The Internet is popular among young people. Voting, however, is not popular among young people. Participating in politics is important. Those who don't vote must watch while politicians divvy up the available money and services without their input. What better way to use technology is there than to enable more young people to vote and be politically aware?

The idea of voting online isn't new; it's similar to voting by mail except that the ballots are submitted via keystroke rather than via the Postal Service. There are concerns that people with more wealth and better education--who tend to use the Internet in greater numbers--would skew online elections. However, the point is missed that, due to the present election structure, richer people already have a disproportionate say in who is elected.

The Internet cannot add any more weight to a seesaw that already has one side on the ground, but it can induce more people to participate. Already, dozens of candidates and organizations have Web sites with much more in-depth information than any 30-second commercial can include.

An article from the Knight-Ridder News Service included the point that "Californians could be voting over the Internet in five years with a computerized system that could revolutionize the state's voting process and boost sagging voter turnout.

"Secretary of State Bill Jones is recruiting Silicon Valley's high-tech companies to study how to make such a system private and secure from fraud. Momentum is already building nationwide from a pilot project that would let some overseas military personnel cast votes over the Internet in the November 2000 election."

The technology is already under development. Again, modifying the secure servers that have enabled e-commerce to flourish in the last few years will allow honest elections to be held online. Janelle Brown, technology correspondent for Salon, said in an interview that the necessary technology could be available within the next five years.

Several companies are working on election server technology including Votehere, which was profiled in the New York Times this spring. "As president of Votehere.net, a start-up company that builds secure Internet voting systems, Jim Adler hears the same question from investors again and again. They don't ask about politics or security. They want to know what would happen if Microsoft moved into the election business. Adler has a ready reply: 'Do you think the Justice Department would let Microsoft run elections in this country?'

"The companies are focusing their efforts on building the trust of election officials in their products and reputations. Votehere.net is new to the industry, but most of these companies are already in the election business, selling voting machines and computer equipment for reading ballot results, and they are anticipating demand for Internet voting software."

An important concern with online voting boils down to trust. Kim Alexander, president of the non-profit California Voter Foundation, said that personal, not technical, issues were the key stumbling block toward acceptance of online voting. "A CVF survey showed that members were supportive with caution," Alexander said in an interview. "I see online voting supplementing polling places. It will be a generation before there is more confidence. The state should provide more information to ease fears."

Brown agreed. "There is little trust in what is online," she said. "There is a lack of familiarity. People don't trust interaction with a machine. It's not something they're familiar with."

When it comes to using a computer to vote, Brown predicted that people will initially be reticent, but it will pass with time.

Neither Brown nor Alexander believed that the Democrats or the Republicans would be helped or hurt by Internet voting. Alexander ventured that more independent voters might participate.

Alexander described a school of thought that believes "voting should be difficult." That thinking certainly is consistent with America's voting history, starting with the Constitution, which permitted only white, middle-aged men with property to vote. Therefore, it is odd that critics of Internet voting cite a lack of access as an issue. From grandfather clauses to literacy tests to poll taxes, suffrage has expanded only slowly and grudgingly.

This is even more reason to provide more opportunity to express their views. The technology, when it is available, must be allowed to operate effectively. Education, not fear, must be the impetus behind improving political participation.

Special thanks to Kim Alexander and Janelle Brown for their time and assistance.

Sources

Quotes taken from "Californians might soon be voting online" an article by Deborah Kong, Knight-Ridder News Service, dated Aug. 8, 1998.

Quotes taken from "Casting Ballots Through the Internet" an article by Rebecca Fairley Raney, New York Times on the Web, dated May 3, 1999.

Copyright © 2000 Tyson Chaney All Rights Reserved

Tyson Chaney is executive director of the Millennium 3 Foundation, a non-profit, non-partisan political research and education organization. He is writing a book, Millennium 3: Political Theory in the Twenty-First Century, that will be published later this year.

comment? discuss this article on our discussion board