Introduction and Claim
The advent of information technology has brought a new idea on how computers and the internet can be used in voting (Burmester and Emmanouil 63). This is part of electronic democracy. In electronic voting, there are no papers used in the actual voting (Alvarez and Thad 2). The electronic voting has presented a platform for advancing e-democracy globally. However, several people and authorities oppose the idea of e-voting.
They claim that the ruling government and software and hardware developers threaten the idea of e-voting. On the other hand, its proponents suggest that it is the high time all states shifted to e-voting which is free form human error. They argue that computers can not manipulate votes, but humans can do, in favour of a candidate. That notwithstanding, benefits of e-voting outweigh those of paper-based voting (Alvarez and Thad 102). Thus, e-voting should be given all the necessary attention in states to ensure a full shift to digital democracy in the future.
Background
Alvarez and Thad (4) argue that e-elections probably started in 1964 when 7 states in the US adopted the system. This was used for presidential elections. The e-voting system began with the use of computers for counting or tabulation. Here, votes were manually cast, and then counting of the ballot was done using computers. This was a step towards reducing human error associated with the physical counting by man. This system used punched ballot papers that could be recognized by the computers during counting. However, the current systems that are being developed and tested in the developed nations involve voting and counting of ballot electronically (Lilleker and Nigel 2).
Traditionally, and even today, many countries have been using paper-based voting system where citizens register as voters, vote and vote counting is done manually. This is still the preferred method of voting in many countries today. Burmester and Emmanouil (67) claim that technological, political and financial implications are some of the factors that have deterred these states from shifting to the e-elections.
Body
Many nations have expressed fears over rising cases of voter apathy and low voter turn out. This has been blamed on low voter education by the bodies conducting elections and the concerned political parties. Several strategies have been put forth to address these issues that undermine democracy (Adler and Thad 152). One of the key solutions is to make the elections easy to conduct and make them voter-friendly. Lilleker and Nigel (10) argue that electronic voting presents a platform on which future elections are to be based. It is an easier and faster method than the paper-based voting system. For instance, in 2000 voter turnout in the USA reached 59% while that of the youth aged 19 to 24 years reached 39%.
This was a test of promoting democracy through electronic elections. Voters with disabilities have the opportunity to participate in democracy by voting their preferred candidates easily. Illiterate voters can also ensure that they have chosen a candidate of their choice. Electronic voting provides intent to the voter where the voter confirms that he/she has voted, and the vote is valid; it will not be spoilt and ends up missing in the final counting. Electronic voting system uses electronic ballots that ensure at no point will the ballots get exhausted, unlike the paper-based system where the ballots can get depleted and cause panic. The electronic ballots are cheaper than the physical ballots (Alvarez and Thad 50).
Critics to this new method of elections have maintained that the system is prone to fraud and unfair election results (Faliszewski, Hemaspaandra, and Hemaspaandra 310). The argument is that the sitting government may order for electronic gadgets that are designed to work in their favor. In addition, the software and hardware engineers involved in the design of e-voting systems may develop systems that are programmed to favor on side (Adler and Thad 148).
In the 2012 elections, in the USA, several states were faced with system glitches during the Election Day. For instance, touch screens were not working in Pennsylvania, machines wrongly identified the presidential candidates in Virginia. In fact, voting was reversed to the old paper-based system in Virginia due to technical obstacles of the electronic voting machines. These happenings worked to undermine the democratic process of elections. Faliszewski, Hemaspaandra, and Hemaspaandra (358) also argue that computer viruses and hacking may be a potential threat to free and clear e-elections.
Gritzalis (156) argue that, with well designed and pre-tested e-voting systems, e-elections can be conducted in a hitch-free manner and help promote democracy. It has been suggested that the laws directing to electronic elections should be passed to facilitate the change.
In addition, studies have shown that technical hitches just happen at the start of the implementation but reduce with time (Lilleker and Nigel 12). Furthermore, Lilleker and Nigel (15) have suggested that there should be interplay among the campaigns, elections and the internet for successful elections. This further stresses the need to incorporate information technology into the elections system.
Conclusion
An electronic election is applications of the information technology in voter registration, voting and vote counting. It presents a model of free and fair electronic globally. Although it has been faced with a myriad of shortcomings, it still holds the future of democratic elections in the future. Several factors have been hindering the update of electronic elections. Some of these are; slow changes of laws, inadequate technological knowledge by election boy officials, high cost of implementation, and fear of fraud in elections, just but to name a few.
When the system is well implemented, electronic elections make elections accessible, fair and open. They promote voter turnout and address issues of early voting and absentee voting, thus are so convenient to the voter. The benefits of electronic elections outweigh those of the traditional paper-based method. Critics of the new system of elections should reconsider their stand and join advocates to promote and enhance the uptake and progress of e-elections in states.
Works Cited
Adler, E. Scott, and Thad E. Hall. “Ballots, Transparency, and Democracy.” Election Law Journal 12.2 (2013): 146-161. Print.
Alvarez, R. Michael, and Thad Hall. Electronic Elections: The Perils and Promises of Digital Democracy. Princeton University Press, 2010. Print.
Burmester, Mike, and Emmanouil Magkos. Towards Secure and Practical E-Elections in the New era: Secure Electronic Voting. New York: Springer, 2003. 63-76. Print.
Faliszewski, Piotr, Edith Hemaspaandra, and Lane Hemaspaandra. “Multimode control attacks on elections.” Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 40.1 (2011):305-351. Print.
Gritzalis, Dimitris, Ed. Secure Electronic Voting. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2003. Print.
Lilleker, Darren, and Nigel Jackson. Political Campaigning, Elections and the Internet: Comparing the US, UK, France and Germany. London, UK: Routledge, 2011. Print.