Skip to content
Subscribe

Will E-Voting via Smartphone Promote Greater Election Participation?

Published:

With smartphone ownership being so common in the U.S., the questions surrounding electronic voting are becoming increasingly important. 39 percent of likely voters surveyed by Consumer Reports said they would choose voting by computer or mobile device over traditional methods. But despite the growing openness to electronic voting, e-voting opportunities have declined since the mid-2000s. Because states lack the funding to repair and replace newer voting machines, many have reverted to more traditional punch-card ballots. Some argue that older paper methods are less vulnerable to fraud, while others counter that more electronic voting would enable greater voter turnout. Here’s a more detailed look from both sides of the aisle at the question of whether allowing e-voting via smartphone would empower democracy more directly.

Support For E-voting

President Obama laid out a case for e-voting in a presentation to this year’s SXSW Interactive Festival in Austin, Texas. Pointing to the fact that half of eligible voters don’t vote, Obama called for redesigning voting technology to enable greater participation. He stated that the United States is the only advanced democracy that makes it difficult for people to vote, saying that it’s easier to order a pizza than to vote. Obama argued that online voting systems aren’t necessarily insecure and claimed that the lack of technological progress reflects a lack of desire on the part of politicians.

Everyone Counts CEO Lori Steele argues that electronic voting is actually more secure than traditional methods when military-grade encryption is used. Additionally, smartphones such as the iPhone 6 have encryption safeguards strong enough to daunt even federal investigators, which presents a formidable challenge for potential hackers. Other advocates point to the fact that all states already send ballots to overseas voters electronically and 32 allow some form of electronic ballot return via the internet, email or fax. Alabama Secretary of State John Merrill says e-voting makes it easier for armed service personnel to get their votes submitted on time, another point in favor of e-voting.

Arguments Against E-voting

Consumer Reports’ survey found that allowing e-voting would only increase voter turnout by 7 percent, a significant improvement but not dramatic enough to elicit a voter turnout of 50 percent. The survey found that the additional voting demographic would be predominantly female, white, aged 18 to 29 with some or no college education, with a household income below $50,000 and independent in party affiliation. While accounting for the voices of these voters is obviously important, it does not address the broader issue of low voter engagement among minorities and other demographics.

Additionally, electronic voting alone lacks the means for effective voting and recount supervision. For instance, in 2004, a North Carolina electronic voting machine lost 4,500 votes when it stopped recording votes in an election that was decided by fewer than 2,000 votes. Due to the lack of a paper trail, no recount was possible. This blunder led to over 60 percent of states requiring a paper trail, making a completely paperless voting process less imminent.

Security Concerns

Security is another major issue. In the wake of hacks against the DNC and Arizona and Illinois voter databases, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid has called for the FBI to investigate whether Russia is tampering with U.S. elections. Foreign Policy cybersecurity writer Elias Groll argues that, while there is no solid evidence of Russian involvement, e-voting remains vulnerable to attack methods such as stealing and deleting voter databases and loading malware onto e-voting systems. Computer science professor Aviel Rubin adds that hackers could manipulate elections by targeting key districts with denial of service attacks that would keep certain online voters from connecting.

Rubin doesn’t see how online voting could be done securely, but other experts are more optimistic. Computer scientist Michael Shamos says that while cyberattacks on e-voting systems might succeed on a small scale, it would be difficult to successfully disrupt an election on a large scale. He points out that electronic voting machines are not connected to each other, making it impossible to spread viruses from one machine to another.

Photo Credit: mtkang / shutterstock.com

Adhere to the IVN etiquette

By posting a comment, you agree to adhere to our etiquette rules: No partisan attacks, no personal attacks, substantiate your sources, no self-promotion.

Contact IVN

Questions about this article or our coverage? Send us a message. A free IVN member account is required.

Message sent

Thanks, we’ll review it and get back to you if needed.

Message not sent

Sorry, something went wrong. Please try again.

Sign in to send a message

Messages are tied to your IVN member account. Signing in is free and takes a few seconds.

Contact IVN

Questions about this article or our coverage? Send us a message. A free IVN member account is required.

Message sent

Thanks, we’ll review it and get back to you if needed.

Message not sent

Sorry, something went wrong. Please try again.

Sign in to send a message

Messages are tied to your IVN member account. Signing in is free and takes a few seconds.

Republish this article

Republishing guidelines

Republish IVN articles for free. Independent Voter News articles may be republished online or in print under a Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 4.0 license, on these terms:

  1. Credit the author and IVN. Keep the byline ("By Author Name, Independent Voter News") and the attribution note at the end, which links to the original.
  2. Keep the meaning. You may update time and place references and apply your house style. You may trim for length, as long as the cuts don't change the meaning or misrepresent the author. Keep the headline. Mark any additions as your own (for example "Additional reporting by ...").
  3. Translations are welcome. Translate faithfully, add "Translated from English by [your outlet]", and tell us at editor@ivn.us.
  4. Keep the links, including the link to the original article.
  5. Keep the tracking image. The HTML includes a 1-pixel image that counts readers on your page. It collects no personal information.
  6. Photos and illustrations. Images credited to IVN may be used with this article only. Images credited to others (AP, Getty, Unsplash, Wikimedia and so on) stay under their owners' terms. Secure the rights or switch "Include images" off.
  7. Don't sell it. You can't sell our articles or sell ads specifically against them. Your normal site advertising is fine.
  8. No implied endorsement. Don't suggest that IVN or the author endorses you, your candidates or your causes, or that donations to you support IVN.
  9. Keep labels. Opinion or analysis pieces keep that label.
  10. Point search engines to the original. Where your CMS allows, set the canonical URL to the original IVN article.
  11. No bulk or automated republishing, and don't submit our articles to aggregators (Apple News, Google News, MSN) as your own.
  12. Corrections and removals. Update your copy when we correct it, and remove it promptly if we ask. We'll contact you at the email you give us.
  13. Questions or print republication: editor@ivn.us.

IVN staff: fill in who you're inviting above, then create the invite.

Preparing the article

Will E-Voting via Smartphone Promote Greater Election Participation?

Choose a format
  • HTML
  • Email HTML
  • Markdown
  • Formatted (.docx)
  • Plain text
  • WordPress blocks
  • PDF
Choose a platform

Photos credited to others need their owners' permission.

To for

Republishing somewhere else? Questions? editor@ivn.us