The thing about most ideas is that they’re usually missing some practical component necessary to bring them to life. In order for our democracy to evolve, this practical component is technology. Specifically, a technology based platform that is a reliable, efficient, and trustworthy means of collecting and recording votes cast by the citizens of this country is what is needed to turn this idea into a reality.
One of the primary reasons America continues to remain a global superpower from a military standpoint is the ability of our armed forces to partner with private subcontractors to develop weapons and equipment that they couldn’t develop on their own. Every year, hundreds of billions of tax dollars are poured into companies like Lockheed Martin, Northrup Grumman, Raytheon, and numerous others, which fuels research and development, and helps America to maintain its place among the military elite.
From a computing technology perspective, America is also home to some of the leading companies in the world, and continues to be at the forefront in the global advancement and development of this type of technology. Surely, if we can utilize the expertise of our private sector in a military sense, then why can’t we partner with our technology leaders in the private sector to develop a digital online voting system? Seeing as how we use technology every day to accurately count how many people like, love, and frowny face the latest cat meme, dinner photo, and countless other social media and internet posts, it certainly seems that we should be able to safely and securely count something of actual importance by using technology. If we can pay bills and taxes, manage bank accounts, and do pretty much everything else online, why can’t we vote, too? Ultimately, it just comes down to putting forth an organized effort, and allocating resources toward the creation and development of a platform.
Preserving the integrity of a technology based voting system, particularly one that is intended to be used with frequency and regularity, will be of critical importance. While more in the way of cybersecurity will be addressed in a later chapter, for now it’s sufficient to state that in order help maintain this integrity, and the trust of the people, the criminal penalties attached to any alteration or attempted manipulation of the system must be severe. An act against our voting system should be considered an act of treason, as the democratic process is something to be revered and kept sacred at all costs.
In this vision for an evolved democracy, the Senators and Representatives will still hold a vital role, only their role will be as true representatives of the people, without the unchecked discretion and power that exists presently. Under this new structure, our elected officials will be the first ones to cast their votes, and their votes will be announced openly and publicly. After this vote by the Senators/Representatives, a vote will then be put to the people, and the decided majority of the people’s vote will control how the official vote is ultimately cast on behalf of their State/District in Congress.
Although perhaps not required, we should expect our elected officials to provide us with the reasoning for their individual votes, specifically in an effort to garner our support to vote the same way. It might be best to think of the official as the one who controls the content presented to us, but not necessarily the outcome. This opportunity to inform, to lead, and to persuade the people makes the role of our Senators and Representatives no less critical than they are today. And from a practical standpoint, we still need individual persons working together to draft legislation, as the process of writing laws isn’t a task suited for the collective. But rather than continue to allow these individuals to exercise absolute discretion once elected into office, in an evolved democracy, the people will act as an ever present check on the power of the official.
The current reality is that many Americans do not vote, despite having the right to. On average, less than 60% of us vote in presidential elections. Due to this lack of participation, it’s important to have a means of preventing small segments of the population from controlling votes, when most of the citizens in a given State/District are generally disinterested. To address the potential issue, a minimum voting threshold of 33.33% will need to apply to the process. Meaning, if at least 1/3 or more of the registered voters in a particular State/District participate and cast a vote on a matter, then the majority of them will control how their elected official votes on behalf of the State/District. But, if less than 1/3 of registered voters participate, then at the conclusion of the vote, the Senator/Representative will be given a choice to vote in one of two ways when casting the official vote in Congress:
- vote in accordance with their original vote published in advance of the vote by the people; or
2. vote in accordance with the decided majority of the people’s vote – despite the fact that the minimum 1/3 threshold was not met.
Leaving the official a limited amount of discretion in instances of low voter turnout allows for a distinction to be made between a vote with say 5% participation and an even split amongst those voting, compared to one with 30% participation and a heavy majority in favor of a particular outcome. Only after a vote is taken will officials know the true position of the citizens they represent, and so we shouldn’t prevent them from acting upon this information under these circumstances, when it makes sense to do so.
Most studies show that people who currently don’t vote, choose not to because they feel disinterested with the process of government or that their vote doesn’t really matter. For others, it’s a matter of inconvenience, as jobs and daily lives take precedence over civic duty, especially when the civic duty requires getting up earlier or getting home late, and standing in a line (in some places for hours) to push a pin through a piece of paper. Perhaps under a structure where the votes of the people actually mean something, and where we can participate on our own schedule through the convenience of technology, we’ll see an increase in the number of people voting, so much so that minimum voting thresholds are just an afterthought. Until such a time, however, this safeguard is a necessity to prevent small groups from distorting the true intent of the system, which is to allow the will of the collective majority to guide our path forward.
Besides enabling greater citizen participation in the process, a technology based system could also provide added benefits by helping to make the traditional electoral process of choosing our officials a more meaningful exercise. Specifically, the system could act as an official source of information concerning candidates for political office, including a professional biography outlining past work history, qualifications for office, and historical voting records (if the candidate has held office previously). In a traditional employment context, virtually all job candidates are required to provide a resume as a condition of being hired, so why wouldn’t we require something similar in an even more important governmental context? Additionally, campaign financing information should be reported and displayed via the system. While much progress has been made in recent history to reform campaign financing through transparency, most American voters have no idea where this information is reported or where to find it, let alone utilize it in their electoral decision making process.
Lastly, an official voting system could afford the candidates an opportunity to provide a written statement of their choosing directly to the people. The intent of these statements would be to explain the candidate’s views on particular issues, why he or she believes they are worthy of being elected, or any other information they believe to be relevant to the voting public. As is common with our existing social media platforms, the length of candidate statements should probably be limited to a pre-established character maximum, so as to provide all candidates with an equal opportunity to communicate with the people, but also to prevent the system from becoming a substitute for the campaign process itself.
Certainly, these candidate details being suggested for inclusion in the system are not new or unique, and are already generally available now. But the consolidation and simplified presentation of this information into a single official source seems well overdue. Particularly when we consider the outright disregard that many of our politicians have for the truth, and the mud-slinging that characterizes most elections, a validated source of factual information about our candidates seems to be needed more now than ever. Although making this information available and more accessible will not cure all that is wrong with our electoral process, it is a step in the right direction.
This overall idea to modernize government through technology is grounded in an assumption that all American citizens have the ability to access a digital voting system. According to 2016 data from the Pew Research Center, however, 13% of Americans do not use the internet. Unsurprisingly, this group is made up primarily of senior citizens, the poor, and the uneducated. Although this percentage is likely to continue shrinking as time goes by, we must remain aware of this subset of our population, and ensure that we provide appropriate education and accessibility to the system for everyone. At this point, virtually every public library has a computer, and for those areas without a library, polling stations can be established in public buildings, just as they are now, only with a computer instead of a booth and a pin. Although accessibility is an issue, it is by no means an insurmountable one.
Nearly every aspect of our American way of life has changed dramatically since the late 1700s, and yet our system of government has remained virtually the same. The reality of the situation is that the system is old and antiquated, both in its structure and mechanics, and is in desperate need of an update. As our world continues to be shaped and changed by technology, it only makes sense that our government should be as well. It’s time for us to re-think what’s possible when it comes to this aspect of our lives.
Recent Comments