-rs99i8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=391&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/297711/original/file-20191018-56220-rs99i8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=391&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/297711/original/file-20191018-56220-rs99i8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=391&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/297711/original/file-20191018-56220-rs99i8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=491&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/297711/original/file-20191018-56220-rs99i8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=491&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/297711/original/file-20191018-56220-rs99i8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=491&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A member of Congress makes a phone call – is a donor, a lobbyist or a constituent on the other end of the line?</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Congress-Health-Overhaul/9873c70f2a09467eb0d9bb25244f46f7/15/0">AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Get longtime officials out of the way</h2>
<p>Long-serving elected officials can consolidate knowledge, power and leverage over others. Members of Congress are <a href="https://www.huffpost.com/entry/call-time-congressional-fundraising_n_2427291">asked to spend more time</a> with donors and lobbyists and <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/60-minutes-are-members-of-congress-becoming-telemarketers/">raising money</a> <a href="https://www.newsweek.com/john-oliver-last-week-tonight-congressional-fundraising-443675">for reelection</a> and their <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/03/12/life-of-a-congressman/1980817/">political party</a> than with their constituents. The self-interested focus on reelection distracts them from serving the public with all their energy. </p>
<p>The Roman Republic limited people from holding public office more than once in their entire lives. After their term was over, each person had to publicly account for their actions while in office. That’s a far cry from the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/01/26/opinion/sunday/paths-to-congress.html">standard U.S. political path</a> from small local offices through state legislatures to Congress, and beyond.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/297712/original/file-20191018-56207-1tx0nod.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/297712/original/file-20191018-56207-1tx0nod.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/297712/original/file-20191018-56207-1tx0nod.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=382&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/297712/original/file-20191018-56207-1tx0nod.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=382&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/297712/original/file-20191018-56207-1tx0nod.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=382&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/297712/original/file-20191018-56207-1tx0nod.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=480&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/297712/original/file-20191018-56207-1tx0nod.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=480&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/297712/original/file-20191018-56207-1tx0nod.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=480&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">In Vermont towns, residents gather each year to talk over local issues.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Town-Meeting-Day/cdd6cdb6525547e1b1c6dcc42489806d/6/0">AP Photo/Lisa Rathke</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Involve everyone possible locally</h2>
<p>For local affairs, citizens can participate directly in local decisions. In Vermont, the first Tuesday of March is <a href="https://www.timeanddate.com/holidays/us/town-meeting-day-vermont">Town Meeting Day</a>, a public holiday during which residents gather at town halls to debate and discuss any issue they wish.</p>
<p>In some Swiss cantons, townspeople meet once a year, in what are called <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landsgemeinde">Landsgemeinden</a>, to elect public officials and discuss the budget. </p>
<p>For more than 30 years, communities around the world have involved average citizens in decisions about how to spend public money in a process called “participatory budgeting,” which involves public meetings and the participation of neighborhood associations. As many as <a href="https://www.participatorybudgeting.org/hope-for-democracy-a-new-book-reflects-on-30-years-of-participatory-budgeting/">7,000 towns and cities</a> allocate at least some of their money this way.</p>
<p>The <a href="http://www.thegovlab.org">Governance Lab</a>, based at New York University, has taken crowd-sourcing to cities seeking creative solutions to some of their most pressing problems in a process best called “crowd-problem solving.” Rather than leaving problems to a handful of bureaucrats and experts, all the <a href="https://www.thegovlab.org/static/files/publications/people-led.pdf">inhabitants of a community can participate</a> in brainstorming ideas and selecting workable possibilities. </p>
<p>Digital technology makes it easier for larger groups of people to inform themselves about, and participate in, potential solutions to public problems. In the Polish harbor city of <a href="https://apolitical.co/solution_article/citizens-tackle-public-problems/">Gdansk</a>, for instance, citizens were able to help choose ways to reduce the harm caused by flooding.</p>
<h2>Randomly select representatives</h2>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/297713/original/file-20191018-56207-1cd2p3y.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/297713/original/file-20191018-56207-1cd2p3y.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/297713/original/file-20191018-56207-1cd2p3y.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=388&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/297713/original/file-20191018-56207-1cd2p3y.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=388&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/297713/original/file-20191018-56207-1cd2p3y.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=388&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/297713/original/file-20191018-56207-1cd2p3y.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=488&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/297713/original/file-20191018-56207-1cd2p3y.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=488&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/297713/original/file-20191018-56207-1cd2p3y.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=488&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Picking names at random.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/woman-taking-paper-piece-glass-vase-1224230149">New Africa/Shutterstock.com</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In larger groups, like national and international governance, I think that it is worth returning to the Athenian method of selecting representatives: by random selection, rather than by election. </p>
<p>As was true in ancient times, this <a href="https://www.worldcat.org/title/citizen-legislature/oclc/11574116">allows average people to participate in government</a> at the same time as it <a href="http://books.imprint.co.uk/book/?gcoi=71157102888010">reduces campaigning, and slashes the influence of special interests</a>, lobbyists and financial donors.</p>
<p>A variation on this idea, which Stanford political scientist James Fishkin has called “<a href="https://cdd.stanford.edu">deliberative polling</a>,” involves randomly selected citizens who are given expert information and guided in their discussions by facilitators. During the 1990s, this method led eight Texas energy companies to adopt the most advanced <a href="https://cdd.stanford.edu/1998/deliberative-polling-texas-electric-utilities/">wind-energy policies</a> of the country. </p>
<p>In 2016, Ireland convened a <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens%27_Assembly_(Ireland)">group of 99 citizens chosen at random</a>, plus a national supreme court judge as a chairperson. Their task was to study and report to the nation on <a href="https://www.citizensassembly.ie/en/">key issues facing the country</a>, including abortion, an aging population and climate change.</p>
<p>When considering reforming their electoral systems, the Netherlands and Mongolia, as well as the Canadian provinces of British Columbia and Ontario, <a href="https://global.oup.com/academic/product/democracy-when-the-people-are-thinking-9780198820291?cc=us&lang=en&">all chose citizens at random</a> to debate the issues, instead of holding elections.</p>
<p>[<em>You’re smart and curious about the world. So are The Conversation’s authors and editors.</em> <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/newsletters?utm_source=TCUS&utm_medium=inline-link&utm_campaign=newsletter-text&utm_content=youresmart">You can read us daily by subscribing to our newsletter</a>.]</p>
<p>All of this leads me to conclude that what the public views as the best political decisions are not made by professional politicians. Rather, average citizens, selected randomly and given the time, necessary information and space to listen to each other and to debate, are better suited to make these decisions while acquiring practical experience about politics and fighting widespread political alienation at the same time.</p>
<p>In addition, the random selection of lawmakers who convene when necessary hinders the emergence of a political class of professionals and undermines the need for anyone to campaign for office. Personal wealth and campaign contributions would be irrelevant. Media manipulation would be useless, as nobody would know up front who will be selected, so nobody could advertise their own merits or attack opponents.</p>
<p>A system in which every citizen has a turn at having a real voice, free of special interests and misinformation? It sounds like real democracy to me.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/123952/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Bernd Reiter does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Randomly selecting citizens to take turns governing offers the promise of reinvigorating struggling democracies, making them more responsive to citizen needs and preferences.Bernd Reiter, Professor of Political Science, University of South FloridaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/942422018-04-09T10:43:50Z2018-04-09T10:43:50ZElection security means much more than just new voting machines<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/213456/original/file-20180405-189830-1e51o3y.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Testing a new voting machine is a good start.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Election-Security-Decentralized-Dangers/a81c014b860e43b39af3f95bd7b334ff/4/0">AP Photo/David Goldman</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>In late March, Congress passed <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/21/us/politics/senate-intelligence-hearing-elections-security.html">a significant spending bill</a> that included US$380 million in state grants to improve election infrastructure. As the U.S. ramps up for the 2018 midterm elections, that may seem like a huge amount of money, but it’s really only a start at securing the country’s voting systems. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.brennancenter.org/publication/americas-voting-machines-risk">A 2015 report by the Brennan Center</a> law and policy institute at New York University estimates overhauling the nation’s voting system could cost more than $1 billion – though the price could be partially offset by more efficient contracting. Most voting equipment hasn’t been updated <a href="http://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/blogs/stateline/2016/03/02/aging-voting-machines-cost-local-state-governments">since the early 2000s</a>. At times, election officials must <a href="https://statetechmagazine.com/article/2015/12/outdated-voting-machine-technology-poses-security-and-election-risks">buy voting machine hardware on eBay</a>, because the companies that made them are no longer in business. Even when working properly, those machines are not secure: At the <a href="https://www.defcon.org/html/defcon-25/dc-25-index.html">2017 DEF CON hacker conference</a>, <a href="https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/07/29/us_voting_machines_hacking/">attackers took control of several voting machines</a> in a matter of minutes.</p>
<p>Securing electoral systems across the U.S. is a big problem with high stakes. This federal money being provided to states now may not be the last of its kind, but it’s what’s available right away, and it must be used as efficiently as possible.</p>
<h2>1. A reliable backup system: Paper ballots</h2>
<p>The security community has been clamoring for <a href="https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2017/12/matt_blaze_on_s.html">paper ballots</a> <a href="https://doi.org/10.1109/MSPEC.2002.1038569">for years</a>. Now, with <a href="https://www.burr.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/One-Pager%20Recs%20FINAL%20VERSION%203-20.pdf">evidence of election hacking in 2016</a> and the vivid demonstration of <a href="https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/07/29/us_voting_machines_hacking/">voting machine vulnerability</a>, the idea is gaining traction.</p>
<p>Paper ballots aren’t perfect – remember “<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chad_(paper)">hanging chads</a>”? – but they provide a physical record that can be compared to electronic records. And if there are discrepancies between the two, paper provides a way to track down the source of the problem. Even if votes are counted electronically, keeping paper ballots provides a way to validate and verify the results if they’re in question – rather than just hoping the electronics are secure. </p>
<h2>2. Examining the whole problem</h2>
<p>Discussing the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence’s investigation into Russian efforts to manipulate state election systems, Chairman Richard Burr, a North Carolina Republican, said, “<a href="https://www.sfchronicle.com/nation/article/Key-Senate-committee-concludes-Russian-12768554.php">It’s clear the Russian government was looking for vulnerabilities</a>.” U.S. election officials should do the same: Probe election systems to identify weaknesses, but then also fix them. </p>
<p>And like the Russians, the U.S. must think about the entire electoral system. Beyond the machines that tabulate votes, which have been at the center of the conversation, there are many other pieces in the system. These include the ways people register to vote, where their records are kept, and how they are verified at the polls as legitimate voters. And there’s what happens after votes are tabulated, as they’re being reported from individual polling places to central municipal records and up to state election officials.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/more-state-election-databases-hacked-than-previously-thought/">At least 10</a> <a href="http://time.com/4828306/russian-hacking-election-widespread-private-data/">states’ voting registration systems</a> <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/09/23/what-we-know-about-the-21-states-targeted-by-russian-hackers/">were compromised</a>, most likely <a href="http://time.com/4472169/russian-hackers-arizona-voter-registration/">by the Russians</a> in the lead-up to the 2016 U.S. presidential election. Despite relief that votes themselves were not changed, these registration systems dictate who is allowed to vote and where, and how voting materials (like referendum information and absentee ballots) are distributed. Elections are often determined by small margins. <a href="https://theconversation.com/rebooting-the-mathematics-behind-gerrymandering-73096">Selectively disenfranchising a small percentage of voters</a> could very well swing the results.</p>
<h2>3. Securing voters, not just machines</h2>
<p>Election security isn’t a problem that will be solved just with technology. Democracy depends on people – specifically, their trust that the system is valid and secure. If that trust continues to erode, fewer of them will participate in elections, and some may begin to reject officially reported results. </p>
<p>In 2016, <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2016/11/11/politics/popular-vote-turnout-2016/index.html">voter turnout was at a 20-year low</a>, with only <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2016/11/11/politics/popular-vote-turnout-2016/index.html">55 percent of eligible citizens casting votes</a>. <a href="http://www.electproject.org/home/voter-turnout/demographics">Younger voters have lower turnout than older voters</a> – for example, while more than 70 percent of eligible voters over the age of 60 cast votes in 2016, only 43 percent of people in the 18-to-29-year-old bracket did so. </p>
<p>The government must not only act, but also reassure the electorate that those actions reflect how seriously officials are taking public concerns. States may want to consider something similar to the <a href="http://money.cnn.com/2017/04/11/technology/hack-the-pentagon-synack-bug-bounty/index.html">“Hack the Pentagon” program</a>, which has been publicly visible as well as effective in flushing out security issues in specific Defense Department systems. “Whether you’re a well-funded government like the U.S. or anyone else, you have to work with the hacker community,” said <a href="http://lutasecurity.com/">Katie Moussouris</a>, who helped start “Hack the Pentagon” and also created Microsoft’s bug bounty program. It’s a bold move, but inviting <a href="https://theconversation.com/malwaretechs-arrest-sheds-light-on-the-complex-culture-of-the-hacking-world-82136">white-hat hackers</a> to publicly probe election systems – and paying them for information on the vulnerabilities they find – would show voters that states are serious about solving problems. </p>
<p>There is a lot of work to do to secure U.S. elections, but $380 million is a good way to start. If states spend it in the most meaningful ways – patching both their machines and the population’s trust – they will build a system that’s secure, trustworthy and works for all the people.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/94242/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jamie Winterton is affiliated with New America as a Future Tense Fellow.</span></em></p>As millions in federal dollars flow to states to protect elections, what should the money help pay for?Jamie Winterton, Director of Strategy, Global Security Initiative, Arizona State UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/942432018-04-06T10:46:30Z2018-04-06T10:46:30ZPaper trails and random audits could secure all elections – don’t save them just for recounts in close races<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/213234/original/file-20180404-95689-okiud6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Recounting very close races is not enough to ensure election integrity.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Virginia-Election-Recount/ae358c5cf1484bc294b1be0f48695311/14/0">AP Photo/Ben Finley</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>As <a href="https://www.politico.com/newsletters/morning-cybersecurity/2018/03/23/plenty-of-cyber-nuggets-in-the-omnibus-149206">states begin to receive millions of federal dollars</a> to secure the 2018 primary and general elections, officials around the country will have to decide how to spend it to best protect the integrity of the democratic process. If voters don’t trust the results, it doesn’t matter whether an election was actually fair or not.</p>
<p>Right now, the most visible election integrity effort in the U.S. involves conducting recounts in especially close races. A similar approach could be applied much more broadly.</p>
<p>Based on <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=ptI-HHkAAAAJ&hl=en">my research into game theory as a way to secure elections</a>, I suggest that the proper first line of defense is auditing results. While an audit can only happen after Election Day, it’s crucial to prepare in advance.</p>
<h2>Announcing the event</h2>
<p>Before the election, officials should make clear public statements that they will be auditing the results. But not every district should have an equal chance at being audited. </p>
<p>For instance, it may be more difficult to influence vote counts in some districts, such as those with <a href="https://theconversation.com/aging-voting-machines-threaten-election-integrity-54523">newer voting equipment</a>. Also, attackers may have different goals: They might seek to defeat a particular candidate as a U.S. senator, for instance. Or they might be trying to control the balance of power in the whole Senate, caring more about the overall split than which candidates get elected where.</p>
<p><a href="https://theconversation.com/using-randomness-to-protect-election-integrity-74139">Applying the principles of game theory</a> would let election officials assign each district – from an entire state down to a municipal precinct – a rating combining a range of factors, including how hard a district’s machines are to tamper with, and how much power that district’s outcome has in determining whether a specific candidate is elected, or the exact political split in a legislative body.</p>
<p>That rating would determine the likelihood a particular district would have of being audited. For example, if a district had taken special precautions to prevent tampering with its election machines, or was not expected to be a swing district in a broader election, it may be less likely to be audited. Narrowly divided districts that also had vulnerable hardware would be much more likely to be audited, because they would also be more susceptible to tampering.</p>
<p>The prospect of audits will in itself deter anyone with malicious intent, reducing the likelihood of an attack. And the audits themselves will help the voting public be sure any tampering is likely to be discovered.</p>
<h2>Creating a paper trail</h2>
<p>For audits to be meaningful, each vote must be recorded on paper – which is much harder to alter than a digital record, and is the only way to have an independent record of votes that can be compared to digital voting results. Ballots can still be tallied using computers, however. </p>
<p><a href="http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/11/08/on-election-day-most-voters-use-electronic-or-optical-scan-ballots/ft_16-11-07_votingtechnology/"><img width="640" height="600" src="http://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/2016/11/07164119/FT_16.11.07_votingTechnology.png" class="attachment-large size-large" alt="" srcset="http://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/2016/11/07164119/FT_16.11.07_votingTechnology.png 640w, http://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/2016/11/07164119/FT_16.11.07_votingTechnology-300x281.png 300w, http://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/2016/11/07164119/FT_16.11.07_votingTechnology-200x188.png 200w, http://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/2016/11/07164119/FT_16.11.07_votingTechnology-260x244.png 260w, http://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/2016/11/07164119/FT_16.11.07_votingTechnology-432x405.png 432w, http://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/2016/11/07164119/FT_16.11.07_votingTechnology-50x47.png 50w, http://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/2016/11/07164119/FT_16.11.07_votingTechnology-160x150.png 160w" sizes="(max-width: 640px) 100vw, 640px"></a></p>
<p>In some districts, <a href="http://stateandcapitol.bangordailynews.com/2018/02/21/with-one-exception-maines-election-system-is-about-as-secure-as-possible/">voters mark paper ballots</a> and insert them into an optical scanner, which counts the votes and secures the paper records if needed for later examination.</p>
<p>In other districts, people select their votes <a href="http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/11/08/on-election-day-most-voters-use-electronic-or-optical-scan-ballots/">directly on computerized systems</a>. In those cases, election officials should ensure the machine prints out a paper record of how a person is voting, which must be <a href="https://www.verifiedvoting.org/resources/vvpr-legislation/">confirmed by the voter</a> before the ballot is officially cast. There are <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter-verified_paper_audit_trail">several different mechanisms</a> by which this can happen – such as displaying the paper record through a glass window in the voting machine, and then saving it in a secure compartment for later recounting or auditing.</p>
<p>It’s also important for election officials to prepare for problems generating that paper record – whether innocuous inconveniences like printer jams or a malicious attack that disables a machine’s ability to print. This may mean having alternative paper ballots on hand for voters to use if electronic systems break down.</p>
<p>Then, after the election, auditors can compare electronic voting results to the results documented in the paper trail. If they don’t agree, then something has gone wrong – either accidentally or as a result of outside interference – and a newly verified tally of the actual paper votes can be used to determine the winner. Often, this is done in the form of a recount for elections with close outcomes. But it needs to happen in other elections too.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/94243/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Eugene Vorobeychik receives funding from the National Science Foundation, the Department of Defense, and the National Institutes of Health. </span></em></p>The best way to protect elections is to plan and prepare for an audit of the results after the votes are cast.Eugene Vorobeychik, Assistant Professor of Computer Science and Computer Engineering, Vanderbilt UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/681002016-11-09T19:21:49Z2016-11-09T19:21:49ZAmerica’s aging voting machines managed to survive another election<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/145129/original/image-20161109-16724-wwjvc6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Depending on old technology.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/robpegoraro/20339783219/">Rob Pegoraro/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/">CC BY-NC-SA</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>During this year’s voting, the vast majority of states used outdated voting machines perilously close to the end of their projected lifespan. Back in April, we warned that <a href="https://theconversation.com/aging-voting-machines-threaten-election-integrity-54523">42 states use machines</a> that are at least a decade old. Given that a high percentage of these machines have projected lifespans of between 10 and 15 years, we argued something needs to be done soon to prevent a real crisis.</p>
<p>We also pointed out, though, that the fact that the machines are aging does not mean they will all break down at once. Fortunately, on Election Day, most Americans were able to vote on machines that functioned properly, though in a few areas like <a href="http://www.fox2detroit.com/news/elections-2016/216159836-story">Detroit</a>, problems were widespread.</p>
<p>In addition, <a href="https://www.eac.gov/election_management_resources/beready16.aspx">election officials were well-prepared</a>. Keenly aware of the potential problems associated with using antiquated equipment during a high-turnout election, they were generally able to keep voting going smoothly when <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/competing-claims-of-voter-fraud-intimidation-raise-tensions/2016/11/08/2342e93a-a58e-11e6-ba46-53db57f0e351_story.html">problems did arise</a>.</p>
<p>Still, the failures that we did see serve as a warning of how bad things could get if we don’t replace our aging voting equipment soon. In <a href="https://www.rti.org/sites/default/files/resources/3327.pdf">a 2010 report</a>, one state’s Department of Legislative Services found that the “nature and frequency of equipment failure beyond the manufacturer’s life expectancy cannot be predicted.” As machines approach the 15-year mark, we are likely to see progressively worse and more frequent problems.</p>
<h2>Problems started early</h2>
<p>Machine problems had already cropped up at the start of this year’s early voting.</p>
<p>Many difficulties tended to affect paperless computerized voting machines, or direct recording electronic machines (DREs), on which voters make their selection on a touchscreen, with a button or a dial. In <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/voting-machine-issue-georgia-officials-blame-testing-43116795">Georgia</a>, <a href="http://www.npr.org/2016/10/26/499450796/some-machines-are-flipping-votes-but-that-doesnt-mean-theyre-rigged">Nevada</a>, <a href="http://www.npr.org/2016/10/26/499450796/some-machines-are-flipping-votes-but-that-doesnt-mean-theyre-rigged">North Carolina</a>, <a href="http://www.newschannel10.com/story/33558990/voting-official-admits-numerous-occasions-of-machine-malfunctions">Tennessee</a> and <a href="http://www.npr.org/2016/10/26/499450796/some-machines-are-flipping-votes-but-that-doesnt-mean-theyre-rigged">Texas</a>, early voters reported calibration problems, or “vote flipping.” It’s a problem unique to touchscreen machines, where a voter intends to pick one candidate, but another shows up as her choice. </p>
<p>In <a href="http://www.fox13memphis.com/top-stories/problems-at-the-polls-on-first-day-of-early-voting-in-tn/458784577">Shelby County, Tennessee</a>, 30 smart cards failed, making it impossible to pull up the correct electronic ballot on voting machines. In <a href="http://kxan.com/2016/10/25/hays-county-reports-issues-with-voting-machines-at-one-location/">Hays County, Texas</a>, voters waited for over an hour because a “faulty cable connection” caused voting machines to fail on the second day of early voting.</p>
<p>Voting machine problems persisted through Election Day. <a href="https://electionlandtrends.appspot.com/">Reports of malfunction</a> came from several voting locations. Calibration errors were reported in the key swing state of <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/2016/11/08/some-pennsylvania-voters-pick-trump-but-screen-says-clinton/93491844/">Pennsylvania</a>. In one <a href="http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/ct-election-voting-problems-20161108-story.html">Utah county</a>, due to widespread memory card failure, 75 percent of the county’s nearly 400 voting machines failed. In the <a href="http://www.fox2detroit.com/news/elections-2016/216159836-story">Detroit</a> area, optical scan machines would not accept ballots. </p>
<p>But at least in some cases, there were ways to work around these sorts of problems. In Durham County, North Carolina, computer problems caused delays for poll workers checking in voters. They switched to backup paper documents, and after litigation, <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/08/politics/north-carolina-durham-county-glitch/index.html">extended voting hours in eight precincts</a> to make up for the difficulties.</p>
<p>A full accounting of <a href="http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/11/election-2016-voter-intimidation-tracker-live-blog">Election Day’s problems</a> will likely take months to sort out.</p>
<p>We can’t say how many votes were affected by these problems, but they no doubt contributed to long lines. We likely saw at least as many machine problems as we saw in 2012, when approximately 500,000 to 700,000 people <a href="https://www.supportthevoter.gov/files/2013/08/Waiting-in-Line-to-Vote-White-Paper-Stewart-Ansolabehere.pdf">did not vote because of long lines</a>. Of course, there are many potential causes of long lines, including <a href="https://www.brennancenter.org/analysis/end-long-lines">misallocation of poll workers</a>. But other causes are definitely failures both of election officials to provide enough machines and of the machines themselves in certain polling places.</p>
<h2>Preventing another Bush v. Gore</h2>
<p>As machines get older, these functionality problems will likely multiply. Context matters. Imagine if these problems had taken place in an extremely close race, decided by just a few hundred or thousand votes. The fallout would be disastrous.</p>
<p>We don’t have to imagine what this would look like, because it has already happened. In 2000, problems with <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2000/11/19/us/counting-the-vote-the-machine-new-focus-on-punch-card-system.html">faulty voting machines</a> contributed to an electoral meltdown of epic proportions.</p>
<p>One key difference between 2000 and today is that we live in a <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2014/01/24/the-two-key-factors-behind-our-polarized-politics/">much more polarized political climate</a>, where discussion of “rigged” elections has become far too common. </p>
<p>Making matters worse, there are more <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-machines-idUSKCN11Q0EU">computerized voting machines</a> in use today that do not provide a paper record. In parts of the country using paperless computerized machines – <a href="https://www.brennancenter.org/analysis/fact-sheet-voting-system-security-and-reliability-risks">where more than 40 million registered voters reside</a> – voters are asked to trust a system of which they are increasingly skeptical. </p>
<p>Those concerns merge when, on Election Day, a major party candidate takes to <a href="http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/11/8/13567060/trump-voter-fraud-2016-election">cable news</a> and <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/11/08/translating-donald-trumps-voter-fraud-talk-into-reality/">Twitter</a> to cast doubt on the outcome.</p>
<p>Confidence in election outcomes and the integrity of our electoral system is the currency of our democracy. It is no exaggeration to say that without that confidence, our democracy will cease to function. Anyone who cares about the legitimacy of our elections in future years will work to ensure our oldest, least reliable and verifiable equipment is replaced.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/68100/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Where problems arose, voting was generally able to keep going smoothly. But those failures serve as a warning of how bad things could get if we don’t replace our voting machines soon.Lawrence Norden, Deputy Director, Democracy Program, Brennan Center for Justice, New York UniversityChristopher Famighetti, Voting Rights Researcher, Democracy Project, Brennan Center for Justice, New York UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/601232016-07-24T20:02:24Z2016-07-24T20:02:24ZDespairing about elections? This is why your vote matters<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/129138/original/image-20160704-19110-1kceq2q.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Your vote is not insignificant in the bigger scheme of things. It matters.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://flic.kr/p/ByMNDf">Rod Waddington/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>It seems that no matter who you vote for, a politician gets elected. Given that outcome, how can we make sure that the person we elect has the character and abilities to do the job properly? </p>
<p>The solution doesn’t lie with staying away from the polls – though evidence suggests this is what more and more people are doing around the world, whether it’s in <a href="http://www.sacsis.org.za/site/article/2001">South Africa</a>, <a href="http://www.straitstimes.com/asia/australianz/hard-to-pin-down-why-young-aussies-stay-away-from-polls">Australia</a>, countries around <a href="http://www.theeastafrican.co.ke/OpEd/comment/Democracy-under-threat-as-leaders-fix-polls-voters-stay-away/-/434750/3036370/-/11sjn5f/-/index.html">East Africa</a>, <a href="http://billingsgazette.com/news/state-and-regional/wyoming/after-caucus-disillusioned-dems-might-stay-away-from-polls/article_7a247478-713f-57b4-abc9-a8f270fdec5d.html">the US</a> or during the UK’s <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/24/how-did-turnout-affect-the-eu-referendum-result/">recent Brexit vote</a>. </p>
<p>When potential voters choose not to exercise their right to vote, they effectively abdicate any decision-making and potentially allow the few to choose for the many. Not voting doesn’t make things better. It can actually make them worse.</p>
<h2>The tragedy of the commons</h2>
<p>There is an old problem in philosophy known as the “<a href="http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/TragedyoftheCommons.html">tragedy of the commons</a>”. One version goes something like this: there is a common area of farmland used by all the villagers in the area to graze animals. This land has supported the village for many years, but now the population is increasing and the land is feeling the pressure. In response the community decides to limit access to the land, to ensure that each farmer only uses it to feed the bare minimum of livestock.</p>
<p>All well and good, but each farmer thinks along the following lines: if I can graze one extra animal on the commons it will make a very small difference to the community – but a huge difference to me. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/129913/original/image-20160709-24105-n5gzzk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/129913/original/image-20160709-24105-n5gzzk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/129913/original/image-20160709-24105-n5gzzk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/129913/original/image-20160709-24105-n5gzzk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/129913/original/image-20160709-24105-n5gzzk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/129913/original/image-20160709-24105-n5gzzk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/129913/original/image-20160709-24105-n5gzzk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">There isn’t always room for one more.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/stanzebla/9461279546/">Stanze/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Of course, each of them is correct. But the end result of this individual preferencing is a collective calamity. The land degrades as a result of a large number of individual, small-scale effects.</p>
<p>What we potentially have in an election situation is something of the reverse. If everyone thinks that what they have to contribute is too little, and so refrains from participating, then the few who do vote will end up making the decisions for them. This may also be calamitous. </p>
<p>It’s exactly what happened during the recent Brexit vote. Many young people who wanted to remain in the European Union <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jul/09/young-people-referendum-turnout-brexit-twice-as-high">did not vote</a>. They didn’t stay away en masse as was originally reported, but older voters, many of whom wanted to leave the EU, turned out in bigger numbers. The result? The decision was made for those youngsters who had backed “remain” but stayed away.</p>
<p>A politician always gets elected at the end of the voting process. But this is where the critical thinking bites. For just as each person who votes is a chance to make things better, each person who doesn’t is a chance to make things worse. Each action, voting or not voting, has an equally significant consequence – it’s just that not voting can only produce a negative one.</p>
<p>Not voting can have serious consequences regarding the kind of society we end up living in. Disengagement can mean a lowering of quality of life.</p>
<h2>Political delusion</h2>
<p>Politicians who win by default or because the voting public isn’t interested can make spurious claims, a point recently <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-myth-of-public-opinion-61965">eloquently outlined</a> by Australian author and public intellectual Clive Hamilton. </p>
<p>The most significant claim is that they have a mandate to do what they want. The simple fact of being elected is seen as a manifestation of the will of the people. Moreover, they therefore think themselves entitled by this “mandate” to ignore the claims of those who voted otherwise, even though these voters might make up a significant proportion of the population.</p>
<p>The number of politicians who emerge from a narrow victory feeling anointed rather than lucky is disturbingly large. A result of this delusion is that anyone who opposes them must also be opposing the collective wisdom of the nation. This puts some people in an even more powerless position. </p>
<h2>There’s no neutral option</h2>
<p>Politicians have a range of strategies to make sure they attain and maintain power. All of them rely on influencing how we make decisions on their terms rather than ours. I’ve written in part <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-politicians-dont-want-us-to-think-but-opinions-are-okay-41459">about this before</a>.</p>
<p>If only those swayed by political rhetoric end up voting, we end up valuing political spin and shallow sloganeering above substantive policy, personality cults over political leadership, and private interests over the public good. In short, power goes to the best salesperson with the best show – not the best leader with the best policies. </p>
<p>It’s a corruption of the very idea of public reasoning and collective decision-making that is the only alternative we have to dictatorships and oligarchies.</p>
<p>Just as the more people vote, the better the chance of good government, so the fewer who vote improves the chance of bad government. And we’ve surely had enough of that. It counts when you vote and it counts just as much when you don’t. Only one of them counts for the better.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/60123/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Peter Ellerton does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Not voting can have serious consequences regarding the kind of society we end up living in. Disengagement can mean a lowering of quality of life.Peter Ellerton, Lecturer in Critical Thinking, The University of QueenslandLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/621712016-07-07T07:14:10Z2016-07-07T07:14:10ZElectronic voting may be risky, but what about vote counting?<p>Several advantages of online voting were identified in a <a href="https://theconversation.com/despite-experts-fears-australia-should-be-moving-to-electronic-online-voting-61832">recent post</a> by Conversation columnist and software researcher David Glance who backed the introduction of such a scheme in Australia.</p>
<p>He is correct that an online voting system would be faster, more convenient and have fewer accidental informal votes. It would also reduce the donkey vote problem (though the “donkey vote” bias can also be dealt with by the use of <a href="http://www.parliament.tas.gov.au/tpl/backg/HAElections.htm">Robson rotation</a> on printed ballots).</p>
<p>But in my view he dismisses the very real risks not only of actual election tampering, but something equally important – the confidence that Australian elections aren’t being tampered with.</p>
<p>A vote-counting system not only needs to be secure against threats to its integrity, it needs to be seen to be secure against such threats. </p>
<p>The right technologies, deployed in the right way, can assist with speeding up vote counts without putting the integrity of our voting system at risk. The place for that technology is not as a replacement for the paper ballot.</p>
<h2>Voting is not like paying your bills</h2>
<p>Most Australians conduct many financial transactions online, such as paying bills or online banking, with a reasonable degree of confidence.</p>
<p>But while these systems do work acceptably well most of the time, there is a steady stream of fraud committed against them. Some estimates put the cost of cybercrime in Australia at <a href="https://www.ag.gov.au/CrimeAndCorruption/Cybercrime/Documents/national-plan-to-combat-cybercrime.pdf">around A$2 billion annually</a>.</p>
<p>Furthermore, there are some key differences between voting and financial transactions which will make electronic voting harder to secure.</p>
<p>For example, financial transactions are private, but not anonymous, and they are conducted on a continuous basis, not once every three years or so.</p>
<p>The two parties to a financial transaction can see how the transaction is interpreted by the financial institution involved, and can report any problems.</p>
<p>Any fraudulent financial transactions can often be reversed or compensated for on an individual basis. If an online election is found to be unsound, the only remedy may be to rerun the election.</p>
<p>Further concerns over online voting have been raised <a href="https://theconversation.com/election-explainer-why-cant-australians-vote-online-57738">elsewhere on The Conversation</a>.</p>
<h2>Confidence in elections is social, not just technical</h2>
<p>If we propose to radically change Australia’s vote-counting system, we should at least do so only after fully considering the nature of the existing system.</p>
<p>It’s pretty widely acknowledged that Australia’s vote counting system is <a href="https://theconversation.com/australias-robust-voting-system-deserves-praise-not-criticism-18320">generally accurate</a> and not subject to widespread tampering. So let’s ask the question: why do we have confidence in Australian elections?</p>
<p>Partly, it’s by direct observation as voters: as we vote, we also observe the process. We see the ballots, we see them being placed in the ballot box. But it’s also through our network of relationships. </p>
<p>Many Australians would probably know one of the <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-07-02/election-2016-3m-queenslanders-to-vote-and-gobble-down-snags/7562296">75,000 temporary poll workers</a>. Those more interested in politics are likely to know a scrutineer, a representative of a party on the ballot who directly observes the vote counting.</p>
<p>Confidence in Australian elections is therefore the result of the observations of a large fraction of the Australian population. The confidence that a conspiracy to rig a vote involving many ordinary Australians is beyond the realms of plausibility. </p>
<p>While all manner of other conspiracy theories circulate on social media, election-rigging conspiracy theories are almost unknown in Australia.</p>
<p>An online, or even an electronic voting system in polling booths, would shift the responsibility for electoral integrity to a tiny technical elite with the time and skills to audit the voting technology used.</p>
<p>We are supposed to trust both their personal incorruptibility, and their competence. Serious security flaws are often missed by such professionals until they have been systematically exploited by criminals.</p>
<h2>Automate the count, not the recording</h2>
<p>People with disabilities have been among the strongest advocates for electronically aided voting, for good reason. But that does not mean that paper ballots should be discarded to this end.</p>
<p>With the right technology, instructions expressed by voice commands, a touchscreen, or whatever interface the voter can use unaided can do the job of marking their ballots. That way voters with disabilities will be able to vote with the same level of privacy and autonomy that others take for granted.</p>
<p>Regardless of how they are marked, paper ballots do not necessarily need to be counted by hand. Senate ballot papers are <a href="http://www.aec.gov.au/elections/candidates/files/counting/css-faqs.pdf">currently being counted</a> with the assistance of handwriting recognition systems similar to the ones used to read postcodes on hand-addressed envelopes.</p>
<p>The present system is only semi-automated, in that every ballot scan is then checked by a human operator.</p>
<p>In the future, it is likely that the system can be refined so as not to require every vote to be human-verified. For instance, using two or more independently implemented automated counting systems, combined with randomised spot checking by AEC staff and scrutineers, may be sufficient to ensure an accurate count. </p>
<p>This would allow much faster initial Senate counts but, if there is any doubt, a hand recount is always possible.</p>
<p>In the United States, which uses a wide variety of vote-counting technologies, the one most favoured by academic experts is <a href="http://www.eac.gov/eac_certifies_third_optical-scan_voting_system/">optical scanning ballots</a>. Many people would have come across these in multiple-choice tests such as driving tests: you fill in the box corresponding to your choice. </p>
<p>These work very well in the American context. They are fast, accurate and can be hand-counted in case of a technical problem or dispute. But American elections do not use the preferential voting system. </p>
<p>Designing a system and educating Australians to use this kind of ballot for preferential votes would present a significant challenge and would probably result in a high informal vote.</p>
<p>In any case, expert opinion is clear – no voting system that relies on electronics to record votes, including systems that produce some kind of human-readable audit trail, has any substantial advantages over paper and pencil (or, perhaps indelible pen).</p>
<p>Even the inventor of the “voter-verified paper audit trail”, Dr Rebecca Mercuri, has <a href="http://www.notablesoftware.com/RMstatement.html">concluded</a> that such systems are inferior to paper ballots marked by the voter.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/62171/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Robert Merkel has donated to and volunteered for the Australian Greens.</span></em></p>There’s something about seeing the ballot process take place – the vote, the count – that inspires confidence. That wouldn’t be the same with any electronic voting system.Robert Merkel, Lecturer in Software Engineering, Monash UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/578312016-06-30T02:39:45Z2016-06-30T02:39:45ZElection explainer: why do I have to vote, anyway?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/122804/original/image-20160517-15939-1141oq2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Australia continues to enjoy voter turnout levels that are the envy of voluntary-voting regimes the world over.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Lukas Coch</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Before too long Australians will be heading off to the polls. As usual there will be complaints from those who object to being required to vote when the majority of Western democracies remain voluntary.</p>
<p>Yet almost of all those voluntary settings are battling escalating turnout decline and, with it, the slow death of representative democracy. Australians continue to enjoy <a href="http://www.idea.int/vt/countryview.cfm?id=15">turnout levels</a> that are the envy of voluntary-voting regimes the world over.</p>
<h2>Why have compulsory voting?</h2>
<p>Australia has one of the oldest systems of compulsory voting. Queensland was the first Australian state to introduce it in 1914, but voting did not become compulsory at the federal level until 1924.</p>
<p>Compulsory voting was adopted to tackle the problem of low voter turnout. At the time, it hovered below 60%. </p>
<p>It turned out to be an extremely decisive and well-accepted remedy. After its introduction, turnout surged dramatically to more than 90% of registered voters. It has stayed that way ever since.</p>
<p>Compulsory voting can therefore improve turnout by up to 30 percentage points. Conversely, when a well-established democratic system abandons it, turnout drops steeply by between 20 and 30 percentage points, <a href="http://www.idea.int/vt/countryview.cfm?id=45">as happened recently in Chile</a>.</p>
<p>Critics of compulsory voting often claim there are equally effective, voluntary means for raising voter turnout. But compulsory voting is the only really <a href="http://www.australianreview.net/journal/v6/n1/louth_hill.pdf">reliable and decisive means</a> for keeping turnout high. And its effect is immediate.</p>
<p>There are several sound reasons for requiring people to vote.</p>
<p>When everyone votes, governments are more legitimate. People tend to think of democracy as a constitutional form but, really, it is an activity constituted by the political participation of citizens. Unless it is performed it only exists in theory.</p>
<p>There are many ways of performing democracy. But voting is the most-consequential and, arguably, least-demanding method, especially in well-run systems such as Australia’s. Through voting, we sign up to the political community and enter into a partnership with other members so that together we can constitute democracy as it is meant to be:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Government of the people, by the people, for the people.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Because the one-vote one-value principle is embodied in democratic practice and ensured through almost-complete participation, voting in Australia is one of the few activities that allow us to express our equality with other citizens and to exercise our interests equally in self-government and self-protection. </p>
<p>This is why participation should be universal. If only a few participate, the political community is only partially and lopsidedly constituted. All must join with all, not some with some, especially when that “some” turns out to be the prosperous and well-educated as is invariably the case in voluntary systems.</p>
<h2>Does compulsory voting do any good?</h2>
<p>Compulsory voting regimes have <a href="http://archive.unu.edu/unupress/sample-chapters/full_participation_web.pdf">lower levels of corruption</a>.</p>
<p>They also have higher levels of satisfaction with the way democracy is working than do voluntary systems. In compulsory voting regimes – where just about everybody votes – government attention and spending is <a href="http://www.cambridge.org/au/academic/subjects/politics-international-relations/political-theory/compulsory-voting-and-against">more evenly distributed</a> across social classes.</p>
<p>More evenly distributed government attention means more even wealth distribution. As a result, compulsory voting settings enjoy <a href="http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1283995">lower levels of wealth inequality</a>. It is no coincidence that when compulsory voting was first introduced in Australia there was a <a href="http://projects.iq.harvard.edu/files/westminster_model_democracy/files/fowler_compulsoryvoting.pdf">dramatic increase</a> in pension spending. When everyone votes, governments are more representative.</p>
<p><a href="http://press.princeton.edu/titles/8756.html">Some say</a> compulsory voting causes the electoral process to be clogged with too many incompetent and ignorant voters who vote “badly”. Higher turnout, <a href="http://www.brown.edu/Research/ppw/files/Polluting%20the%20Polls.pdf">they say</a>, brings a higher proportion of informal and “donkey” votes that distort electoral outcomes. </p>
<p><a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1475-6765.2009.01834.x/abstract">Some claim</a> that high turnout elections are characterised by a higher proportion of voters who are incapable of even voting in their own interests.</p>
<p>With regard to the last claim, high levels of turnout actually correlate with governments that are more responsive to the needs and priorities of the entire electorate. </p>
<p>That is, governments are more representative and therefore more democratic when everyone votes. So, somehow or other, poorer and less-well-educated voters, no matter how badly they perform on political knowledge surveys, do seem to know what they are doing.</p>
<h2>How bad is the ‘bad voting’ problem in Australia?</h2>
<p>Informal voting <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1475-6765.1995.tb00638.x/abstract">tends to be higher</a> in compulsory voting regimes. This is because people whose first language isn’t English, less-well-educated, and poorer members of the electorate have been brought into the voting process.</p>
<p>These electors, while clear about how they want to vote, <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-8497.2009.01505a.x/abstract">have a hard time</a> casting a valid ballot due to factors associated with their disadvantage.</p>
<p>Yet these informal votes do little harm because they are not counted. Therefore, they are incapable of distorting outcomes.</p>
<p>Also, the donkey vote – where voters mindlessly number their ballots from top to bottom or in reverse – only accounts for <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1540-6237.2009.00603.x/abstract">around 1% of total votes cast</a> in Australia. This is actually lower than in many systems where voting is voluntary such as the US, where the figure <a href="https://digital.library.adelaide.edu.au/dspace/handle/2440/70788">has been estimated</a> at between 2% and 4%.</p>
<p>Compelling people to vote seems to increase their political knowledge. This is partly because voters choose to inform themselves when they know they have to vote and partly because the voting process “imparts incidental knowledge”. And it causes that knowledge to be <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0261379415001791">spread more evenly</a> throughout the citizenry.</p>
<p>Without compulsory voting, Australian democracy would look very different. Turnout would <a href="http://www.australianreview.net/journal/v6/n1/louth_hill.pdf">likely drop</a> to around 60% or lower and governments would be less representative. There would be lower levels of satisfaction with the political system. The electorate would be less politically informed. We would also have greater wealth inequality and more corruption.</p>
<p>In any case, the majority (more than 70%) of Australians <a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00344893.2010.518089">approve of compulsory voting</a> – and have done so for decades. The nay-sayers continue to be a minority.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/57831/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Lisa Hill receives funding from the Australian Research Council. </span></em></p>The majority of Australians approve of compulsory voting – and have done so for decades. The nay-sayers continue to be a minority.Lisa Hill, Professor of Politics, University of AdelaideLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/578162016-06-13T04:02:09Z2016-06-13T04:02:09ZElection explainer: how are lower house votes counted? And what is ‘the swing’?<p>The alternative vote method, known as preferential voting, is used to elect <a href="http://www.aec.gov.au/voting/counting/hor_count.htm">Australia’s House of Representatives</a>. It was first used at a federal election <a href="http://blogs.abc.net.au/antonygreen/2015/09/the-orogins-of-senate-group-ticket-voting-and-it-wasnt-the-major-parties.html">in 1919</a> to allow for the anti-Labor votes in rural areas to be split between the Nationalists and the newly emerged Country Party. The <a href="http://education.aec.gov.au/getvoting/content/types-of-elections.html#fpv">first-past-the-post vote system</a> was in use prior to this.</p>
<p>Preferential voting requires electors in single-member electoral districts (“seats”) to numerically order candidates starting with the most preferred (who would get a “1”, or primary vote) through to the least preferred. </p>
<p>At federal elections, voters must cast a preference for all candidates. Failure to do so, or failure to give an ordinal list of preferences, <a href="http://www.aec.gov.au/voting/informal_voting/">renders the ballot informal</a>. This means it is not counted towards any candidate and is set aside.</p>
<h2>How are the votes counted?</h2>
<p>When the count for the seat is undertaken, electoral officials begin by counting the primary vote won by each candidate. The successful candidate <a href="http://www.aec.gov.au/elections/candidates/scrutineers-handbook/preferences.htm#hor">needs to win</a> 50% plus one vote of the total formal votes cast in the seat. For example, in a seat where 90,000 votes are cast, the winner needs 45,001 votes.</p>
<p>If no candidate has achieved the threshold, the candidate with the lowest primary vote comes out of the count. The eliminated candidate’s ballots are inspected and allocated to the next preferred candidate at full value. </p>
<p>A tally is taken again. If no-one has reached the benchmark, the elimination process continues. The candidate with the smallest total of votes is eliminated; the ballots are inspected and allocated to the next preferred candidate who is still in the count. At all times, the preferences that are allocated retain a full value.</p>
<p>This process continues until a candidate achieves an absolute majority after the allocation of preferences. </p>
<p>The Australian Electoral Commission has done a full allocation of preferences for all seats since 1984. This means election results are expressed in two ways: </p>
<ul>
<li><p>how many primary votes the candidates and their political parties won; and </p></li>
<li><p>the result of the election as a contest between the party that wins a majority of lower house seats and the next best.</p></li>
</ul>
<p>This outcome, in turn, will be determined by the result in each seat after the distribution of the preferences cast by those voting for candidates other than those representing the two major parties. This is the so-called “two-party vote”, and is usually expressed as a result comparing the Liberal-National Coalition and Labor.</p>
<h2>What is ‘the swing’?</h2>
<p>There are 150 lower house seats. The Liberal or National parties comfortably win about one-third of these. Similarly, Labor wins another one-third of these with margins that range from five to 20 or more percentage points. </p>
<p>The final third of the seats, however, have very close margins. These are the seats that the parties fight over, meaning whichever party wins these seats will probably have the lower house majority required to form government. </p>
<p>In each election some voters will change the choice they made in the previous election. They may vote either for the other major party or for a minor party or an independent. The shift in voter alignments between elections is known as “the swing”.</p>
<p>Analysts keep an eye on two types of swing. The first is the primary vote swing. This swing indicates how the voters have responded to the major party in government, and whether the other major party is the beneficiary of shifting alignments. If the other major party is not picking up “swinging” voters, then the shift in support will be going to the minor parties and/or independents. </p>
<p>The “two-party” swing is arguably the more important swing to be observed. This will determine which party wins the close seats. This swing shows the shift of support from the party holding the seat to the candidate who is challenging for the seat after the preferences from voters for all the other unsuccessful candidates in the contest have been allocated.</p>
<h2>The ‘how-to-vote’ card</h2>
<p>The alternative vote system is quite complicated compared with first-past-the-post voting, for example. </p>
<p>To assist voters in identifying their candidates, <a href="http://www.aec.gov.au/elections/candidates/candidates-handbook/voting.htm">political parties publish how-to-vote cards</a>. These leaflets are offered to voters as they arrive at the polling booth and advise those wishing to vote for that particular party on how they should rank their preferences for all the other candidates. </p>
<p>This practice is known in Australian politics as “directing preferences”. However, these leaflets are simply advisory; voters can choose to accept or reject them. </p>
<p>Not everyone requires them, but to a voter who does not know which electorate they are in, does not know the candidates and does not understand how the electoral system works – but wants to cast a valid vote nonetheless – the how-to-vote card is indispensable. </p>
<p>Given these leaflets also advise on the Senate, their usefulness to the uncertain voter is even greater. Scope exists for the parties to try to influence results through the advice they give on preferences. </p>
<p>For major parties, the main purpose of the how-to-vote card is to ensure voters fulfil the requirement of casting a preference for all candidates so that their vote is formal. The preference rankings made by electors voting for minor party candidates, however, may decide which major party candidate will win the seat. </p>
<p>Scope exists for the parties to horse-trade on preferences, provided they are not bound by ideology (it is inconceivable, say, that Family First would direct preferences to the Greens) or rules (the Democrats had a rule never to direct preferences to the major parties). </p>
<p>If wheeling and dealing can be done, it will be undertaken by party secretaries and presidents. This gives the process an opaque, backroom feel to it. It can also seem politically irrational when apparently sworn enemies are shown to have entered into what the party executives will hope is a mutually beneficial arrangement. </p>
<p>Such deals can be the difference between winning and losing seats – and winning and losing executive power.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/57816/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Nick Economou does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>At federal elections, voters must cast a preference for all candidates in their lower house seat. Failure to do so, or failure to give an ordinal list of preferences, renders the ballot informal.Nick Economou, Senior Lecturer, School of Political and Social Inquiry, Monash UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/591722016-05-26T03:53:56Z2016-05-26T03:53:56ZPre-polling gains popularity, but makes life harder for politicans and parties<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/123867/original/image-20160525-25209-cn3ftj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">While there may not be too many voters in swimsuits or shorts at this year's winter poll, increasing numbers of Australians are voting before election day.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Paul Miller</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Australians will choose their next government on July 2 and, with <a href="http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/">opinion polls</a> showing the parties to be neck and neck, every vote will be important. But many voters will take the opportunity to cast their ballot well before this date.</p>
<p>The Australian electoral system has a number of ways in which people can vote in order to ensure all citizens can have their say, even if they are unable to attend a polling booth on election day.</p>
<p>The Australian Electoral Commission (AEC), which conducts federal elections, provides a <a href="http://www.aec.gov.au/faqs/voting_australia.htm">number of alternatives</a>. The most popular of these is pre-poll voting.</p>
<h2>Pre-poll voting: who can do it?</h2>
<p>Pre-polling is not something that can be done simply to avoid turning up to vote on election day. Citizens must satisfy one or more of the <a href="http://www.aec.gov.au/voting/ways_to_vote/">eligibility requirements</a> set out by the AEC.</p>
<p>These include being more than 8km away from a polling place, an illness, religious beliefs or travelling on election day.</p>
<p>Other reasons that people may be allowed to vote early include work commitments or if they are outside the electorate where they are enrolled to vote on election day.</p>
<p>Early voting commences once the candidates have been declared and AEC has printed the ballot papers. For the upcoming federal election, pre-poll votes will begin on <a href="http://www.aec.gov.au/faqs/voting_australia.htm">Tuesday, June 14</a>.</p>
<h2>The rise and rise of pre-poll voters</h2>
<p>There has been a rise in the number of people voting early. The number of postal voters registered (those who register and then receive and return their ballots in the mail) rose from about 750,000 in 2007 to more than <a href="http://www.aec.gov.au/elections/federal_elections/2013/e2013-facts.htm">1.3 million</a> in 2013.</p>
<p>There has also been a sharp rise in the number of prepoll voters who vote at the <a href="http://www.aec.gov.au/about_aec/cea-notices/pre-poll-voting-centres.htm">special polling booths</a> set up by the AEC before the election. Twenty years ago, <a href="http___www.aphref.aph.gov.au_house_committee_em_elect07_report2_chapter%25207-2.pdf">845,748</a> voters cast their ballots early. In 2013 this figure was more than <a href="http://www.aec.gov.au/elections/federal_elections/2013/e2013-facts.htm">3.2 million</a>, or about 22% of enrolled voters.</p>
<p>Combined, about 4.5 million citizens (of the 14.7 million enrolled) did not attend a polling booth on election day in 2013 as they had arranged to either vote by mail or had already voted early. This equates to about one in three voters across the country.</p>
<h2>Implications of voting early</h2>
<p>The rising number of postal voters and pre-poll voters has significant implications for parties and candidates. They must campaign earlier and stronger, especially in marginal seats (those held with a margin of less than 5%), which are crucial to deciding election outcomes.</p>
<p>The growing popularity of early voting contributes to the need for parties to engage in perpetual campaigning. It also stretches their resources as they have to staff early election centres for several weeks, as they would a normal booth on election day.</p>
<p>They can no longer rely on the bunting and other paraphernalia near the entrances of polling stations to sway undecided voters on election day either. Candidates are also faced with a smaller proportion of electors if they wait to meet and greet them as they line up to go in to vote on election day.</p>
<h2>The convenience factor</h2>
<p>The rising number of voters shunning polling booths on the election day, yet still participating in the democratic process, is understandable.</p>
<p>Changes in society, especially to working arrangements, has meant Saturdays are no longer as relaxed for many as they once may have been.</p>
<p>Winter elections also coincide with many sporting activities that may preclude the participants or, in the case of myriad junior leagues, their parents, from getting to their local polling booth on that particular Saturday.</p>
<p>While pre-poll voting is gaining popularity, there are some significant drawbacks.</p>
<p>A potential weakness is that voters, especially those who are not rusted-on supporters, may cast their ballot prior to all parties releasing their policies. This is problematic, as major parties often delay making big policy announcements until much closer to the election.</p>
<p>Indeed, it would be frustrating for a voter to hear of a policy they support or oppose after having already voted.</p>
<p>The rising number of pre-poll voters may also have a <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-21/pre-polling-affects-election-day-charities/7263448">detrimental impact</a> on local community groups. These often enjoy a financial windfall by holding cake stalls and sausage sizzles on election day that they then can use for local projects.</p>
<p>The trend from recent elections suggests a record numbers of people will vote early this year. The choices they make before the completion of the entire election campaign will go some way in deciding whether the Coalition or Labor can govern in the 45th parliament.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/59172/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Zareh Ghazarian does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>A growing number of people are pre-polling, or voting before election day. This has significant implications for the parties in terms of rolling out policy and voter engagement.Zareh Ghazarian, Lecturer, School of Social Sciences, Monash UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/591702016-05-13T03:39:50Z2016-05-13T03:39:50ZHigh Court unanimously rejects challenge to Senate voting reform<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/122405/original/image-20160513-16422-1yq20dv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Family First senator Bob Day unsuccessfully challenged the government's changes to the way senators are elected.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Sam Mooy</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>In a <a href="http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2016/20.html">unanimous judgment</a>, the High Court on Friday crushed Family First senator Bob Day’s High Court challenge to the recent Senate voting reforms. </p>
<p>The court regarded none of Day’s arguments as having any merit. It dismissed them as “untenable” or failing at their very threshold.</p>
<h2>Remind me again, what are the changes?</h2>
<p>The <a href="https://theconversation.com/senate-voting-changes-pass-so-how-do-we-elect-the-upper-house-now-55641">voting changes</a> to which Day objected provide for optional preferential voting both above the line and below the line in Senate elections. </p>
<p>Under the previous voting system, if an elector marked “1” above the line for a party, the party then determined how the vote was distributed to all the candidates on the ballot paper. If electors voted below the line, they had to number sequentially every candidate according to their preferences. This could amount to more than 100 candidates. </p>
<p>The consequence was that about <a href="http://blogs.abc.net.au/antonygreen/2014/04/below-the-line-preference-flows-at-the-2013-wa-senate-election.html">95% of people</a> voted above the line. This allowed parties to determine the flow of their preferences.</p>
<p>First in New South Wales and then federally, people began to <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-11/green-hand-the-power-of-preferences-back-to-the-people/4951020">manipulate this voting system</a>. They created microparties with catchy names to harvest votes, and did deals with other parties regarding preferences, so that they could be elected even though they had a very small proportion of the primary vote.</p>
<p>The consequence was that people with <a href="http://blogs.abc.net.au/antonygreen/2013/09/the-preference-deals-behind-the-strange-election-of-ricky-muir-and-wayne-dropulich-.html">negligible public support</a> were being elected on the preferences of voters who often had polar-opposite political views to the candidate their vote had actually caused to be elected.</p>
<p>In NSW, after the infamous 1999 “tablecloth” ballot paper, the Labor government changed the voting system for the Legislative Council to allow optional preferential above-the-line voting. In 2016, it was a Coalition government at the Commonwealth level that adopted the same approach. </p>
<p>Now, when an elector marks “1” above the line for a party, the elector’s preferences go to the candidates for that party in the order they are listed below the line. They then flow to the candidates of the party marked “2” above the line, and so on. </p>
<p>Voters thus regain control over their preferences. They can see on the face of the ballot to whom the preferences go and decide how far those preferences should go.</p>
<p>Voters are instructed to vote for at least six parties or groups above the line, or at least 12 candidates below the line. This is intended to reduce the risk of too many votes becoming “exhausted” by not having enough preferences for the vote to end up electing a candidate.</p>
<h2>How the case was argued and decided</h2>
<p>Day had <a href="http://www.senatorbobday.com.au/media-release-constitutional-risk-on-voting-devils-deal-25-over-3-million-voters-disenfranchised/">argued</a> the government’s changes would leave those voters who wish to vote for minor parties “disenfranchised” because their vote, if their preferences exhaust, will not go on to elect any candidate. His arguments before the High Court, however, were more <a href="http://sydney.edu.au/law/slr/slr_38/slr38_2/SLRv38n2TwomeyBTHC.pdf">technical in nature</a>. </p>
<p>First, Day argued that because the ballot offers electors the option to vote above the line and below the line, this is two separate methods of voting – breaching the requirement in <a href="http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/coaca430/xx9.html">Section 9</a> of the Constitution that there be a single method of choosing senators. </p>
<p>The High Court dismissed this argument. It said “method” should be construed broadly to permit more than one way of indicating a choice within a single uniform system. It said Day was arguing for a:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>… pointlessly formal constraint on parliamentary power to legislate with respect to Senate elections.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Day’s second argument was that when voting above the line, people were really voting for parties – not candidates. Therefore, the Senate was not “directly chosen by the people” as required by the Constitution. </p>
<p>The court described this argument as “untenable”. It noted that, under the new system, a vote above the line is a vote directly for the candidates of that party listed below the line. The court politely refrained from pointing out that the validity of Day’s election would be threatened by his own arguments on this point.</p>
<p>Day’s third argument concerned the problem with the exhaustion of votes and the fact that the votes of some electors may not end up electing candidates. He attempted to derive a principle of “direct proportionality” from the Constitution, which required that all electors have their votes reflected in the election of candidates. </p>
<p>The court was again very dismissive of this argument. It said:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>There is no principle of “direct proportionality” to be infringed. There is no disenfranchisement in the legal effect of the voting process. The plaintiffs’ argument, based upon effects adverse to the interests of so-called “minor parties”, was in truth an argument about the consequences of elector choices between above the line and below the line voting and in the number of squares to be marked. It should be rejected.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Ultimately, it is up to voters to decide whether they want to give full preferences or whether they want their vote to exhaust rather than elect someone they oppose. This is not disenfranchisement – it is democratic choice.</p>
<p>Day also argued the ballot paper was misleading, as it does not include in the instructions all the additional vote-saving provisions. The court concluded the ballot paper was not misleading. The paper’s instructions accurately reflected the law and there was no need to include all the savings provisions.</p>
<p>Overall, the High Court was dismissive of the arguments made, not even attempting to develop them in a way that could give them substance and merit. Being a unanimous judgment, it is plainly clear that the new Senate voting system and the use of above-the-line and below-the-line voting are constitutionally valid. </p>
<p>It is now up to voters to exercise their greater freedom in granting their preferences to ensure the Senate truly represents their voting wishes.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/59170/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Anne Twomey has received funding from the Australian Research Council and occasionally does consultancy work for governments and inter-governmental bodies.</span></em></p>The High Court regarded none of Bob Day’s arguments in his challenge to Senate voting reforms as having any merit.Anne Twomey, Professor of Constitutional Law, University of SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/587522016-05-09T15:17:46Z2016-05-09T15:17:46ZTrump and Clinton victorious: proof that US voting system doesn’t work<p>Having outlasted all his opponents, Donald Trump is the presumptive nominee of the Republican Party. Hillary Clinton is closing in on locking up the Democratic nomination. </p>
<p>Clinton and Trump may have won primaries, but are they really representative of what the American people want? In fact, as we will show, it is John Kasich and Bernie Sanders who are first in the nation’s esteem. Trump and Clinton come last. </p>
<p>So how has it come to this? The media has played a big role, of course, but that Trump versus Clinton will almost surely be the choice this November is the result of the totally absurd method of election used in the primaries: majority voting. </p>
<p>This is a strong statement. But as mathematicians who have spent the last dozen years <a href="https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/majority-judgment">studying voting systems</a>, we are going to show you why it’s justified and how this problem can be fixed. </p>
<h2>The problem with majority voting</h2>
<p>With majority voting (MV), voters tick the name of one candidate, at most, and the numbers of ticks determine the winner and the order of finish. It’s a system that is used across the U.S. (and in many other nations) to elect presidents as well as senators, representatives and governors. </p>
<p>But it has often failed to elect the candidate preferred by the majority. </p>
<p>In 2000, for example, George W. Bush was elected president because of Ralph Nader’s candidacy. In the contested state of Florida, Bush had 2,912,790 votes, Al Gore 2,912,253 (<a href="http://www.fec.gov/pubrec/2000presgeresults.htm">a mere 537 fewer</a>) and Nader 97,488. There is little doubt that the <a href="http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/polisci/faculty/lewis/pdf/greenreform9.pdf">large majority of those who voted for Nader</a>, and so preferred him to the others, much preferred Gore to Bush. Had they been able to express this preference, Gore would have been elected with 291 Electoral College votes to Bush’s 246. Similar dysfunctions have also occurred in <a href="https://theconversation.com/pour-eviter-un-nouveau-21-avril-instaurons-le-jugement-majoritaire-58178">France</a>.</p>
<p>Imagine how different the U.S. and the world might be today if Gore had won. </p>
<h2>The 2016 primaries</h2>
<p>A quick glance at the <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/us/elections/primary-calendar-and-results.html">U.S. presidential primaries and caucuses held on or before March 1</a> shows that when Trump was the “winner,” he typically garnered some 40 percent of the votes. However, nothing in that result factors in the opinions of the 60 percent of voters who cast ballots for someone else. </p>
<p>As Trump is a particularly divisive candidate, it is safe to suppose that most – or at least many – of them strongly opposed him. The media, however, focused on the person who got the largest number of votes – which means Trump. On the Democratic side of the ledger, the media similarly poured its attention on Hillary Clinton, ignoring Bernie Sanders until widespread enthusiastic support forced a change. </p>
<h2>The source of the problem</h2>
<p>An election is nothing but an invented device that measures the electorate’s support of the candidates, ranks them according to their support and declares the winner to be the first in the ranking. </p>
<p>The fact is that majority voting does this very badly. </p>
<p>With MV, voters cannot express their opinions on all candidates. Instead, each voter is limited to backing just one candidate, to the exclusion of all others in the running. </p>
<p>Bush defeated Gore because Nader voters were unable to weigh in on the other two. Moreover, as we argue further on, majority voting can go wrong even when there are just two candidates. </p>
<p>The point is that it is essential for voters to be able to express the nuances of their opinions.</p>
<h2>What is to be done? Use majority judgment</h2>
<p>Majority judgment (MJ) is a new method of election that we specifically designed to <a href="https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/majority-judgment">avoid the pitfalls of the traditional methods</a>. </p>
<p>MJ asks voters to express their opinions much more accurately than simply voting for one candidate. The ballot offers a spectrum of choices and charges voters with a solemn task:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>To be the President of the United States of America, having taken into account all relevant considerations, I judge that this candidate as president would be a: Great President | Good President | Average President | Poor President | Terrible President</p>
</blockquote>
<p>To see exactly how MJ ranks the candidates, let’s look at specific numbers. </p>
<p>We were lucky to find on the web that the above question was actually posed in a March <a href="http://www.people-press.org/files/2016/03/03-31-2016-Political-topline-for-release.pdf">Pew Research Center poll</a> of 1,787 registered voters of all political stripes. (It should be noted that neither the respondents nor the pollsters were aware that the answers could be the basis for a method of election.) The Pew poll also included the option of answering “Never Heard Of” which here is interpreted as worse than “Terrible” since it amounts to the voter saying the candidate doesn’t exist. </p>
<p>As is clear in the table below, people’s opinions are much more detailed than can be expressed with majority voting. Note in particular the relatively high percentages of voters who believe Clinton and especially Trump would make terrible presidents (Pew reports that <a href="http://www.people-press.org/files/2016/03/3-31-16-March-Political-release-1.pdf">Trump’s “Terrible” score increased by 6 percent since January</a>.)</p>
<iframe src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/Lt6PR/4/" frameborder="0" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" webkitallowfullscreen="webkitallowfullscreen" mozallowfullscreen="mozallowfullscreen" oallowfullscreen="oallowfullscreen" msallowfullscreen="msallowfullscreen" width="100%" height="350"></iframe>
<p>Using majority judgment to calculate the ranked order of the candidates from these evaluations or grades is straightforward. Start from each end of the spectrum and add percentages until a majority of voters’ opinions are included. </p>
<p>Taking John Kasich as an example, 5 percent believe he is “Great,” 5+28=33 percent that he is “Good” or better, and 33+39=72 percent (a majority) that he is “Average” or better. Looked at from the other end, 9 percent “Never Heard” of him, 9+7=16 percent believe he is “Terrible” or worse, 16+13=29 percent that he is “Poor” or worse, and 29+39= 68 percent (a majority) that he is “Average” or worse. </p>
<figure class="align-left ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/121600/original/image-20160507-32021-ihpi5j.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/121600/original/image-20160507-32021-ihpi5j.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=900&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/121600/original/image-20160507-32021-ihpi5j.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=900&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/121600/original/image-20160507-32021-ihpi5j.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=900&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/121600/original/image-20160507-32021-ihpi5j.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1131&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/121600/original/image-20160507-32021-ihpi5j.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1131&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/121600/original/image-20160507-32021-ihpi5j.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1131&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Governor Kasich on the presidential campaign trail.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/80038275@N00/17214592312">Michael Vadon</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Both calculations end on majorities for “Average,” so Kasich’s majority-grade is “Average President.” (Mathematically, the calculations from both directions for a given candidate will always reach majorities at the same grade.) </p>
<p>Similarly calculated, Sanders, Clinton and Cruz all have the same majority-grade, “Average President.” Trump’s is “Poor President,” ranking him last.</p>
<p>To determine the MJ ranking among the four who all are rated “Average,” two more calculations are necessary.</p>
<p>The first looks at the percentage of voters who rate a candidate more highly than his or her majority-grade, the second at the percentage who rate the candidate lower than his or her majority-grade. This delivers a number called the “gauge.” Think of it as a scale where in some cases the majority grade leans more heavily toward a higher ranking and in others more heavily toward a lower ranking. </p>
<p>In Kasich’s case, 5+28=33 percent evaluated him higher than “Average,” and 13+7+9=29 percent rated him below “Average.” Because the larger share is on the positive side, his gauge is +33 percent. For Sanders, 36 percent evaluated him above and 39 percent below his majority-grade. With the larger share on the negative side, his gauge is -39 percent.</p>
<p>A candidate is ranked above another when his or her majority-grade is better or, if both have the same majority-grade, according to their gauges (see below). This rule is the logical result of <a href="https://portail.polytechnique.edu/economie/fr/recherches/publications/cahiers-de-recherche/2016">majorities</a> deciding on candidates’ grades instead of the usual rule that ranks candidates by the numbers of votes they get. </p>
<iframe src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/K0vMf/6/" frameborder="0" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" webkitallowfullscreen="webkitallowfullscreen" mozallowfullscreen="mozallowfullscreen" oallowfullscreen="oallowfullscreen" msallowfullscreen="msallowfullscreen" width="100%" height="280"></iframe>
<p>When voters are able to express their evaluations of every candidate – the good and the bad – the results are turned upside-down from those with majority voting. </p>
<p>According to majority judgment, the front-runners in the collective opinion are actually Kasich and Sanders. Clinton and Trump are the trailers. From this perspective the dominant media gave far too much attention to the true trailers and far too little to the true leaders.</p>
<p>Tellingly, MJ also shows society’s relatively low esteem for politicians. All five candidates are evaluated as “Average” presidents or worse, and none as “Good” presidents or better.</p>
<h2>Majority voting’s failure with two candidates</h2>
<p>But, you may object, how can majority voting on just two candidates go wrong? This seems to go against everything you learned since grade school where you raised your hand for or against a classroom choice. </p>
<p>The reason MV can go wrong even with only two candidates is because it does not obtain sufficient information about a voter’s intensity of support.</p>
<p>Take, as an example, the choice between Clinton and Trump, whose evaluations in the Pew poll are given in the first table above. </p>
<p>Lining up their grades from highest to lowest, every one of Clinton’s is either above or the same as Trump’s. Eleven percent, for example, believe Clinton would make a “Great” president to 10 percent for Trump. Trump’s percentages lead Clinton’s only for the Terrible’s and Never Heard Of’s. Given these opinions, in other words, it’s clear that any decent voting method must rank Clinton above Trump.</p>
<p>However, majority voting could fail to do so. </p>
<p>To see why, suppose the “ballots” of the Pew poll were in a pile. Each could be looked at separately. Some would rate Clinton “Average” and Trump “Poor,” some would rate her “Good” and him “Great,” others would assign them any of the 36 possible couples of grades. We can, therefore, find the percentage of occurrence of every couple of grades assigned to Trump and Clinton. </p>
<p>We do not have access to the Pew poll “ballots.” However, one could come up with many different scenarios where the individual ballot percentages are in exact agreement with the overall grades each received in the first table. </p>
<p>Among the various scenarios possible, we have chosen one that could, in theory, be the true one. Indeed, you can check for yourself that it does assign the candidates the grades each received: reading from left to right, Clinton, for example, had 10+12=22 percent “Good,” 16+4=20 percent “Average,” and so on; and the same holds for Trump. </p>
<p>So what does this hypothetical distribution of the ballots concerning the two tell us? </p>
<p>The first column on the left says 10 percent of the voters rated Clinton “Good” and Trump “Great.” In a majority vote they would go for Trump. And moving to the tenth column, 4 percent rated Clinton “Poor” and Trump “Terrible.” In a majority vote this group would opt for Clinton. And so on. </p>
<iframe src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/B6jVY/1/" frameborder="0" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" webkitallowfullscreen="webkitallowfullscreen" mozallowfullscreen="mozallowfullscreen" oallowfullscreen="oallowfullscreen" msallowfullscreen="msallowfullscreen" width="100%" height="240"></iframe>
<p>If you add up the votes in each of these 11 columns, Trump receives the votes of the people whose opinions are reflected in four columns: 10+16+12+15=53 percent; Clinton is backed by the voters with the opinions of columns with 33 percent support; and 14 percent are undecided. Even if the undecided all voted for Clinton, Trump would carry the day.</p>
<p>This shows that majority voting can give a very wrong result: a triumphant victory for Trump when Clinton’s grades are consistently above his!</p>
<h2>A bird’s-eye view</h2>
<p>Voting has been the subject of intense mathematical research since 1950, when the economist Kenneth Arrow published his famous <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/256963">“impossibility theorem,”</a> one of the two major contributions for which he was awarded the 1972 Nobel Prize.</p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/121601/original/image-20160507-32037-1atmha2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/121601/original/image-20160507-32037-1atmha2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=692&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/121601/original/image-20160507-32037-1atmha2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=692&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/121601/original/image-20160507-32037-1atmha2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=692&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/121601/original/image-20160507-32037-1atmha2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=870&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/121601/original/image-20160507-32037-1atmha2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=870&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/121601/original/image-20160507-32037-1atmha2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=870&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Marquis de Condorcet (1743-1794) was a French philosopher and mathematician.</span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>This theorem showed that if voters have to rank candidates – to say, in other words, who comes first, second and so forth – there will inevitably be one of two major potential failures. Either there may be no clear winner at all, the so-called <a href="http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/voting-methods/#3.1">“Condorcet paradox”</a> occurs, or what has come to be called the “Arrow paradox” may occur. </p>
<p>The Arrow paradox is familiar to Americans because of what happened in the 2000 election. Bush beat Gore because Nader was in the running. Had Nader not run, Gore would have won. Surely, it is absurd for the choice between two candidates to depend on whether or not some minor candidate is on the ballot!</p>
<p><a href="https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/majority-judgment">Majority judgment</a> resolves the conundrum of Arrow’s theorem: neither the Condorcet nor the Arrow paradox can occur. It does so because voters are asked for more accurate information, to evaluate candidates rather than to rank them. </p>
<p>MJ’s rules, based on the majority principle, meet the basic democratic goals of voting systems. With it:</p>
<ul>
<li>Voters are able to express themselves more fully, so the results depend on much more information than a single vote.</li>
<li>The process of voting has proven to be natural, easy and quick: we all know about grading from school (as the Pew poll implicitly realized). </li>
<li>Candidates with similar political profiles can run without impinging on each other’s chances: a voter can give high (or low) evaluations to all.</li>
<li>The candidate who is evaluated best by the majority wins.</li>
<li>MJ is the most difficult system to manipulate: blocs of voters who exaggerate the grades they give beyond their true opinions can only have a limited influence on the results.</li>
<li>By asking more of voters, by showing more respect for their opinions, participation is encouraged. Even a voter who evaluates all candidates identically (e.g., all are “Terrible”) has an effect on the outcome. </li>
<li>Final grades – majority-grades – enable candidates and the public to understand where each stands in the eyes of the electorate.</li>
<li>If the majority decides that no candidate is judged an “Average President” or better, the results of the election may be rescinded, and a new slate of candidates demanded.</li>
<li>It is a practical method that has been tested in elections and used many times (for judging prize-winners, <a href="https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00753483/document">wines</a>, <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/opre.2014.1269">job applicants,</a> etc.). It has also been formally proposed as a way to <a href="http://tnova.fr/rapports/reformer-l-election-presidentielle-moderniser-notre-democratie">reform the French presidential election system.</a></li>
</ul>
<h2>Reform now</h2>
<p>It should come as no surprise that in answer to a recent Pew poll’s question “Do you think the primaries have been a good way of determining who the best qualified nominees are or not?” only <a href="http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/04/05/voters-have-a-dim-view-of-primaries-as-a-good-way-to-pick-the-best-candidate/">35 percent</a> of respondents said yes. </p>
<p>Democracies everywhere are suffering. Voters protest. Citizens don’t vote. Support for the political extremes are increasing. One of the underlying causes, we argue, is majority voting as it is now practiced, and its influence on the media. </p>
<p>Misled by the results of primaries and polls, the media concentrates its attention on candidates who seem to be the leaders, but who are often far from being deemed acceptable by a majority of the electorate. Majority judgment would correct these failings.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/58752/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michel Balinski is related to a member of The Conversation's editorial team. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Rida Laraki does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Two mathematicians explain why majority voting often fails to elect the candidate preferred by the majority and propose an alternative, ‘majority judgment.’Michel Balinski, Applied mathematician and mathematical economist, "Directeur de recherche de classe exceptionnelle" (emeritus) of the C.N.R.S., École polytechniqueRida Laraki, Directeur de recherche CNRS au LAMSADE, Professeur à l'École polytechnique, Université Paris Dauphine – PSLLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/548682016-02-25T11:06:22Z2016-02-25T11:06:22ZWhy it’s time to end in-person voting for good<p>During President Obama’s final State of the Union address, he called for reforms to the voting process, <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/13/us/politics/obama-2016-sotu-transcript.html?_r=0">saying</a>, “We’ve got to make it easier to vote, not harder. We need to modernize it for the way we live now.” </p>
<p>Just ahead of Super Tuesday and in the midst of the presidential primaries – where we’ve already witnessed record turnout and long lines in Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada – it’s a good time to reconsider the president’s appeal to modernize the voting process, and review an encouraging effort to do just this. </p>
<p>Many <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/17/politics/hillary-clinton-alabama-voter-id-laws/">have questioned</a> the burden and fairness of voter ID laws, particularly for minority voters. But even easing voter ID laws doesn’t eliminate the bias of the polling locations themselves. In fact, a score of recent studies highlight how the building where you vote – whether it’s a church or a school – can subconsciously influence which boxes you check on the ballot. </p>
<h2>Primed for votes</h2>
<p>The method by which a polling location can influence someone’s decision is known as priming. <a href="http://alicekim.ca/Sci90noBeg.pdf">Priming</a> is a subconscious form of memory, based on identification of ideas and objects. This effect happens when external stimuli “manipulate” internal thoughts, feelings or behaviors. After becoming activated by stimuli, priming triggers these associations in our memory. For example, one study <a href="http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v390/n6656/pdf/390132a0.pdf">showed</a> that a store playing traditional French or German music can prime shoppers to buy French or German products.</p>
<p>Most states prohibit campaigning <a href="http://www.nass.org/component/docman/?task=doc_download&gid=1347">within 100 feet</a> of a polling place, and others ban wearing campaign buttons or t-shirts while voting. While these laws were passed to prevent voter intimidation, subtle exposure to campaign paraphernalia could result in priming. During the Nevada caucuses, <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/feb/23/donald-trump-wins-nevada-caucuses-results">some voters complained</a> that caucus volunteers – not so subtly – were wearing Donald Trump paraphernalia.</p>
<p>But even if banning campaigning near polling sites were strictly enforced, <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12518968">research confirms</a> that locations themselves can serve as contextual primes that influence specific attitudes and behaviors. </p>
<p>For example, simply being in a church can change our attitudes. A 2012 <a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10508619.2012.634778">study</a> found that religious locations prime significantly higher conservative attitudes – and negative attitudes toward gay men and lesbians – than nonreligious locations. </p>
<p>Other <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2009.00749.x/epdf">studies</a> also observed that being exposed to churches and clerical images can promote someone’s Christian identity, making them more likely to back political initiatives aligned with Christian values and philosophies. </p>
<p>For these reasons, it’s plausible to suspect that churches could cause religious priming in voters, unfairly biasing voters to vote for more conservative candidates and take more conservative stances on ballot issues such as same-sex marriage.</p>
<p>The use of schools as polling places has also been called into question, and social scientists have examined whether schools can unfairly bias vote choice on education-related ballot measures. </p>
<p>Since 2000, education measures have made it to general election ballots <a href="http://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/ballot-measures-database.aspx">208 times</a>. The thinking goes that voters in schools are likely to be primed to think about their own schooling – or their own care for children – and, in turn, support pro-education measures.</p>
<h2>And the studies say…</h2>
<p>At this time, there are six published studies on the issue of whether or not polling location can subtly influence our vote. And all of them, to a varying degree, conclude that the priming of polling places is a real phenomenon. </p>
<p>In 2008, professors Jonah Berger, Marc Meredith and S. Christian Wheeler were the first to investigate this matter, <a href="http://www.pnas.org/content/105/26/8846.long">finding</a> that individuals voting in Arizona schools were more likely to support a ballot measure that increased the state’s sale tax to finance education.</p>
<p>Two years later, psychologist Abraham Rutchick <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2009.00749.x/abstract">discovered</a> that voters in South Carolina churches were more likely to support a conservative Republican challenger, and more likely to oppose a same-sex marriage ballot measure. </p>
<p>After controlling for voters’ party identification, Rutchick found the conservative Republican challenger received 41 percent of the vote in churches and just 32 percent in secular locations. Then, after controlling for the age, race, sex and party identification of each voter in 1,468 polling places in the 2006 general election, he found that 83 percent of people voting in churches supported establishing a definition of marriage as between one man and one woman, while 81.5 percent did so in secular locations – a significant difference.</p>
<p>In late 2011, I conducted a study with political scientists Jeanette Morehouse Mendez and Rebekah Herrick, analyzing three measures voted on in Oklahoma’s 2008 general election. One measure sought to ban same-sex marriage in the state, while the other two sought to create a lottery system to fund education. </p>
<p>While our <a href="http://ojs.library.okstate.edu/osu/index.php/OKPolitics/article/viewFile/1020/920">findings</a> were not as distinct as the previous studies, we did discover that Oklahomans voting in churches were less supportive of the ban.</p>
<p>In any case, our education findings were consistent with Berger, Meredith and Wheeler’s. After controlling for political ideology, we found that voters in school buildings were more supportive of the education referendums than those casting votes in community buildings.</p>
<p>In 2014, we published a follow-up <a href="http://www.esciencecentral.org/journals/lets-be-fair-do-polling-locations-prime-votes-2332-0761.1000126.pdf">study</a> that expanded the research to multiple states. We tested election data from Maine, Maryland and Minnesota’s 2012 general election. Like the previous studies, we theorized that churches and schools could unfairly prime vote choice. While we found that churches actually primed <em>more</em> support for same-sex initiatives, there’s ample evidence to support the confounding results in <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/21/maryland-marriage-equality-law-civil-marriage-protection-act_n_1901634.html">Maryland</a> and <a href="http://www.startribune.com/minneapolis-area-lutherans-oppose-marriage-amendment/139536313/">Minnesota</a>. </p>
<p>Also, like previous studies on the priming ability of schools, we found that voters in schools were more supportive of education. For example, in Maine’s 2012 general election, 47 percent of votes cast in schools were in favor of the education bond issue, while only 42 percent did so in community buildings and miscellaneous locations. We ran additional tests on the data to control for political ideology, and the results reinforced our findings. </p>
<p>Most recently, a <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0261379415001821">study</a> on polling sites was replicated for the first time outside the U.S. In October 2015, political scientist Matthias Fatke published his work concluding that polling places in Germany could influence vote choice. </p>
<p>Taken as a whole, the empirical evidence has found that a seemingly irrelevant thing – a polling location – can influence a voter’s decision on a political candidate, political party and ballot issues. </p>
<h2>An alternative approach</h2>
<p>In 2011, the <em>Boston University Law Review</em> published an <a href="http://www.bu.edu/law/journals-archive/bulr/documents/blumenthalandturnipseed.pdf">article</a> arguing that the courts were wrong to allow the use of churches as polling places. The article’s authors, Syracuse law professors Jeremy Blumenthal and Terry Turnipseed, supported the elimination of polling locations and called for the adoption of a ballot-by-mail system. </p>
<p>Colorado, Oregon and Washington have taken legislative action to remodel their voting process, making it easier (and fairer) to vote. They’ve done this by eliminating the traditional polling location, and going to an all-mail voting system. </p>
<p>In these states, ballots are mailed to registered voters at least two weeks prior to Election Day. Voters then decide, at their convenience, to either mail their ballot back or drop it off at a designated location. </p>
<p>Some proponents argue against all-mail voting, citing <a href="http://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/all-mail-elections.aspx">tradition</a>, as many are accustomed to voting at their polling location. Others contend it will lead to higher rates of <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/wp/2014/12/16/the-pros-and-cons-of-all-mail-elections-as-told-by-two-republican-secretaries-of-state/">voter fraud</a> or coercion. </p>
<p>But advocates of this new method praise the emergent improvements in voter turnout and safeguards, and the decreased costs from eliminating poll workers. Since <a href="http://sos.oregon.gov/voting/Pages/voteinor.aspx">Oregon</a> first implemented all-mail voting, they’ve ranked as a national leader in voter turnout. After <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2013/03/12/the-states-with-the-highest-and-lowest-turnout-in-2012-in-2-charts/">Washington</a> made the change, their turnout improved to 13th best in 2012, up from 15th in 2008. Similarly, Colorado (the most recent state to enact all-mail voting) saw their <a href="http://www.denverpost.com/editorials/ci_26909639/vote-confidence-mail-elections-colorado">turnout increase</a> to roughly 2 million people in 2014 – up from 1.8 million in 2010.</p>
<p>A total of 13,397 polling places were examined in the range of studies cited above. Nearly all the findings suggest that priming concerns should join <a href="http://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/all-mail-elections.aspx#Adv">convenience</a> and <a href="http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/editorials/article4304076.html">lower costs</a> as reasons for adopting all-mail voting. </p>
<p>It would answer President Obama’s call to modernize the voting process, providing voters with the time to develop informed decisions about candidates and issues.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/54868/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Ben Pryor does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Simply by voting in a church, you’re more likely to support a conservative cause or candidate.Ben Pryor, Researcher, Oklahoma State UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/412652015-05-07T21:25:43Z2015-05-07T21:25:43ZExplainer: how Britain counts its votes<p>The <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32633099">British election exit poll</a> shocked pollsters and media commentators alike by giving the Conservatives a strong lead of 316 seats over Labour’s 239. Polls had predicted the two parties would be <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-numbers-that-explain-the-british-election-polling-deadlock-40130">deadlocked</a> with fewer than 300 seats each. But of course, as the cliché goes, there’s only one poll that matters – the one the British people actually vote in. So how do vote counters across the country bring in the results every five years?</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/80900/original/image-20150507-1230-1k3g7hm.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/80900/original/image-20150507-1230-1k3g7hm.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/80900/original/image-20150507-1230-1k3g7hm.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=300&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/80900/original/image-20150507-1230-1k3g7hm.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=300&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/80900/original/image-20150507-1230-1k3g7hm.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=300&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/80900/original/image-20150507-1230-1k3g7hm.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=377&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/80900/original/image-20150507-1230-1k3g7hm.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=377&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/80900/original/image-20150507-1230-1k3g7hm.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=377&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>It’s not the people who vote that count; it’s the people who count the votes. That well-worn quote is apocryphally attributed to <a href="http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2000/12/did_stalin_really_say_that_thing_about_votes.html">Stalin</a>, who of course found rather less subtle ways of eliminating his opponents.</p>
<p>Whoever came up with it, the aphorism raises a real question: in the hundreds of local counts taking place across the UK in the aftermath of the 2015 general election, who will be doing what? </p>
<p>They’ll be counting not just general election ballots for one or more constituencies, but in many places votes cast for unitary, district, parish and town councillors, plus the occasional elected mayor and local referendum. </p>
<p>Here is a brief cast list, and a summary guide to what should happen.</p>
<h2>Who’s who</h2>
<p>Running the whole show in each seat and getting a moment’s media glory by announcing the constituency results is the Acting Returning Officer (ARO), who’s usually a local authority chief executive. </p>
<p>They’re acting not because the proper returning officer forgot the date, but because in England and Wales (though not Scotland), the general overseeing role is purely honorary. Responsibility for the detailed organisation of the elections – from nominations, distribution of poll cards and ballot papers, to the conduct of the poll and counting of votes – <a href="http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/175365/Part-A-Returning-Officer-role-and-responsibilities.pdf">is entirely the ARO’s</a>.</p>
<p>Acting officers receive an additional remuneration for the election period, but they’re also legally and potentially financially responsible for screw-ups by any election staff. </p>
<p>The counting itself is done by temporary staff known as, well, counters. They work in teams, under supervisors and under pressure – especially in Sunderland.</p>
<p>For reasons best known to itself, Sunderland gets its thrills every five years by being the first count to declare its results. With the polls not closing until 10.00pm, its midnight target is ambitious, but the ARO pulls out all stops, reportedly going so far as to <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/public-leaders-network/2015/apr/27/sunderland-sets-its-sights-on-first-place-in-the-uks-other-election-race">rig traffic lights</a>, so the ballot box vans get an uninterrupted journey to the count.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/syBJG4xftAk?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Houghton & Sunderland South declares the first result of the 2010 election.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Also allowed into the count are election agents, protecting the interests of their candidate, and accredited observers, who, unlike agents, are impartial and report anything untoward to election officials.</p>
<h2>Stage 1: counting the ballot papers</h2>
<p>The count opens with the ceremonial unsealing of the ballot boxes, both those from the polling stations and those containing the postal ballots, which have already been opened and verified but the actual votes not yet counted. The ballot papers are emptied on to the counting tables, and, in the manner of a stage magician, the emptiness of the boxes displayed to the assembled observers. </p>
<p>All ballot papers are then counted, the counters ensuring the number of papers in each box matches the ballot paper account – the form completed by the presiding officer at either the polling station or the opening and verification of the postal ballot packs.</p>
<p>If the numbers don’t match, there are recounts until they do match or the same number of ballots is recorded twice in succession. </p>
<h2>Stage 2: counting the votes</h2>
<p>First, ballot papers from different boxes are mixed, to preserve the secrecy of the vote. They are then allocated to count teams, who sort the papers by the candidate voted for – each voter in the UK’s plurality electoral system being allowed, of course, only one unambiguous X vote.</p>
<p>If the voter’s X is not clearly in the box next to a candidate, it becomes a “doubtful” paper, with the ARO or deputy adjudicating on its validity. But nowadays, the aim is to divine the voter’s intention wherever possible, and only where it is completely unclear or disputed is the ballot paper actually rejected.</p>
<p>With “Wank, wank, good guy, wank” having been recently <a href="http://www.buzzfeed.com/jamieross/reasons-you-should-register-to-vote-by-mondays-deadline">deemed a valid vote</a> (cast for the SNP), it’s reasonably safe to say a tick, a “Yes”, or a smiley face are all likely to be accepted. If a candidate’s agent objects, the objection is recorded, but again, it’s ultimately the ARO’s decision.</p>
<p>With sorting completed, each candidate’s votes are then counted, plus any rejected votes, and the total checked against the total number of ballot papers recorded in the first count. </p>
<h2>Stage 3: the result</h2>
<p>The ARO then shares the provisional result with the candidates and their agents, at which point either a candidate or agent may request a recount of the votes. There are no rules defining either how close a result needs to be to qualify for a recount or the number of recounts – seven being the current record, jointly held by <a href="https://theconversation.com/election-2015-brighton-at-the-centre-of-the-battle-for-the-south-coast-39341">Brighton Kemptown</a> (1964) and Peterborough (1966).</p>
<p>Again, it’s the ARO’s decision whether to allow a recount. After all, some recount requests are inevitably made simply to try and save losing candidates’ £500 deposits, which are <a href="http://www.democraticaudit.com/?p=1587">forfeited</a> if they win less than 5% of the vote.</p>
<p>There hasn’t been a constituency tied vote in a general election since Ashton-under-Lyne declined to pick a winner in <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/generalelection/general-election-2015-explained-dead-heats-unelected-mps-and-recounts-10179278.html">1886</a>. But they occur frequently in local elections, and the convention is that, if the votes remain level after recounts, the ARO will decide the winner by a random method acceptable to the candidates concerned – perhaps tossing a coin, or as in one recent case, having the candidates draw <a href="http://www.birmingham.ac.uk/schools/government-society/departments/local-government-studies/news/2011/05/ultimate-pivotal-voters-ramsbottom.aspx">different length cable ties inserted into a legal text book</a>. </p>
<p>If we end up with a dead heat in the two leading parties’ House of Commons seats, as seems entirely possible, it would be heartening to see it resolved so reasonably and amicably.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/41265/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Chris Game does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Counting tens of thousands of paper votes is no small task. How does the UK get it done?Chris Game, Honorary Senior Lecturer, Institute of Local Government Studies, University of BirminghamLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/409212015-04-30T05:16:23Z2015-04-30T05:16:23ZHate the players, love the game: why young people aren’t voting<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/79771/original/image-20150429-23367-bmbq86.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Hanging on his every word.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/50386890@N02/5427442379">EdMiliband</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>When Labour leader Ed Miliband visited <a href="http://www.russellbrand.com/videos/coming-soon-russell-brand-meets-ed-milliband/">Russell Brand</a> recently, they talked a bit about why young people abstain from voting. In a way, Miliband’s chat with Brand is a snapshot of how Britain has talked about young politics since the 1980s: a politician and a public commentator trying to figure out where the young votes went.</p>
<p>Miliband is right to put young voters on his list of priorities. However, no matter how you feel about abstention as an electoral tactic, commentators who hail a revolution around the corner miss the point. Young people haven’t quit the political system. It is the political system that has failed to give them something to vote for. </p>
<p>Rather than consulting celebrities, political parties would be best advised to put their money where their mouth is: if you want young votes, this is what you have to do.</p>
<h2>Abstention generation</h2>
<p>The 2015 election is a critical one for young people. This generation is facing the worst economic prospects of <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-21302065">any since World War II</a>. Yet, we still see an enduring rift between young citizens and the political institutions built to serve them. Abstention is a widely discussed symptom of this rift. And while some like to blame apathy, the truth is, young people feel <a href="https://www.opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/ben-bowman/votes-at-16-is-uk-waking-up-to-our-young-citizens">marginalised</a> from the institutions that run British politics.</p>
<p>Though voter turnout fell in all age groups between 1986 and 1999, a <a href="http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/__data/assets/electoral_commission_pdf_file/0019/16093/youngpplvoting_6597-6188__E__N__S__W__.pdf">generational gap in electoral participation</a> grew. Something changed in the relationship between institutional politics and the children who grew up in the 1980s and 1990s.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/79753/original/image-20150429-23384-s2a1u0.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/79753/original/image-20150429-23384-s2a1u0.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/79753/original/image-20150429-23384-s2a1u0.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=439&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/79753/original/image-20150429-23384-s2a1u0.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=439&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/79753/original/image-20150429-23384-s2a1u0.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=439&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/79753/original/image-20150429-23384-s2a1u0.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=551&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/79753/original/image-20150429-23384-s2a1u0.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=551&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/79753/original/image-20150429-23384-s2a1u0.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=551&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Voter turnout.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Ben Bowman</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In 2010, 34% of the UK population abstained from voting, but the proportion was much higher among young people. If abstention was a party, 2010 would have been a landslide victory among the young.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/79784/original/image-20150429-6236-l92xje.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/79784/original/image-20150429-6236-l92xje.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/79784/original/image-20150429-6236-l92xje.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=176&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/79784/original/image-20150429-6236-l92xje.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=176&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/79784/original/image-20150429-6236-l92xje.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=176&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/79784/original/image-20150429-6236-l92xje.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=221&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/79784/original/image-20150429-6236-l92xje.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=221&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/79784/original/image-20150429-6236-l92xje.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=221&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">See elections differently - votes vs. abstention for young men and women.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Author</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The results for those young people who did vote gave the three main parties remarkably close results – with the Liberal Democrats boosted to a great extent by their pledge to oppose any rise in tuition fees.</p>
<h2>The UK is different</h2>
<p>Young people don’t vote, but in the UK, the rupture between young people and institutional politics runs deeper than empty ballot boxes.</p>
<p>In fact, the UK has the largest generational gap of our European neighbours <a href="http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/europpblog/2013/07/19/young-people-are-less-likely-to-vote-than-older-citizens-but-they-are-also-more-diverse-in-how-they-choose-to-participate-in-politics/">across all traditional modes of institutional participation</a>, from protest to petitions. While their fellows in France balance electoral abstention with participation in other traditional ways of doing politics – such as protests or boycotts – young people in the UK are far less involved in any of these.</p>
<p>Young people are interested in politics and believe in elections – but they <a href="http://www.esrc.ac.uk/my-esrc/grants/RES-000-22-4450/outputs/Read/5d37104f-4a48-42a3-9bc5-daa64305e872">don’t trust politicians or political parties</a>.</p>
<p>Go into any pub or park you like and ask the first person of any age what they think about politicians, and you are likely to get a negative response. <a href="https://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/3504/Politicians-trusted-less-than-estate-agents-bankers-and-journalists.aspx">Politics is the least trusted profession in the UK</a>. So there is little to surprise us in on the right side of the chart below, which depicts a selection of the responses to a study of <a href="http://www.exeter.ac.uk/media/universityofexeter/research/microsites/epop/papers/Henn_and_Foard_-_Young_People,_Political_Participation_and_Trust_in_Britain.pdf">young people’s perceptions of politics in 2011</a>, following the last General Election.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/79781/original/image-20150429-6263-66ifg4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/79781/original/image-20150429-6263-66ifg4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/79781/original/image-20150429-6263-66ifg4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=349&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/79781/original/image-20150429-6263-66ifg4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=349&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/79781/original/image-20150429-6263-66ifg4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=349&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/79781/original/image-20150429-6263-66ifg4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=438&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/79781/original/image-20150429-6263-66ifg4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=438&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/79781/original/image-20150429-6263-66ifg4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=438&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Young people, politics and trust.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Matt Henn and Nick Foard, Nottingham Trent University, 2011</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>But on the left hand side of the chart you will see data that is not often discussed. Young people in the UK tend to profess to researchers that they do have an interest in politics and that they trust elections as an effective way to go about running a country.</p>
<p>Despite Russell Brand’s assertion that <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2014/feb/20/is-russell-brand-right-are-we-disenchanted-by-politics">politics itself is a broken system</a>, young people don’t necessarily agree, even if they don’t vote. They seem to want elections as a democratic principle but distrust the current stock of politicians as custodians of that principle.</p>
<h2>Preaching to the converted?</h2>
<p>This lack of trust in politicians may go some way towards explaining why the hard work and imaginative adverts of the many <a href="http://bitetheballot.co.uk/the-basics/">campaigns for young turnout</a>, which have characterised elections since the 1990s have not made a significant dent in young abstention.</p>
<p>Perhaps young people are already sold on democracy in principle, no matter which celebrity asks them to rock up to the polling station. Maybe they’re waiting for something everyone else wants – something to vote for.</p>
<p>It may not be a coincidence that the last major vote in the UK, the Scottish Independence Referendum, <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/scottish-independence/scottish-referendum-results-huge-turnout-bolsters-case-for-voting-at-16-9745081.html">attracted so many young voters</a>. It offered a clear and distinct choice more or less separate from political parties. Yes is Yes and No is No, no matter what colour tie it wears.</p>
<p>Unsurprisingly, the issues that matter most to young people reflect the <a href="http://people.bath.ac.uk/bd203/docs/DiTC_YoungPeoplesPoliticsDuringCrisis_BenBowman_2013.pdf">risky nature of young lives</a> following the global economic crisis.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/79757/original/image-20150429-23357-p1oy3v.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/79757/original/image-20150429-23357-p1oy3v.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/79757/original/image-20150429-23357-p1oy3v.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=309&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/79757/original/image-20150429-23357-p1oy3v.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=309&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/79757/original/image-20150429-23357-p1oy3v.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=309&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/79757/original/image-20150429-23357-p1oy3v.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=389&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/79757/original/image-20150429-23357-p1oy3v.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=389&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/79757/original/image-20150429-23357-p1oy3v.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=389&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Top concerns.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Demos</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>They are <a href="http://www.demos.co.uk/files/Tune_in_-_web.pdf?1419813387">concerned</a> about affording a place to live, finding a job, and having reliable safety nets like the NHS and mental health provision there for when things go wrong.</p>
<h2>Where do we go from here?</h2>
<p>One way to put young people at the centre of politics is to represent them, directly, in political institutions. We may be too late to catch the 2015 election, but by 2020, the UK’s political parties would do well to revise their approach to young people as members. </p>
<p>Historically, political parties have considered young people as a case apart. They are kept in <a href="http://www.democraticaudit.com/?p=6169">youth wings</a>, segregated from the main party, from decision making processes and campaigning.</p>
<p>If they were to welcome young people and make them part of decisions, they might be able to repair the relationship between young people and political institutions after years of <a href="http://www.youthcitizenshipcommission.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/YCC_Final_Report1.pdf">scandal, distrust and division</a>.</p>
<p>They could start by giving them a more representative set of politicians to vote for. The fact that a greater proportion of young women than young men abstained from voting in 2010 might, for instance, tell us that the lack of representation of women in parliament is a factor.</p>
<p>Political parties need to act now to better understand the relationship between young diversities, and their representation in parliament. They need to understand that young people can be voters, but also abstainers, protesters, organisers, union members and ethical buyers, and that all these are ways of doing politics in the 21st century.</p>
<p>Most of all, what young voters want is a place at the main table of politics. They don’t want to rock the vote for the vote’s sake. If we are to rebuild the broken relationship between politics and young constituents, we need to start by putting young people at the centre of politics. Voting is, after all, a tool for representation in the public decision making process. If we want young people to use it, it needs to be effective.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/40921/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>This article does not reflect the views of the Research Councils.</span></em></p>Research suggests young people are engaged in politics, they just don’t like the politicians.Benjamin Bowman, PhD candidate in Politics, University of BathLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/382982015-03-23T19:17:19Z2015-03-23T19:17:19ZIn a tight NSW election, optional preferences could win the day<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/75618/original/image-20150323-14606-1vp38g.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Union-led campaigns across NSW are telling voters to put government MPs last on their ballot papers – a strategy that helped elect Labor in Queensland earlier this year.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.facebook.com/NSWPowerSellOff/photos/pb.383490491758035.-2207520000.1427075509./748439171929830/?type=3&theater">Stop the Sell Off/Facebook</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>At the New South Wales Liberal Party’s official launch on March 23, Premier Mike Baird urged voters to <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/state-politics/nsw-election-dont-elect-sneaky-labor-by-accident-asks-baird/story-fnsgbndb-1227273796028">“just vote one”</a> for his government, while warning against Labor’s “sneaky preference deals” with minor parties.</p>
<p>In contrast, Baird’s opponents are urging NSW voters to exercise their choice to number all the boxes on the lower house ballots, and <a href="http://www.usu.org.au/usucampaigns/energy-a-utilities/stop-the-sell-off/1108-put-the-liberals-last-it-s-where-they-put-you">“put the Liberals and Nationals last”</a>.</p>
<p>Both the key issues and the messages about how to vote in this NSW election have striking parallels with those that dominated January’s Queensland election. In part, that’s because the Labor and union anti-privatisation campaign against the Baird government in NSW was first honed in Queensland.</p>
<p>But it’s also because NSW and Queensland have the same optional preferential voting system, unlike other states. The way Queenslanders chose to exercise their preferences was crucial in the shock defeat of that state’s Liberal National government. </p>
<p>Could that happen again in NSW?</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/YNBFVRarGWE?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">NSW Premier Mike Baird’s campaign launch – including urging voters to “just vote 1” from the 28:40 mark.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Vote 1, number a few boxes, or number them all</h2>
<p>NSW and Queensland are the <a href="https://theconversation.com/are-queenslanders-in-danger-of-wasting-their-votes-35919">only Australian states</a> using optional preferential voting to elect their lower house MPs. </p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/75575/original/image-20150322-14627-xik314.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/75575/original/image-20150322-14627-xik314.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/75575/original/image-20150322-14627-xik314.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=716&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/75575/original/image-20150322-14627-xik314.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=716&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/75575/original/image-20150322-14627-xik314.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=716&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/75575/original/image-20150322-14627-xik314.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=900&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/75575/original/image-20150322-14627-xik314.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=900&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/75575/original/image-20150322-14627-xik314.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=900&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">As this union-led Stop the Sell Off campaign Facebook post notes, ‘Preferences will be extremely important at this election.’</span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In a close election, the optional preferential voting system can not only affect the result, but also make it harder than in a federal election to use pre-election opinion polls to gauge what the two-party preferred vote will be.</p>
<p>Under optional preferential voting, a voter can indicate a preference for just one candidate, for two, three or more, or fill in every box, as I explained in greater detail in <a href="https://theconversation.com/are-queenslanders-in-danger-of-wasting-their-votes-35919">this article in The Conversation</a>. (Meanwhile, <a href="https://theconversation.com/new-south-wales-election-preview-38174">Adrian Beaumont’s</a> NSW election preview covers how to preference correctly in the upper house.)</p>
<p>In Queensland, the Newman government ran a strong “just vote 1” campaign, repeatedly claiming that votes for minor parties were <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2014/s4158469.htm">“wasted votes”</a>. </p>
<p>That is incorrect, as under optional preferential voting a vote can be cast first for a minor party with subsequent preferences allocated to other candidates the voter supports – thus giving the voter the right to choose only candidates they support. Electoral educators, other parties and interest groups criticised that “wasted votes” claim.</p>
<p>In fact, the Newman government feared that exhausted votes for minor parties would give the ALP an advantage – and that proved to be the case. (A vote is “exhausted” when it is removed from the count because the candidates preferenced on the ballot have been eliminated from the count. You can read a <a href="http://www.elections.nsw.gov.au/about_elections/voting_and_counting_systems/optional_preferential">more detailed explanation here</a>.)</p>
<p>At this year’s election, ABC election analyst Antony Green says Queensland saw a <a href="http://blogs.abc.net.au/antonygreen/2015/03/why-the-baird-government-is-vulnerable.html">20% decline</a> in exhausted preferences, and a similar size increase in preference flows to Labor. Many of those <a href="http://blogs.abc.net.au/antonygreen/2015/03/why-the-baird-government-is-vulnerable.html">preferences went to the ALP</a>, helping it to form a <a href="https://theconversation.com/final-queensland-election-results-labors-stunning-revival-37616">minority government</a>.</p>
<p><a href="http://blogs.abc.net.au/antonygreen/2015/02/huge-shift-in-preference-flows-at-2015-queensland-election.html">Green has concluded</a> that the well-organised Labor and union campaign to “put the LNP last” was crucial in Queensland election result:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>It looks like those preferences recommendations, and the decisions of voters themselves to number more squares, have been the difference between Labor winning the 2015 election and the LNP being returned … Preferences can still make a difference.</p>
</blockquote>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/sQPgHnsBgM4?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">A NSW Nationals YouTube clip, encouraging its supporters to just vote 1.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Vote 1 for privatisation, or preference against it?</h2>
<p>In the Queensland election, the LNP government staked its re-election strategy on an infrastructure program funded by privatising assets, despite the political backlash against its Labor predecessor’s plans for assets sales. </p>
<p>In the month before the election, most opinion polls showed that the Newman government was set to suffer a big swing, but still likely to <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-01-31/queensland-election-newman-in-trouble-in-ashgrove-poll/6059330">hang on</a>. </p>
<p>In NSW, the polls are <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-03-23/nsw-election-liberals-mike-baird-beats-labors-luke-foley-polls/6339672">not as close</a> as they were in Queensland. And in contrast to Campbell Newman, Mike Baird’s <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-03-13/nsw-election-vote-compass-mike-baird-luke-foley-leadership/6302904">high personal popularity</a> is seen as one of the government’s strongest selling points.</p>
<p>But Baird has still been similarly “courageous” – as they used to say on <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yes_Minister">Yes, Minister</a> – by declaring <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/nsw-state-election-2015/bairds-doordie-infrastructure-plan-there-is-no-plan-b-20150227-13r2wz.html">“there is no Plan B”</a> to fund many of his campaign promises without the government’s plan for partial privatisation of the power industry.</p>
<p>Most <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/nsw-state-election-2015/poll-shows-mike-baird-set-for-victory-as-he-rallies-the-troops-at-campaign-launch-20150322-1m4vmt.html">polls</a> and <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-03-10/nsw-election-2015-vote-compass-privatisation-electricity-assets/6291254">the ABC’s Vote Compass</a> have shown the majority of NSW voters oppose privatisation. </p>
<p>However, the latest <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/nsw-state-election-2015/poll-shows-mike-baird-set-for-victory-as-he-rallies-the-troops-at-campaign-launch-20150322-1m4vmt.html">Fairfax/Ipsos poll</a> shows there is less opposition when people are asked for their view on privatisation with the proceeds being used for infrastructure, with a result of 48% in support and 47% opposed.</p>
<p>Nevertheless, privatisation has given new Labor leader Luke Foley a central theme to run with, which does seem to have <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-03-10/nsw-election-2015-vote-compass-privatisation-electricity-assets/6291254">resonated</a> in many parts of the state, especially in <a href="http://www.afr.com/business/energy/electricity/baird-needs-to-win-the-young-women-and-country-voters-20150322-1m5307">regional areas and with women</a>.</p>
<p>So just as in Queensland, the only question now is: come election day on March 28, will voters heed the “just vote 1” message, or will preferences prove crucial in deciding the next NSW government?</p>
<hr>
<p><em>Read more of The Conversation’s coverage of the <a href="https://theconversation.com/au/topics/nsw-election-2015">2015 NSW election</a>.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/38298/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Bronwyn Stevens does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The way Queensland voters chose to exercise their preferences was crucial in the shock defeat of the state’s first-term conservative government. Could that happen again in this weekend’s NSW election?Bronwyn Stevens, Lecturer in Politics, University of the Sunshine CoastLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/374652015-03-10T19:32:47Z2015-03-10T19:32:47ZNSW’s online gamble: why internet and phone voting is too risky<p>Up to 250,000 votes are <a href="http://www.cio.com.au/article/545546/nsw_electoral_commission_cio_says_ivote_system_will_ensure_counting_accuracy/">expected</a> to be cast using the iVote electronic voting system between March 16 and the close of polls on March 28 in the <a href="https://theconversation.com/au/topics/nsw-election-2015">New South Wales election</a>. </p>
<p>That would represent a massive increase on the <a href="http://www.elections.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/96297/SGE_2010-2011_Amended.pdf">46,864</a> votes at the 2011 state election and could mean about 5% of the <a href="http://www.aec.gov.au/Enrolling_to_vote/Enrolment_stats/national/2013.htm">total vote</a> is cast electronically, <a href="http://www.vote.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/182842/SE.801_iVote_Brochure.pdf">using a telephone or via the internet</a>. It looks set to be by far the biggest test of electronic voting in Australia, which has largely been limited to <a href="http://www.itnews.com.au/News/371437,mp-backs-calls-for-electronic-voting-rollout.aspx">small trials in the past</a>, and one of the largest <a href="https://www.verifiedvoting.org/internet-voting-outside-the-united-states/">online votes worldwide</a>.</p>
<p>If the NSW election proves to be <a href="http://blogs.abc.net.au/antonygreen/2015/03/why-the-baird-government-is-vulnerable.html#more">close</a>, those electronic votes could prove crucial. But before electronic voting begins on Monday, people in NSW should be warned: there are many unanswered questions about the integrity and privacy of those votes.</p>
<h2>Protecting voter integrity</h2>
<p>Late last year, the federal Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters recommended against electronic voting in federal elections. Its report <a href="http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Joint/Electoral_Matters/2013_General_Election/Second_Interim_Report">concluded that</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Australia is not in a position to introduce any large-scale system of electronic voting in the near future without catastrophically compromising our electoral integrity.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>So what are some of the potential threats? Software errors, hackers, misbehaving system administrators, malware or other unobservable problems could all potentially cause electronic votes to be misrecorded, modified or exposed. </p>
<p>The NSW Electoral Commission responded to such concerns by releasing a 102-page <a href="http://www.elections.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/193219/iVote-Security_Implementation_Statement-Mar2015.pdf">iVote Security Implementation Statement</a> at the end of last week.</p>
<p>But its statement still doesn’t answer many of the concerns I have been <a href="http://people.eng.unimelb.edu.au/vjteague/ResponseToDraftDesign_updatedForWeb.pdf">raising with the commission</a> for more than a year – particularly over vote privacy and verifiable election integrity.</p>
<p>For example, Norway’s online voting system, implemented by iVote’s provider Scytl, was <a href="https://www.regjeringen.no/en/aktuelt/Internet-voting-pilot-to-be-discontinued/id764300/">discontinued last year</a> after a software bug caused votes to be only very weakly hidden from election officials (see page 8 of <a href="http://www.osce.org/odihr/elections/109517?download=true">this report</a>). </p>
<p>The fundamental problem for NSW voters is this: you can’t tell what a computer is really doing to its electronic data just by looking at the screen.</p>
<h2>Concerns about the NSW system</h2>
<p>iVote is available to anyone who meets <a href="http://www.ivote.nsw.gov.au/">broad eligibility criteria</a>, including:</p>
<ul>
<li>I have a disability … and because of that disability I have difficulty voting at a polling place or I am unable to vote without assistance</li>
<li>I will not be in NSW throughout the hours of polling on election day.</li>
</ul>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/72742/original/image-20150223-21899-1mn39qm.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/72742/original/image-20150223-21899-1mn39qm.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/72742/original/image-20150223-21899-1mn39qm.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=639&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/72742/original/image-20150223-21899-1mn39qm.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=639&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/72742/original/image-20150223-21899-1mn39qm.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=639&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/72742/original/image-20150223-21899-1mn39qm.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=803&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/72742/original/image-20150223-21899-1mn39qm.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=803&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/72742/original/image-20150223-21899-1mn39qm.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=803&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">If you’re a NSW voter, you can test the iVote system before casting your ballot.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">NSW Electoral Commission</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/72743/original/image-20150223-20857-14qf66l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/72743/original/image-20150223-20857-14qf66l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/72743/original/image-20150223-20857-14qf66l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=786&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/72743/original/image-20150223-20857-14qf66l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=786&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/72743/original/image-20150223-20857-14qf66l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=786&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/72743/original/image-20150223-20857-14qf66l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=988&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/72743/original/image-20150223-20857-14qf66l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=988&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/72743/original/image-20150223-20857-14qf66l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=988&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A demonstration ballot used on the iVote site, which you can fill in and re-number if you make a mistake.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">NSW Electoral Commission</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The 2011 version of iVote <a href="https://www.elections.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/93481/iVote_Audit_report_PIR_Final.pdf">misrecorded 43 votes</a>, which appeared with the letter ‘N’ in the box(es) where preference numbers are supposed to go.</p>
<p>The NSW Electoral Commission is right to try to provide an independent and private voting option for voters with disabilities. However, it’s not helpful for those voters if their vote can’t be counted because of bugs in the system, like that ‘N’ ballot problem.</p>
<p>And iVote wasn’t <a href="https://www.elections.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/93766/July_2011_Final_ACG_iVote_Report_ELE01-C_Final.pdf">actually adopted</a> by many voters who couldn’t use paper ballots: in 2011, fewer than 2000 iVote users (less than 5%) had a disability. </p>
<p>More than 90% of iVote users simply declared that they would be out of the state on polling day - a group of people with much more secure voting options, including pre-poll and postal voting. </p>
<p>So will a <a href="https://www.elections.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/125454/C1_iVote_Strategy_for_SGE_2015_Amend_3.pdf">revamped design</a> for the 2015 election and a new vendor (Everyone Counts has been replaced with <a href="http://www.theage.com.au/it-pro/government-it/spanish-firm-wins-nsw-ivote-tender-20140331-zqnyq.html">Scytl</a>) resolve the fundamental questions over vote privacy and electoral integrity?</p>
<p>The NSW Electoral Commission <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-02-04/computer-voting-may-feature-in-march-nsw-election/6068290">certainly thinks so</a>, recently saying:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>People’s vote is completely secret. It’s fully encrypted and safeguarded, it can’t be tampered with, and for the first time people can actually after they’ve voted go into the system and check to see how they voted just to make sure everything was as they intended.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>So let’s consider those two key claims: vote privacy and the impossibility of tampering.</p>
<h2>Protecting privacy</h2>
<p>In response to concerns over the total lack of verifiability in the 2011 iVote run, a “Verification Service” has been introduced for the 2015 election.</p>
<p>Votes will be sent in encrypted, or hidden, form to a “Verification Service” run by the Australian Centre for Advanced Computing and Communications, known as AC3. Voters can telephone AC3, enter their 12-digit Receipt Number, and check the decrypted vote it reads back to them.</p>
<p>But that still leaves crucial privacy questions unanswered, including:</p>
<ol>
<li>What if someone bullies a voter into calling the system to reveal how they voted?</li>
<li>What if someone with (legal or illegal) access to AC3 observes the decrypted vote, and the caller ID of whoever called to “verify” it?</li>
<li>What if the “Verification Service” misreads the vote, in a way that matches a misrecording by the voting client?</li>
<li>12 digits isn’t long enough to secure modern encryption, so exactly what extra measures are in place to keep votes private?</li>
</ol>
<h2>Checking for undetectable vote tampering</h2>
<p>Now let’s consider vote tampering <em>after</em> voters call in to “verify”. </p>
<p>We’re told there will be a “Vote Auditor” who will reconcile the “Verified” votes with those passed from the main voting system into the count.</p>
<p>But even after reading the <a href="http://www.elections.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/193219/iVote-Security_Implementation_Statement-Mar2015.pdf">iVote Security Implementation Statement</a>, a number of issues are still unclear, including:</p>
<ol>
<li>Who is the “Vote Auditor” this year? </li>
<li>Exactly what data will they see? </li>
<li>Why should candidate-appointed scrutineers, who usually have the chance to observe paper-based processes directly, trust one appointed “Vote Auditor” to act for them all?</li>
<li>How do we know that the audit process detects all forms of manipulation?</li>
<li>All the privacy questions that applied to the “Verification Service” apply to the auditor too.</li>
</ol>
<p>These questions are particularly difficult to answer because no source code is publicly available.</p>
<p>Political parties and candidates have until March 16 to nominate a scrutineer to attend the <a href="http://www.votensw.info/candidates_and_parties/ivote_decryption_verification_ceremony">iVote Decryption Verification Ceremony</a>. Yet it’s unclear how those scrutineers will be able to do their job properly; with electronic votes, the scrutineers will have to take it on trust that all the data they can see on a screen has not been affected by unseen malware, software errors, hackers or other problems.</p>
<h2>Where electronic voting can work – and where it doesn’t</h2>
<p>Polling-place electronic voting can give the voter a real chance to verify that their vote is cast as they intended in the privacy of the booth. Good systems also provide some meaningful evidence to voters or scrutineers that the votes are properly included in an accurate count. </p>
<p>In Tasmania and Western Australia, voters with disabilities complete their ballot using a computer in a polling place, then print it out, check it carefully and put it in an ordinary ballot box. </p>
<p>I did a lot of work on the <a href="http://electionwatch.edu.au/victoria-2014/click-here-democracy-e-vote-explained">Victorian Electoral Commissions’s 2014 project</a> to implement open-source end-to-end verifiable polling place e-voting. </p>
<p>So to be clear, not all electronic voting is too risky; polling place-based electronic voting with a voter-verifiable paper record can provide proper peace of mind for voters and political candidates alike.</p>
<p>But as yet, no remote telephone or internet voting system in Australia or overseas truly provides reliable, usable, verifiable and private voting.</p>
<p>As the director of the University of Michigan’s Centre for Computer Security and Society, <a href="https://jhalderm.com/">Alex Halderman</a>, said to me recently:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Internet voting sounds like a good idea, but it raises some of the most difficult security problems in the world today. My team studied real internet voting systems used in the US and around the world, and we found that online criminals, dishonest officials, or even state-sponsored hackers could hack in and change election results. The stakes couldn’t be higher.</p>
</blockquote>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/iit5WdLYwns?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">A University of Michigan electronic voting expert explains a key flaw in Estonia’s e-voting system.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>That’s why, if you want to be sure your vote counts in the NSW election, I recommend you stick with an old-fashioned paper ballot.</p>
<p><em>* Vanessa Teague is involved with hosting the University of Michigan’s Alex Halderman, who is giving a free public lecture <a href="http://people.eng.unimelb.edu.au/vjteague/jhalderm_talk.html">in Melbourne on March 18</a> and <a href="https://cecs.anu.edu.au/internetvoting">in Canberra on March 23</a> on Internet Voting and Cybersecurity: What Could Go Wrong?</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/37465/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Vanessa Teague receives funding from the Australian Research Council for work on electronic voting privacy. She is on the advisory board of Verifiedvoting.org. She worked on a voluntary basis for the Victorian Electoral Commission's electronic voting project.</span></em></p>The NSW election will be Australia’s biggest test of electronic voting, with up to 250,000 votes set to be cast online or by phone. But many questions remain about the integrity and privacy of those votes.Vanessa Teague, Research Fellow in the Department of Computing and Information Systems, The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/367582015-02-22T19:12:33Z2015-02-22T19:12:33ZDon’t blame micro-parties or the Senate – update an archaic system<p>Paul Keating famously labelled the Senate <a href="http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;page=0;query=unrepresentative%20swill%20SearchCategory_Phrase%3A%22house%20of%20representatives%22%20Decade%3A%221990s%22%20Year%3A%221992%22;rec=4;resCount=Default">“unrepresentative swill”</a>. Similar sentiments – while not as colourful – are <a href="http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/miss-judgement/index.php/heraldsun/comments/column_ludicrous_senate_has_had_its_day/">being voiced</a> by those <a href="http://www.canberratimes.com.au/comment/double-dissolution-should-be-considered-to-break-political-impasse-20150216-13fu1l.html">frustrated with the blocking</a> power of the Senate’s micro-parties. </p>
<p>In a recent Australian Financial Review <a href="http://www.afr.com/p/business/companies/what_our_top_ceos_expect_in_grc2SMAQwIuAtg79nWSGRN">survey</a>, leading corporate CEOs called for major reform to the Senate.</p>
<p>At one level it is not hard to understand why. The Senate in general, and the minor and micro-parties that hold the balance of power in particular, were instrumental in gutting the Abbott government’s budget at a time when <a href="https://theconversation.com/big-no-longer-beautiful-for-australias-reform-agenda-37345">reform is pressing</a>.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/opinion/senate-is-a-threat-to-our-future/story-fni0ffxg-1227224649095">Criticism of their power</a> over policy will likely grow as the Senate casts a critical eye this year over the government’s attempts to reshape the budget and fix Australia’s tax system.</p>
<p>But behind the singular criticisms of the Senate is a bigger picture of deeper dysfunction. It’s a picture that suggests the Senate is not a root cause, but part of a long list of symptoms that indicate our political system is increasingly unfit for purpose in the 21st century.</p>
<h2>Excluding micro-parties is not reform</h2>
<p>A clue to understanding these deeper problems lies in the complaints these business figures make. In essence, they lament how micro-parties are an increasingly powerful phenomenon, gaining <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/features/unrepresentative-swill/story-e6frg6z6-1226716378749">outsized power compared to their meagre vote</a> in elections. </p>
<p>Many of the CEOs surveyed proposed that, in response, the Senate’s <a href="https://theconversation.com/explainer-how-does-the-senate-voting-system-work-17768">proportional voting system</a> should be abolished. Or, at least, the system of preferential voting should be changed to stamp out the micro-party phenomenon.</p>
<p>This would allow major parties to pass legislation with greater certainty and reduce the range of political parties able to hold the balance of power. It would also restore “representativeness” to our democratic system by ridding it of what one CEO described as “a disparate bunch of single-issue politicians”.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/cG1khlbqI9k?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Business leaders today, like Paul Keating in 1992, resent the Senate’s ability to frustrate the government’s agenda.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>On a superficial level, these and other proposals aimed at restoring the primacy of major parties seem to have merit. But these complaints overlook what is occurring within our political system, and the political arena more generally.</p>
<p>On the face of it, democratic systems like Australia’s look the same as 20 or 30 years ago. Major parties dominate the day-to-day political process, presenting their policy programs at general elections as they vie to form government and represent the general public. </p>
<p>But beneath the surface the relationship between citizens and these parties has been fundamentally and irreversibly weakened. This is reflected in membership and support for major political parties, which have <a href="http://www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/sn05125.pdf">fallen</a> across the Western world. </p>
<p>In contrast, support for smaller parties has <a href="http://blogs.abc.net.au/antonygreen/2013/11/record-vote-for-minor-parties-at-2013-federal-election.html">risen</a> sharply, albeit from low bases.</p>
<p>Why? </p>
<p>Because voter preferences are no longer shaped predominantly by class, ideology, ethnicity and geography. And it is to these catch-all attributes that major political parties traditionally appealed. </p>
<h2>19th-century model is showing its age</h2>
<p>In a 21st-century internet-driven, globalised world, the array of political choices and identities available to voters are increasing and fragmenting.</p>
<p>This reflects broader changes in a society in which choices – political, social or economic – are influenced by a widening collection of complex factors. </p>
<p>Major parties are finding it <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/feb/09/abbotts-legacy-is-a-hairball-in-the-throat-of-the-body-politic-can-turnbull-dislodge-it">increasingly difficult</a> to develop a coherent overarching narrative for what they seek in government and why it benefits the community as well as the individual over the long term. </p>
<p>In contrast, voter fragmentation suits micro and minor parties. With their single or limited issues campaigns they can cut through the political noise with more succinct appeals and arguments. They offer retail politics in a wholesale world. </p>
<p>Informal groupings and alliances of micro-parties likewise can respond more nimbly to the flux of 21st-century voter sentiment. </p>
<p>In addition to the splintering of traditional voter blocs, voter choices are rarely static. Our democratic system is now characterised by larger and unpredictable cohorts of “swinging” voters. Their political preferences and voting intentions constantly change, often heavily influenced by a single issue or narrower policy platform.</p>
<p>The major parties, as a result, become less flexible and responsive. Their feedback mechanisms are often <a href="http://insidestory.org.au/the-parties-democratic-deficit/">stilted</a>. They can be held up by procedural delays, adherence to party rules or structures, and even the “need” for cabinet solidarity. </p>
<p>All this suggests micro-parties may not be some kind of unwelcome or unrepresentative intrusion into our democratic system, as conventional views would have it. Whether <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2013/s3844842.htm">by accident</a> or design, they have allied themselves with the way the 21st-century political world is being restructured.</p>
<p>In short, all this should signal that new political configurations like micro-parties need to be accommodated, not curtailed.</p>
<p>However, advocating more collaborative attitudes to politics and policy-making can only get us so far, particularly if major parties won’t work together on long-term reform.</p>
<h2>Our democracy needs new organising principles</h2>
<p>Ultimately the micro-party issue should begin to highlight how our political system is predicated on many organising principles that no longer apply.</p>
<p>The system requires functional majorities – built on major parties achieving stable blocs of voter support – to get anything major done. This is a system where the languid decision-making processes of parliament are increasingly left behind by a <a href="http://www.theage.com.au/comment/how-our-leaders-have-lost-their-way-20150209-139jmz.html">super-speed 21st century</a>.</p>
<p>This is a system that seems unable to acknowledge what many citizens already know: that so much going on in our globalised and interdependent world escapes the control of territorially based parties and parliaments. </p>
<p>Broader, progressive reforms to our democratic institutions are urgently needed to reflect the realities of a <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/feb/10/australian-voters-have-learned-to-distrust-further-reform-and-rightly-so?CMP=share_btn_tw">new political and policy world</a>. </p>
<p>We need to have a conversation about managing this world more effectively with more inclusive structures of policy-making and more innovative systems of voter input. The conversation needs to tackle some weighty issues, namely: </p>
<ul>
<li><p>What is the role of political parties, both large and small, in this system and what processes might encourage more effective political and policy collaboration? </p></li>
<li><p>What sort of voting and electoral systems best capture and reflect the kaleidoscopic nature of today’s citizenry?</p></li>
<li><p>What reforms do our democratic institutions require so they can develop the policies Australia needs to thrive over the long term, beyond short-term political cycles that can turn in days?</p></li>
</ul>
<p>It is this path – not attempts to restore a world that no longer exists through piecemeal changes to a single part of the system – that will give our democracy the new lease of life it sorely needs.</p>
<hr>
<p><em>Other articles in The Conversation’s ongoing series, “New Politics”, can be read <a href="https://theconversation.com/au/topics/new-politics">here</a>.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/36758/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Travers McLeod is CEO of the Centre for Policy Development, an independent, non-profit and non-partisan policy institute.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Mark Triffitt does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The Senate is not a root cause, but part of a long list of symptoms that indicate Australia’s political system is increasingly unfit for purpose in the 21st century.Mark Triffitt, Lecturer, Public Policy, The University of MelbourneTravers McLeod, Honorary Fellow in the School of Social and Political Sciences, The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.