Internet
Voting - The End of Democracy?
by Lynn Landes 8/27/03
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 the publisher of EcoTalk.org
and a news reporter for DUTV in
Philadelphia, PA. Formerly Lynn was a radio show host for WDVR
in New Jersey and a regular commentator for a BBC
radio program. She can be reached at (215) 629-3553 / lynnlandes@earthlink.net.
