Written in 2018 for a University of Colorado course.
Technology today is changing nearly every aspect of life. Companies like Amazon are changing the way we shop. Facebook and other social media are changing how we communicate with one another. Venmo is changing how we handle money. Democracy is no different. Today, politicians must have a social media presence in order to communicate better with their constituents, Donald Trump may be the most poignant example of this. Just like technology has disrupted the business model of the news industry, it is also doing so in democracy. In order for democracy to survive, it must embrace technology and grow with it.
Since the beginning of this country, voting technology had been evolving with the times. Until about 1890, states voted orally or by a raise of hands to decide important issues in their community. In 1891, Kentucky was the last state to move from the widely used “oral ballot” to the Australian, or secret ballot (Jones, 2003). These early written ballots were, of course, extremely low tech but were still functional because the small number of people voting. Before the move to paper ballots, only wealthy, land-owning, white males were allowed to vote. However, when more white men were added to the voting pool, it became more difficult to count votes by voice so it made logistical sense to move towards a type of ballot that could be counted by hand. After that, in 1920, the 19th Amendment allowed women the right to vote. With the other half of the population technically allowed to vote, obviously the low tech, written paper ballots would not suffice anymore. And indeed, the year that the 19th Amendment was passed, 8 million women voted in elections across the United States (The History Channel). The rise of lever machines as a way to record and count votes correlates with the larger number of eligible voters entering the voting pool, suggesting again that as more people are eligible to vote, voting technology must adapt. Further evidence of this lies in the passage of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 by President Johnson. This act removed restrictions for people of color to vote (by law) and again, added a substantial number of voters to the voting pool. And again, we see that technology evolved; punch card machines began to be used in elections all over the United States.
Today, many states use a combination of electronics and paper voting methods. We’re getting along fine right now, but as more millennials become eligible to vote, how can we change technology to accommodate the large influx of voters that we are likely to see?
One proposed solution is moving towards online voting. In 1999 President Bill Clinton asked the National Science Foundation to look into the possibility of online voting (YouTube). They found that the cost of cyber security and the risks associated with online voting made an inviable option. But around the world, more countries are increasingly moving towards online voting. Take Estonia for example. The small European country is the only country in the world to offer online voting to its entire electorate. Voters are given a government-issued identification card with a chip and a reader that connects to a computer. People can then vote online and change their vote as many times as they want before the election closes, but only their last vote counts. This eliminates some of the problems that Americans face on election day, such as not being able to leave work or other responsibilities to make it to the polls in time and waiting in line for upwards of four hours in areas where polling stations are sparse. Online voting would no doubt be more convenient, but many people still worry about the risks of holding an election online.
For one, online voting exposes an election to the threat of hackers. Some argue that if someone can create the program that allows online voting, that someone else can corrupt it. This is a worthy concern and one that proponents of online voting have pondered. Sure, we could just enhance cyber security to the voting program, but this would likely increase costs exponentially. Mark Ryan, a professor of computer security at the University of Birmingham in the United Kingdom has proposed a system that will “tolerate” some of the voter fraud attempted by hackers but then “detect and report that it took place” (YouTube). Just like with normal elections today, it is possible that an outside party will attempt to interfere. Voter fraud in our elections now makes up a minuscule percentage of the total number of votes cast but it is reasonable to suspect that in an online election, this percentage could increase. Ryan’s program would reduce the cost of trying to prevent every instance of outside intervention in an election and make the program easier to use for voters. But there still may be unforeseen problems, even with a program like this, there is clearly a lot of work do be done if online voting is going to be a realistic option in the future.
Unlike Estonia, the United States has a much larger population of eligible voters. Estonia has a population of only 1.3 million people, while the United States has a population of over 323 million. The sheer number of people voting could hypothetically crash a site set up for online voting. And unlike Estonia, elections in the United States, especially general presidential elections, have a lot more at stake than an Estonian election. The fate of other countries is often affected by the outcome of United States elections, as we have already seen from the actions of our current president. Whoever is in charge of our country, as one of the global superpowers, has the ability to drastically change the world. So is online voting just a folly for the United States? Other countries like Australia, Canada, and Switzerland have experimented with what they believe to be successful online voting programs (Verified Voting). However, in most cases, weaknesses and problems with the programs have been identified by independent studies. Online voting seems like it could eliminate some problems like detecting voter fraud more easily, reducing wait times, and potentially solving problems we have with the electoral college by making voting more direct but it appears that although there are many potential benefits to moving toward online voting, it may not be practical or probable in the near future. But what about other ways that technology can improve democracy?
Maybe we don’t have to jump right from the voting methods used today to a completely online system. There are other ways in which technology is already improving democracy and can further improve it in the future. Technology has the potential to engage constituents and create more responsive and participatory elected officials. We can already see evidence of this today with social media. Voters can follow their representatives and engage with them online when they approve or disapprove of something they have done. The representatives can inform voters of their policy positions and allow voters to make better informed decisions based on the information that is given to them via these social media platforms. Most recently, candidates for public office have sought to reach out to young voters through social media to communicate their platforms because that’s where millennials spend a lot of their time. Politicians and their advisors have noticed that we are moving towards a more technologically savvy world and recognize that they have to keep up or they will alienate a large percentage of their constituents in the near future.
One possible way to increase civic participation using technology is to use a program similar to an online voting system to hold referendums for issues that representatives have to vote on. This would make our government more of a direct democracy. Instead of relying on elected officials to do what they think is best, or sometimes what is their own self-interest, voters could vote on an issue on their phone and tell their representative how they want them to vote. This would, of course, still be susceptible to hackers but at a lower rate than an election because a person is not being elected, citizens are just voting on issues. This would be a great way to involve millennial voters in the democratic process in a way that they have not been involved before. Many young voters are deterred by the fact that they think their vote doesn’t matter or they aren’t being heard, but by creating a more direct path for people to voice their opinions, I think it’s safe to say that more people would get involved. This would especially help in midterm elections where voter turnout is even lower than in general elections. This type of instantaneous feedback for citizens to provide to elected officials would then in turn make them more responsive to their constituents. “Government is the single largest expense for most citizens, and yet is the least responsive institution to their demands” (Rattray, 2016). Ben Rattray, the founder and CEO of change.org wrote this for Medium and it is becoming more true every day. Many voters, including myself, feel the distance between our needs and the response of government. Seizing the capability of technology to give more feedback to elected officials would make them more accountable and more responsive to what voters want from them.
One of the most important ways that technology is making democracy better is by changing the way we receive news. The Washington Post’s motto is, “Democracy Dies in Darkness,” and this is true. The most vital parts of a functioning democracy are journalists and media that keep people informed of what is happening in politics and help them make more informed decisions. Newspapers have served this purpose for hundreds of years, ever since the start of our country, but technology has advanced in a way that has also made journalism adapt to better suit the needs of news consumers. We have all heard about how technology and the internet have ruined the business model of newspapers and forced them to come up with a completely new one. For a while, the future of news look bleak. Papers were struggling to find ways to continue to make money so that they could stay open and continue reporting the news. Online advertising seems to be a remedy for that, at least for now. But more important than that is the recent surge of news consumption since the last presidential election. With rumors of “fake news” swirling, reputable news sources like the New York Times, the Washington Post, and CNN came under scrutiny and had even more of a responsibility to produce news that was not only true but substantive and informed voters of what they needed to know.
Today it is easier than ever to stay informed. Many people receive notifications from news apps they’ve downloaded on their phone letting them know breaking news and other important news of the day. Technology has made it easier to be an informed voter, although there is a lot more news to sort through these days. As a millennial, it is extremely important to pay attention to things going on in politics because many of the decisions being made today will be our problems in a very short time. News apps and notifications have become popular among millennials as a way to stay informed and a more informed electorate leads to a more accountable government. And with the traditional news sources under attack by the president, it is more important than ever to stay informed. The current administration’s “war against the media” is threatening the credibility of the media’s role in government and that is a dangerous thing. If the news produced by the media is undermined or labeled as “fake,” politicians will not be as accountable to their constituents. If they do something and people get mad, they could just claim fake news like President Trump does when unflattering things are published about him. It is essential that journalists and the media be able to publish the truth about our elected officials or we run the risk of moving towards a more corrupt government with unaccountable politicians. Technology is able to help with this because news can be spread faster than ever. One of the most poignant examples of this is the use of news media and social media to expose politicians who have been accused of sexual assault or sexual misconduct. Take the case of Roy Moore, the former Alabama state judge who is running for a Senate seat. Back when it is said he first starting harassing young girls, cell phones, the internet, and social media didn’t exist. This made it easier for him to get away with his behavior because news didn’t travel as far and as fast as it does today. However, in the last few weeks, several powerful men, including a few politicians have been accused of sexual misconduct and are finally facing consequences for their actions in a way that we haven’t seen in the past. This is partly due to the media exposure that these stories are getting. If enough people see these stories and express enough anger with these men, they are more likely to have to resign from their positions. The role the media has in keeping our government free from predators like this is clear and it is important that it continue to have this role if we want our government to continue to serve us in the way we want.
Technology has changed the way we do nearly everything in life. Democracy is not immune to the changing world and therefore must adapt to continue to function at the current level and potentially even better than in the past. But one thing is clear, democracy and government in this country cannot remain stagnant while the rest of society advances due to technology. How exactly this is done is not totally clear, there are many options, but using news media, social media and perhaps some kind of online voting system would be good starts.
Works Cited
D. (2016, November 08). Retrieved December 08, 2017, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fin3OHjZa98
Internet Voting Outside the United States. (2016, August 10). Retrieved December 07, 2017,
Jones, D. W. (1999). A Brief Illustrated History of Voting. Retrieved December 07, 2017, from
King, E. (2016, April 26). How the U.S. Ended Up With Today’s Paper Ballots. Retrieved
December 07, 2017 from http://time.com/4305508/paper-ballot-history/
Rattray, B. (2016, November 29). How Tech Can Help Save Democracy. Retrieved December
19th Amendment. Retrieved December 07, 2017 from http://www.history.com/topics/womens-history/19th-amendment
U. (2013, July 25). Retrieved December 08, 2017, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=dI7IHtHpwf4
Comments