HOME
DV NEWS
SERVICE ARCHIVE SUBMISSIONS/CONTACT ABOUT DV
Internet
Voting - The End of Democracy?
by
Lynn Landes
August
28, 2003
Despite
inherent and increasingly blatant security risks, Internet voting companies are
steadily gaining control over the U.S. electoral system and American civic
life. The risk to democracy is very real.
"The
voter has absolutely no control over the vote cast once it leaves his own
computer system," writes Dr. Rebecca Mercuri, one of the nation's leading
experts in computer voting technology. "He cannot check whether it has
been subverted on the way to the count...(there are) problems with all forms of
remote voting include the dangers of coercion, vote selling and impersonation.
The Internet introduces additional authentication issues."
In
the wake of recent voting machine fraud and assorted scandals, Internet voting
- the most vulnerable technology to election fraud - is flying under the radar.
That may not be an accident.
Neither
the Federal Election Commission (FEC) nor the National Association of State
Election Directors (NASED) publicly lists one of the largest Internet voting
providers, Bermuda-based Accenture (formerly Andersen Consulting of Arthur
Andersen/Enron fame). This omission is alarming. Accenture's first major
contract in this arena will be to count the online military vote for the
Department of Defense (DOD) in the upcoming 2004 presidential election.
Also,
there are no mandatory, or voluntary, government/industry standards that
specifically address Internet voting technology. Even the federal standards
that apply to other voting systems, are outmoded and voluntary. There is no
federal government authority over the elections industry. State regulations and
certification hinged on industry guidelines and industry-appointed certifiers.
This is an industry that is basically self-regulating.
Within
the ranks of those who have voiced concerns about touchscreen and optical
scanning voting equipment, questions are still being raised -- where is this
taking democracy as we know it?
The
same scientist who found serious flaws in Diebold software, also had a business
relationship with leading worldwide supplier of Internet voting technology,
VoteHere. Avi Rubin, who headed the Johns Hopkins University team of
investigators, recently resigned his position on the Technical Advisory Board
of VoteHere and returned stock options in the company. Two years ago, Rubin
participated in The National Workshop On Internet Voting. That workshop blazed
the trail for Internet voting.
Today,
Internet voting is being used by civic, labor, and business organizations to
elect their governing bodies.
Election.com
is a case in point. It has about 600 customers that use its Internet voting
service, including the Democratic National Committee, the Pennsylvania State
Employees Credit Union, the Sierra Club, IEEE (The Institute of Electrical and
Electronics Engineers, Inc.), the American Association for the Advancement of
Science, the Florida Bar, and AIMR (Association of Investment Management and
Research).
Who
owns Election.com? A majority stake in Election.com was purchased last spring
by Osan Ltd, a group of Saudi investors. Meanwhile, the public sector assets of
Election.com were recently bought by Accenture.
So
far, the history of Internet voting has been short, but it's sure to be
expanded as the new standard for "democracy."
Internet
voting for political office was first used by the Arizona Democratic Party in
their primary election in March 2000. Its big debut will be in the 2004
presidential election, when the Department of Defense (DOD) offers Internet
voting to the military and other civilians. As many as 6 million people, that's
5% of the voters in the 2000 presidential election, may use the system.
Who
are the largest promoters of Internet voting? The White House - and not just
the Bush Administration, but the Clinton White House also expressed an interest
in advancing and popularizing the idea of online voting.
Late
in 2000, the Clinton administration asked the National Science Foundation (NSF)
to organize The National Workshop On Internet Voting, which was jointly
sponsored by the NSF and The Internet Policy Institute (IPI) and hosted by the
Freedom Forum in cooperation with the University of Maryland.
Who
are the IPI and The Freedom Forum? The Washington-based Freedom Forum is Allen
H. Neuharth's baby.
Neuharth
is the founder and senior advisory chairman of the Freedom Forum, "a
nonpartisan foundation dedicated to free press, free speech and free spirit for
all people," according to their website.
Neuharth
is also the founder of USA TODAY, the former chairman and chief executive
officer of Gannett Co., Inc., and the author of "Nearly One World."
Speaking
at the Economic Club in Washington, October 16, 2001, Neuharth said, "Yes,
there are some evil people in the world. True, we in the USA are not
universally loved. But the fact is, our world has become a huge global
village...One global village, linked electronically, via the satellite; over 5
billion villagers, most of them sharing similar problems and hopes and
opportunities."
But
for whose benefit?
The
Washington-based Internet Policy Institute (IPI) is a consortium of network
companies and non-profit organizations. According to an April 12, 1999 CNN
report, The Internet Policy Institute said its founding money came from America
Online Inc., the Nasdaq exchange, the Morino Institute, MCI WorldCom, Network
Solutions Inc.(now VeriSign, formerly owned by SAIC), the Potomac KnowledgeWay
(includes Morin Institute again) and the World Information Technology and
Services Alliance, "a consortium of 50 information technology (IT)
industry associations from economies around the world," according to their
website.
What
did "The National Workshop On Internet Voting" report say? In so many
words it says, "Get ready to get on the Internet to elect your
leaders."
The
report says,"Poll site Internet voting systems offer some benefits and
could be responsibly fielded within the next several election cycles. While
many issues remain to be addressed, the problems associated with these systems
appear likely to be resolvable in the near term. As such, it is appropriate for
experiments to be conducted and prototypes deployed in order to gain valuable
experience prior to full-scale implementation....The next step beyond poll site
voting would be to deploy kiosk voting terminals in public places... Remote
Internet voting systems pose significant risk to the integrity of the voting
process, and should not be fielded for use in public elections until substantial
technical and social science issues are addressed."
However
in a footnote, the reports says, "...remote Internet voting may be
appropriate in the near-term for special populations, such as the military and
government employees and their dependents based overseas. Such exceptions
should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis."
That
day is here. Internet voting is slowly being shoved down the throat of the
electorate. The military are the first victims, the elderly and the disabled
will be next. Our civic, labor, and business institutions are succumbing in
droves.
Questions
remain. Why is Internet voting being promoted by military-industrial government
contractors, who have expanded their information technology (IT) business into
"voting technology?" Why are computer security issues not being
seriously addressed in touch screen voting machines and Internet voting?
And
most importantly, who will benefit from computer voting that can be used to
manipulate results and award elections to the highest bidder?
Lynn Landes is a freelance
journalist. She publishes her articles at EcoTalk.org.
Formerly Lynn was a radio show host, a regular commentator for a BBC radio
program, and environmental news reporter for DUTV in Philadelphia, PA. She can be
contacted at (215)
629-3553, or by email at: lynnlandes@earthlink.net
* Other Related Articles by Lynn
Landes
* Voting
Machine Fiasco: SAIC, VoteHere and Diebold
* Offshore
Company Captures Online Military Vote
* Suspicion
Surrounds Voter News Service
* Mission
Impossible: Federal Observers & Voting Machines
* 2002
Elections: Republican Voting Machines, Election Irregularities, and
"Way-Off" Polling Results
* Voting
Machines - A High Tech Ambush
* Election
Night Projections: Cover For Vote Rigging Since 1964?
* Elections In
America: Assume Crooks Are In Control