As reported on this blog about a year ago Norway had a great experience with its first large trial of Internet voting. Now there is more good news.
“It's official,” proclaimed Christian Bull, head of the Internet voting project in Norway, “we're doing another Internet voting pilot in 2013.”
In a December 14, 2012, press release, The Ministry of Local Government and Regional Development made this announcement: *
After positive experiences with the experiment of 2011, the Parliament of Norway will continue the trial of Internet voting in the elections of 2013.
“We need to know more before we conclude whether this is a future way to vote for all voters in Norway,” says Secretary Dag Henrik Sandbakken.
The evaluation of the experiment in 2011 showed that voters have high confidence in the election process. 92% of the voters in the trial cities had positive opinions about their experience. They found it to be an easy and convenient way to vote.
Even 75% of the voters who did not take part in the initial trial expressed positive opinions about using Internet voting in the future.
One of the key findings from the evaluation is that Internet voting enabled voters with disabilities to vote alone and without assistance for the first time. This includes the blind and visually impaired voters.
“We have also received positive feedback from the Norwegian Association of the Blind, who welcome another trial in 2013,” says Sandbakken.
Two conclusions in the evaluation of the last election are that no evidence of violations of voter secrecy were found, and that there were no reports requiring official investigation of problems with attempts at undue influence or vote buying for either Internet voting users or other voters.^
The researchers point out that the initial Internet voting trial raises several unanswered questions to which this evaluation does not provide answers, and that there is a need for further testing and research. They want, for example, more data on the effects of Internet voting on turnout among the various groups of voters.
The ten municipalities that participated in the previous experiments will also participate in the 2013 trials.
[End]
William J. Kelleher, Ph.D.
Political Scientist, author, speaker,
CEO for The Internet Voting Research and Education Fund
Email: Internetvoting@gmail.com
Blog: http://tinyurl.com/IV4All
Twitter: wjkno1
Author of Internet Voting Now!
Kindle edition: http://tinyurl.com/IntV-Now
In paper: http://tinyurl.com/IVNow2011
* Google Translation used for this report
Just in - the English translation by Norway is up, at
^ Translation corrected in consultation w/ Mr. Bull 12-18-12
Sunday, December 16, 2012
Saturday, December 8, 2012
Obama: We have to fix that
Dear President Obama:
This written note follows up on the message I posted on the White House form recently.
While I am happy that you have been re-elected, I am very disappointed about our election system. You know the problems, as you said “we have to fix that.”
A recent New York Times opinion mentioned a fabulous challenge by Harvard Prof Keyssar – President Obama should call up a Federal Election Tribunal to investigate whether or not digital voting can securely enhance the democratic process in the USA! I totally agree. The last presidential commission on Internet voting was called by Bill Clinton in 1999. A lot has changed in this technology since then.
Our election system is in decline compared to the world leaders. In Canada over 40 cities have used it w/o security incidents. Elections Canada wants it for federal elections. Estonia uses it. Cantons in Switzerland, overseas voters for France and Mexico City, and the largest state in India, Gujarat, have used it. West Virginia and Arizona have, too.
The Luddites, like Barbara Simons, Ron Rivest, and David Jefferson get too much coverage in the sensationalist press. They have half the nation afraid for no real reason.
The professionals who have actually run Internet voting elections, such as West Virginia Secretary of State, Natalie Tennant have recommended it for the whole country. But she doesn’t get 1/10 the coverage of the nay-sayers. Our nation needs a real debate, to get all the pros and cons out in the open!
Please call up a new Presidential Commission on the Use of Internet Voting in the USA.
I am qualified, and would be honored, to be a part of it.
Respectfully,
William J. Kelleher, Ph.D.
Political Scientist
CEO, The Internet Voting Research and Education Fund
Twitter: wjkno1
Author: Internet Voting Now!
This written note follows up on the message I posted on the White House form recently.
While I am happy that you have been re-elected, I am very disappointed about our election system. You know the problems, as you said “we have to fix that.”
A recent New York Times opinion mentioned a fabulous challenge by Harvard Prof Keyssar – President Obama should call up a Federal Election Tribunal to investigate whether or not digital voting can securely enhance the democratic process in the USA! I totally agree. The last presidential commission on Internet voting was called by Bill Clinton in 1999. A lot has changed in this technology since then.
Our election system is in decline compared to the world leaders. In Canada over 40 cities have used it w/o security incidents. Elections Canada wants it for federal elections. Estonia uses it. Cantons in Switzerland, overseas voters for France and Mexico City, and the largest state in India, Gujarat, have used it. West Virginia and Arizona have, too.
The Luddites, like Barbara Simons, Ron Rivest, and David Jefferson get too much coverage in the sensationalist press. They have half the nation afraid for no real reason.
The professionals who have actually run Internet voting elections, such as West Virginia Secretary of State, Natalie Tennant have recommended it for the whole country. But she doesn’t get 1/10 the coverage of the nay-sayers. Our nation needs a real debate, to get all the pros and cons out in the open!
Please call up a new Presidential Commission on the Use of Internet Voting in the USA.
I am qualified, and would be honored, to be a part of it.
Respectfully,
William J. Kelleher, Ph.D.
Political Scientist
CEO, The Internet Voting Research and Education Fund
Twitter: wjkno1
Author: Internet Voting Now!
Monday, October 15, 2012
Three Reasons to be PRO Internet Voting for All US Elections
Here are 3 reasons why I advocate Internet voting in all US elections –
1). Internet voting can take power away from Big Money, and bring more rationality into the campaign-election process.
IMAGINE: You are watching candidates debate online or on TV. After each debate you log on to your state’s secure voting website, using your own PC, cell phone, iPad, or other electronic device. Your voter registration is checked, and then the ballot appears. You mark it, and send it w/ a click.
This will neutralize the power of Big Money! How? Most of the Big Money spent on political campaigns is meant to impress, persuade, and even manipulate the decision of the voters. The theory is that if a voter repeatedly hears a lot of positive information about one candidate’s name, and negative information about the names of others, the voter’s mind will be conditioned to vote for the name with good stuff connected to it when he or she goes in to the voting booth.
But with secure Internet voting, there is NO TIME for campaign advertising to try to persuade or trick you, or to condition your mind like a pigeon trained to peck on the blue button rather than the red one. You watch the debate. You form your own opinion of what you have just seen, and you vote strictly on that basis.
All the advertising before or after the debate will be useless, because everyone will vote while their own views are fresh in their minds. Big Money will become irrelevant. Elected officials will owe their job only to the voters.
What could be more orderly and conducive to reason and deliberation, than to watch debaters trying their best to perform at a presidential level, and then to have each voter vote his or her considered assessment of each debater’s efforts?
2). The US requires TWO votes for a presidential election: one in the primary, and another in the general election. But Americans are a practical people. Many regard the first vote as too inconvenient, its not worth the effort of driving to the polls, looking for parking, then waiting in line; so only about 25% vote in primaries. The ones who do vote in primaries are highly motivated by partisan feelings. Hence, they elect extreme partisans to office. Now we have gridlock in the US Congress because the partisans refuse to cooperate with each other.
This need not be. Convenience is empowerment. Make voting more convenient, and more people will vote in both the primaries and general election. When more people vote, more moderate votes by ordinary Americans will be cast. When more moderate votes are cast, the partisan gridlock in Washington will diminish. The moderate voters will elect problem-solving officials. Because Congressional elections can be done online, special interests will have less power. Internet voting can get this country going again!
3). Voter ID: Currently, some states are requiring voters to show IDs. This is a problem for inner city folks who don’t drive cars, and thus don’t have a driver’s license. Old folks and poor folks are also affected. But w/ Internet voting, voters don’t have to show anybody an ID. When they log on to the secure website, their registration is checked. It’s the same convenient process for everyone. (Registration is moving to biometrics, and it will all be biometrics soon.)
Internet voting can greatly enhance democracy in the USA! All that is necessary to make this happen is a letter to your local election official asking that an Internet voting system be implemented. They will be happy to hear from their constituents, because they already know that online voting is a far less costly and troublesome process than the polling place and paper-based system currently in use.
Note:
Also see in this blog -
*********************
William J. Kelleher, Ph.D.
Political Scientist, author, speaker,
CEO for The Internet Voting Research and Education Fund
Email: Internetvoting@gmail.com
Blog: http://tinyurl.com/IV4All
Twitter: wjkno1
Author of Internet Voting Now!
Kindle edition: http://tinyurl.com/IntV-Now
In paper: http://tinyurl.com/IVNow2011
PS
1). Internet voting can take power away from Big Money, and bring more rationality into the campaign-election process.
IMAGINE: You are watching candidates debate online or on TV. After each debate you log on to your state’s secure voting website, using your own PC, cell phone, iPad, or other electronic device. Your voter registration is checked, and then the ballot appears. You mark it, and send it w/ a click.
This will neutralize the power of Big Money! How? Most of the Big Money spent on political campaigns is meant to impress, persuade, and even manipulate the decision of the voters. The theory is that if a voter repeatedly hears a lot of positive information about one candidate’s name, and negative information about the names of others, the voter’s mind will be conditioned to vote for the name with good stuff connected to it when he or she goes in to the voting booth.
But with secure Internet voting, there is NO TIME for campaign advertising to try to persuade or trick you, or to condition your mind like a pigeon trained to peck on the blue button rather than the red one. You watch the debate. You form your own opinion of what you have just seen, and you vote strictly on that basis.
All the advertising before or after the debate will be useless, because everyone will vote while their own views are fresh in their minds. Big Money will become irrelevant. Elected officials will owe their job only to the voters.
What could be more orderly and conducive to reason and deliberation, than to watch debaters trying their best to perform at a presidential level, and then to have each voter vote his or her considered assessment of each debater’s efforts?
2). The US requires TWO votes for a presidential election: one in the primary, and another in the general election. But Americans are a practical people. Many regard the first vote as too inconvenient, its not worth the effort of driving to the polls, looking for parking, then waiting in line; so only about 25% vote in primaries. The ones who do vote in primaries are highly motivated by partisan feelings. Hence, they elect extreme partisans to office. Now we have gridlock in the US Congress because the partisans refuse to cooperate with each other.
This need not be. Convenience is empowerment. Make voting more convenient, and more people will vote in both the primaries and general election. When more people vote, more moderate votes by ordinary Americans will be cast. When more moderate votes are cast, the partisan gridlock in Washington will diminish. The moderate voters will elect problem-solving officials. Because Congressional elections can be done online, special interests will have less power. Internet voting can get this country going again!
3). Voter ID: Currently, some states are requiring voters to show IDs. This is a problem for inner city folks who don’t drive cars, and thus don’t have a driver’s license. Old folks and poor folks are also affected. But w/ Internet voting, voters don’t have to show anybody an ID. When they log on to the secure website, their registration is checked. It’s the same convenient process for everyone. (Registration is moving to biometrics, and it will all be biometrics soon.)
Internet voting can greatly enhance democracy in the USA! All that is necessary to make this happen is a letter to your local election official asking that an Internet voting system be implemented. They will be happy to hear from their constituents, because they already know that online voting is a far less costly and troublesome process than the polling place and paper-based system currently in use.
Note:
Also see in this blog -
*********************
William J. Kelleher, Ph.D.
Political Scientist, author, speaker,
CEO for The Internet Voting Research and Education Fund
Email: Internetvoting@gmail.com
Blog: http://tinyurl.com/IV4All
Twitter: wjkno1
Author of Internet Voting Now!
Kindle edition: http://tinyurl.com/IntV-Now
In paper: http://tinyurl.com/IVNow2011
PS
Over 100 cities in Canada have used Internet voting - all w/o having even one vote changed. Sure, there have been attempted hacks, but none succeed. Why? Because professionals know how to prepare for the attacks, and fend them off. Elections Canada wants Internet voting for all national elections. Also, numerous other Internet voting trials around the world, have all worked well. These include Estonia, Norway, Switzerland, France, Mexico City, Australia (New South Wales), and Gujarat, India. West Virginia did it for their overseas military in 2010, and everyone loved it. Search this blog for lots of info on Internet voting security.
Friday, September 28, 2012
Alex Halderman Debates Internet Voting Security w/ Me!
Kudos to Alex Halderman for not shrinking from a challenge! Our debate on You Tube runs from 21:30 to 42:00. What is more important to consider in the debate over Internet voting security -- known facts about the many successes of Internet voting trials, or scary possibilities that haven't happened? What evidence is RELEVANT to this debate.
William J. Kelleher, Ph.D.
Political Scientist, author, speaker,
CEO for The Internet Voting Research and Education Fund
Political Scientist, author, speaker,
CEO for The Internet Voting Research and Education Fund
Email: Internetvoting@gmail.com
Twitter: wjkno1
Author of Internet Voting Now!
Kindle edition: http://tinyurl.com/IntV-Now
In paper: http://tinyurl.com/IVNow2011
For more on Alex Halderman see, in this blog,
Cyber Bullying in Connecticut: A Lesson in Empathy
For more on Alex Halderman see, in this blog,
Cyber Bullying in Connecticut: A Lesson in Empathy
Wednesday, September 19, 2012
INTERNET VOTING IN CANADA – My Series at IVN.us
I am writing a series on Canada’s National Debate over Internet Voting - Check it out!
First article: Elections Canada Favors Internet voting,
Movement towards offering Internet voting in all national elections
Second article: Three Major Canadian Cities Love Internet Voting
Big successes here, w/ old folks biggest users in one of the cities
Big Mo Favors Internet Voting in Canada – Pt 3 in series
Demand is rising, and governments are responding - even Native Canadians are doing it
Post 4 - The Canadian Model
The Canadian Model shows how to discuss Internet voting security concerns REASONABLY, w/o using scary stories to try and stir up fear and panic. Why can’t Americans be more like Canadians around this topic?
More to come …
William J. Kelleher, Ph.D.
Political Scientist, author, speaker,
CEO for The Internet Voting Research and Education Fund
a CA Nonprofit Foundation
Email: Internetvoting@gmail.com
Twitter: wjkno1
Author of Internet Voting Now!
Kindle edition: http://tinyurl.com/IntV-Now
In paper: http://tinyurl.com/IVNow2011
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)