The dark side of voting technology

In Estonia, which is widely considered to be a leader in the use of voting technology, almost one-quarter of all votes in the 2011 parliamentary election were cast online.

Yet the actual impact of such technology on voter participation remains dubious.

Although the rate of online voting in Estonia increased by nearly 20% between the 2007 and 2011 elections there, overall voter turnout increased by fewer than two percentage points (from 61.9% to 63.5%).

This suggests that online voting may simply encourage regular voters to change how they cast their ballots, rather than encouraging additional voters to participate.

But voting technology may not just be ineffective; it could actually be damaging.

Such technology doesn’t reduce costs only for voters; it also reduces costs for the state, making it easier than ever to conduct elections.

The risk is that lower costs would encourage more frequent elections and referenda, thereby undermining the efficiency of government.

At a time of lackluster global economic growth and deteriorating living standards for many, efficient government could not be more important.

According to the US Millennium Challenge Corporation, more efficient government helps to reduce poverty, improve education and health care, slow environmental degradation, and combat corruption.

A key feature of an efficient government is long-term thinking.

Policymakers must work toward the policy goals that got them elected.

But they must also be given enough political room to adjust to new developments, even if it means altering policy timelines.

Amid constant elections and referenda, that isn’t really an option.

Instead, policymakers face strong pressure to deliver short-term, voter-pleasing results – or get punished at the polls.

The likely result is a shortsighted agenda prone to sudden politically motivated reversals.

Continued next page

(276 VIEWS)