Online voting a flawed proposal

Imagine picking our government’s leaders right from the comfort of one’s computer chair. No need to drive anywhere, no “I Voted” sticker, no stamps, no paper forms.
  
While it will be a long time before state and national governments seriously consider the Internet as a method for casting ballots, online voting is not far from reality here on the UW-Whitewater campus where it is being considered as a way to select representatives for Whitewater Student Government.
  
Many WSG officials see online voting as a way to encourage more people to vote and avoid a common situation where perhaps less than 10 students actually turn out and cast ballots in a particular senatorial district.
  
In the last WSG election, for example, where five senators in the Esker District recieved a total of 12 votes.
  
Some in WSG argue increased turnout is a way to improve legitimacy and consent from the governed.
  
At face value, this approach seems fairly logical. But it’s not. In fact, online voting doesn’t at all solve the issue WSG is attempting to address—legitimacy.
  
Low turnout might be disappointing, but it reflects a lack of interest, not accessibility. There is no great threat of force or intimidation here that would keep students from coming out to the polls.
  
Online voting, however, directly addresses accessibility by making voting easier. It doesn’t make students more interested in the issues.
  
It’s important to view legitimacy as an abstract concept. There is no galactic law stating a certain percent of constituents must vote in order for an election to be legitimately considered consent of the governed. If the election is free, the governed are the only ones who decide how many votes will be cast.
  
Not only does online voting fail to address the supposed issue of legitimacy, it might actually serve to further damage it.
  
To more clearly illustrate this, let’s call votes based on at least some degree of interest, awareness and research “quality votes.”
  
The (if very minimal) effort required to go to a polling place ensures a vote is at least to some degree a deliberate, thoughtful decision. Except perhaps for those unaware of the election that chance upon a polling place and decide to cast a random vote, most votes at traditional polling places are quality votes.
  
So online voting not only fails to address the “problem” of low voter turnout, which is lack of interest, it could actually make the system less functional. By making it so easy to vote, the proportion of quality votes decreases.
  
This decrease in quality votes and increase in uninformed, random decisions creates a situation where “legitimacy” is potentially less recognized than now. Random votes negate candidate’s efforts and water down ballots cast by those who took the time to make an educated decision.

• Facebook Comments
• Site Comments

Be the first to comment on this article!

Add comment


I am not posting spam. I understand posting spam or other comments that are unrelated to this article will cause my comment to be flagged for deletion and possibly cause my IP address to be permanently banned from this server.

Enter the characters in the image above:

log out