Voting takes place for a wide variety of issues, ranging from determining the next garden club officers to determining the next leader of a country. Different voting systems meet different requirements depending on the circumstances.
Direct Recording Electronic
Direct Recording Electronic (DRE) voting systems tally votes directly to computer memory. The voting machines typically take the form of an automatic teller machine or a laptop computer.
DRE voting systems are often favored because they can incorporate assistive technologies for handicapped people, allowing them to vote without involving another person in the process. They can also offer immediate feedback on the vailidity of a particular ballot so that the voter can correct any problems.
The primary challenge with DRE voting machines is re-counting votes to verify that the computer performed its task appropriately. The Mercuri Method of electronic voting, described by Rebecca Mercuri, addresses the problem by having the DRE machine print a paper ballot that is verified by the voter before being dropped into a ballot box. The paper ballots would then be used for recounts if necessary.
David Chaum proposes a solution to the repeatability and verifiability issues that allows the voter to verify that the vote is cast appropriately and that the vote is counted. In "Elections with Unconditionally Secret Ballots and Disruption Equivalent to Breaking RSA," (Advances in Cryptology EUROCRYPT '88, .G. Gunther (Ed.), Springer-Verlag, pp. 177-182.) Chaum proposes a two-layer printout from a DRE voting machine. The layers, when combined, show the human-readable vote. The voter selects one layer to destroy at the poll and takes the other layer as a receipt, and the voter can verify that his particular vote was counted with that receipt, but the actual vote cast is thoroughly encrypted. The chief drawback to Chaum's method is that the mathematics involved are not obvious to most observers.
Another challenge for DRE systems is a requirement in some areas that the entire ballot be presented to the voter simultaneously, so the voter can "vote for President, then vote for dog catcher, then leave," according to Rebecca Mercuri in a November 14, 2003 presentation. DRE systems in those areas need particularly large screens to accomodate all the choices.
The Datavote systems tend to have higher accuracy than Votomatic machines. Votomatic machines suffer from all manner of problems related to handling the perforated cards - problems that featured prominently in the 2000 U.S. Presidential Election.
Mark-Sense Voting
In mark-sense voting the user marks a ballot and feeds it into a ballot box. The votes may be tallied by automatic sensors at a central location or at the precinct. With precinct-tallied votes, the systems usually verify that the ballot is legitimate as they accept the ballot.Punch Card Voting
With punch card ballots, voters create punched cards to indicate their choices. There are two main kinds of systems, Datavote and Votomatic.
Datavote systems use a cutting tool and vacuum to clean away material from unperforated cards indicating the voters' choices. Votomatic machines require the voter to punch out a perforated rectangle, a chad from the card using a stylus.Internet Voting
With internet voting, people cast their ballots online. Corporations routinely use internet voting to elect their officers, and overseas U.S. military residents of Arkansas, Florida, Hawaii, Minnesota, North Carolina, South Carolina, Utah and Washington will be allowed to vote by internet in the 2004 Presidential election. Identification of voters can be a challenge, but internet voting makes it easier for people to cast their ballots than many other methods.Telephone Voting
Telephone voting was recently used to determine the winner of the American Idol television talent contest. It is also used to determine other contests. Its main drawback is the difficulty in verifying the identity of the voter and allowing only one vote per person. Its chief advantage is the ease in getting people to participate.Six Commandments of Electronic Voting
Michael Shamos devised the Six Commandments of Electronic Voting [1]. The commandments are in order of importance, judged by statutes and willingness of election officials to compromise on the various requirements.Problems with Electronic Voting
External Links