Slashdot Mirror
India Starts All-Electronic National Elections
fantomas writes "Forget the problems of e-voting in a state in some middling sized western country as recently reported by Slashdot. The world's largest democracy is about to go to the polling stations and vote for a new government using all-electronic voting systems. Will it work? Will the USA follow if all goes to plan? Can any readers from India comment on how it seems to be going?"
How would they know if they have screwed up votes? The ballots read like the Python Spam Skit:
Place your vote:
Egg and Singh
Egg Bacon and Singh
Egg Bacon Sausage and Singh
Singh Bacon Sausage and Singh
Singh Egg Singh Singh Bacon and Singh
Singh Sausage Singh Singh Bacon Singh Tomato and Singh
Lobster Thermidor a Crevette with a mornay sauce served in a Provencale manner with shallots and aubergines garnished with truffle pate, brandy and with a fried egg on top and Singh
Just a joke, lads. In India "Singh" is like "Smith" in the West.
"helicopters, bullock carts and elephants were all used to ferry the machines to the remotest corners of India."
An elephant carrying a voting machine. Even in my wildest dreams I never would have thought of that.
Evolution or ID?
...lets hope they don't out source their election to a certain American company.
I just hope nothing goes wrong and they need to call tech support because it's probably been outsourced to India and they'll have a hard time understanding the thick accents. Oh wait...
we could just outsource our voting :-T
Get paid to code OSS
Of course, all kinds of jokes come to mind. Did they outsource it? Blah Blah Blah.
But, really, if they are able to make this work, perhaps some of the outsourcing the US is making to Inida can be justified with their ability to, at least, beat us on the e-voting front.
That is still a big if. It's funny we are worried about fraud on our e-voting machines. They are worried about fights. Maybe if we started having fist fights at the booths all our e-voting woes will dematerialize.
India has just announced that they will be outsourcing all government officials and associated elections to the United States.
An unamed individual was quoted saying, "This is a very positive move for India. The savings will be good for our country because the US has the most skilled politicians that can be bought for the lowest price."
Back to you Kent.
It is easier to build strong children than to repair broken men. -Frederick Douglass
Some "third-world" countries have difficulty keeping track of their population, in other words, some people simply are not registered on any lists. For those countries, using biometrics for voting actually makes sense, as it allows for "unregistered" people but disallows them from voting twice. In fact, it's a bit of a paradox - biometrics could actually be the answer for those people who don't like the government keeping records on them.
Will it work?
Why so much scepticism? The electronic voting machines are being used in India from quite some time now. But this is the first time that the whole of the general election will be paperless. So it is just the matter of scale (1 million voting machines), which is of interest.
In many fields the 'rich west' will eventually be overrun by the third world.
Why ? Because they have absolutely nothing holding them back, whereas we have a substantial investment in our current infrastructure.
That makes us conservative - resistant to change - even if that change is for the better.
Look at the entrenchement of MS for example. They will continue to receive cash that could have been spend better for a long long time to come.
Meanwhile the rest of the world - the poor part that is - is absolutely free to adapt linux, not having a vested interest in 3rd party closed source they will outstrip the west in knowledge about these systems in a very few years.
Unless of course we decide to 'move first' again.
MP3 Search Engine
India's system is a simple box that counts. The system in the U.S. is typically more like an automated teller machine (ATM) with a computer behind it.
The Mercuri method of electronic voting allows the voter to inspect a paper printout of the cast ballot before it lands in the box for use only in the event of a recount. Brazil (and other places) use it. I would like to see it in use wherever direct-recording electronic (DRE) voting is used.
The big quirk in the United States is the decentrallized nature of the voting systems - every county (of which there are about 3400) selects its own voting machines, ballots, and so forth.
I hate call waitin`~+~~~
NO CARRIER
Now India has an interesting democracy - a 22-party coalition (which is expected to win this election as well) in control of the government. That's quite a refreshing change from the point of view of someone in an (effectively) one-party state like South Africa (with the African National Congress getting a controlling 69% in the recent election). I'm not sure which would be better, 2 strong parties, like in the US, or dozens of small parties forming coalitions, like in India. I would guess that the coalitions would allow for more fluidity in politics than 2 (or a few) strong parties.
raj
Sarovar.org Hosting for open source projects in Indi
Just voted in the morning. The Electronic Voting machines (EVMs) have been around in India since 5 years or so, but this is the first one in which they are used throughout India.
The voting process is something like this,
U go to the poll booth assigned, someone finds U in the printed list of voters for the booth, the candidates can have their agents sitting inside, who also verify that my name exists.
The identification is via a electoral card or some defined photo-ids
Next U get a ink mark on the index finger, whcih is supposed to be difficult to erase ( techniques to erase them are "well-known":-))
After that U get a slip which is taken by next official who has to press a button to make the EVM operable. So there is a paper trail of who has voted.
The EVM (as shown in the BBC article is a flat device with the names, symbol of the party and a LED and a button) When the official has given the go ahead, there is a green light on top; one has to press the button against the candidate, a red LED against the candidate glows and U are done.
The procedure is quite simple and is lot better than the ballot paper stuffing before.
The counting is done on a scheduled date, wherein all these EVMs are kept in a specified place and counting happens with the candidates' representatives around.
Some pictures:
http://specials.rediff.com/election/2004/apr/20ele cimg8.htm
The elephant carrier news:
http://www.hindu.com/2004/04/20/stories/2004042001 451300.htm
Some candidates:
http://specials.rediff.com/election/2004/apr/16bod y1.htm
This is third time the EVMs have been used but first time for a national elections.
where did my sig go? where's my sig at?
The main issue is that the software used is closed-source, and it is closed even to the political parties involved in the election.
But now there's some pressure to open-source the code, mostly by the left-winged parties (PDT, PC do B, PSTU, PT and smaller ones). And there is a good chance that it may happen, because our current governament is supporting, and recommending, opensource software.
With some work, in the future Brazil may be the fist country to use full electronic elections, with full open-souce software!
I don't remember where i read this: The e-voting machines being used in India aren't networked. At the end of the day, the poll workers take the machines to the main district office and plug them into a network. The software on the machines itself isn't reprogrammable.
For those who don't want to RTFA about the election itself , this BBC link within the story is about the voting machines themselves.
Brazil's last general elections were all electronic. No big news there. There is a single Brazilian system, where a different company designs each module. Party-appointed technical representatives can audit the whole system.
India and Brazil have other things in common: illiteracy and poverty. Most of the users of the electronic ballots in Brazil cannot understand what they read on the screen. Electoral candidates in small towns "teach" people to vote on them, by making them memorize the key sequences.
I just wonder if these countries couldn't be spending time, money, and minds on more relevant issues.
This guy faced the threat of actual violence at the polls. He turned up to vote nonetheless. It's great to see that some people still believe in democracy.
Meanwhile, elsewhere in the world in the homelands of democracy, the turnout at elections is what exactly, these days? And the danger we face on our way to the polls is... the prospect of injury caused by getting our fat arses off the sofa once every five years?
Sometimes I think we deserve the George and Tony show, I really do.
Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
raj
Sarovar.org Hosting for open source projects in Indi
It's a good move because the size of our population. I heard from a government employee who worked in the state elections that Ballot stuffing is common. One of the leading parties is actually paying election workers to 'press the button' for them on the machines. This was not so convenient before. This happened in the state elections for sure, and will probably happen in the nationals too. The market for illegally made 'homebrew' weapons (costing as less as $30) is flourishing as the election arrives. Efforts have been made for security of election booths, but it's doubtful how security will fare against bribes. The routine election-season killings have already started. On the whole, introducing e-voting in India is like throwing water in a puddle of mud - you can move faster in it, but it makes you much dirteir all the same.
Their knowledge/usage of computers is limited, and I would put them in the same space as the average Joe/Jane American as far as computer/security knowledge is concerned.
I tried explaining that just a fancy GUI and interface doesn't make for a better voting process, and that the programs/algorithms need to be checked for correctness and security. I don't think the importance of it seeped through - and they still gushed about the fast/easy and hi-tech voting process.
That's about it...I guess the good part is that the machines are mostly firm/hardware and not the beefed up (down?) Windows machines like Diebold's ATM machines in the US. The machines are made by a company called Bharat Electronics. Unfortunately it looks like their server is ASP/IIS based.
An Indian-American Hindu committed to non-violent thought/speech/action alarmed by the global explosion of radical Islam
We have 100% e-vote for several years already and, we are a quite big country with very remote areas. Probably it's not as big operation as in India but quite big as well. ;) ) that connects directly with the central servers that count the votes.
Another very interesting feature we have here is the possibility to follow results in real time via web or a java program (which I run on my linux box
As for the security, the source of the system is not generaly open but any representative of any party can ask for review, random audits are made in the ballots and a part of them print the vote for the voter.
Scientia est Potentia
Last Year they gave all the registered voters photo identity cards , using Biometrics even our thumbimpression is in their system,
Hold the "illitracy" jokes(i am typing this arent i)
then they sent a slip telling us where we have to go to cast out vote , even the booth no.
they had 2 EVMs 1 4 parliamentary election and another for local assembly elections,
they ofcourse put the customary indelible ink on the left index finger. probably becoz some people feel nostalgic of the "gud 'ol days"
when u cud raid a polling booth and take away the ballot boxes
and then cry foul play!!!
hav phun
This is how it worked for me today:
1. You need a voter id card. If you don't have that, any govt. id is supposed to work.
2. They check your name twice against two hardcopies of the voter lists. In addition, the larger parties have their own guys hanging around with their own copies of the voter lists to make sure there's no mischief.
3. You sign or fingerprint against your name in a ledger.
4. Next you get a dab of indelible ink on your left index finger.
5. Finally, they enable the EVM by pressing a master key. A green light comes on on the box.
6. You get to vote. The green light goes off, and the button you hit goes red. After a delay of about 5 seconds, it beeps and goes off.
What could be easier?
Surely even americans might be able to follow the above.
Why don't you guys outsource your next election to the Indian Election Commission and you won't get that miserable failure as a president for the second time?
Is your system set up to allow votes for people not listed i.e. write-ins or do you have to select 'only' from the list provided?
If you have to select from the list, can you withhold your vote on parts of the ballot because you don't like any of the candidates or does that invalidate the entire ballot?
'And all the monkeys aren't in the zoo Every day you meet quite a few...'
Being a linux geek, I'm all for new technologies being used to make out lives easier, but there are too many special interests and flaws in the current method of E-Voting. The vast majority of E-Voting companies are really just one company that supports a biased outcome to the elections. Not to mention the fact that most of the E-Voting-Machines run M$. The state of E-Voting in america is really bad...
From http://www.ecotalk.org/VotingSecurity.htm: If people are voting on machines, they are not voting at all. In Bush v. Gore, the Supreme Court said that, A "legal vote," as determined by the Supreme Court, is "one in which there is a 'clear indication of the intent of the voter.'" If a machine is involved in the voting process, the voter has been relegated to making inputs and hoping that the machines' output is the same. That output can only be 'circumstantial' evidence of what the voter intended. It is the voters' right to create 'real' evidence of their own intention.
peace
-- Slackware Geek
Do not handicap your children by making their lives easy. - Robert Heinlein
I am from and in India. AFAIK, we have not had any problems with these electronic voting machines. They have been in use for quite some time now, they were never used in all constituencies, however.
:). The Election Comission would be forced to use paper ballots. These goons resort to capturing polling booths and electronic voting machines make their task tough.
:) :)
The only potential problem with them that I have come across in local media reports is that of some political goons registering dozens of dummy candidates... their aim being to have more candidates in a constituency than the number of buttons on the machines
Now I guess these enterprising political goons will have to enlist hackers
I am sure if there's an american hacker out there upto the task, he/she can reverse the outsourcing thing
Dont make a better sig, you insensitive clod!
The electronic machines were last used in elections to four different state goverments in december of 2003. Taking advantage of the fact that many voters in remote areas were illiterate and were using the electronic machines for the first time, the election volunteers instructed them to vote for a particular party only, explaining that, that is the only button that works on the machine.
Now the interesting fact is that most of these volunteers were government employees and they were pissed off at the outgoing government for withholding their bonuses and they had a score to settle with them.
So they instructed the poor illterate voters to vote for the rival party!
I'm quite sure that there would be many such intances in this election of politicians exploting people's ignorance and getting them to vote for some party for which they might not have wanted to vote.
With this system, the ruling coalition often has a wafer-thin majority which means even an otherwise insignificant party with a small number of seats in parliament can exert and awfully strong influence on the government. The Prime Minister can be toppled pretty much anytime by losing a confidence vote. If the oppisition isnt't strong enough to form a majority coalition after that the only alternative is to dissolve parliament and hold general elections again.
Although this government has lived out its full 5 year term*, there was a period before that when there were 3 general elections in a 5 year period. In addition to the obvious fiscal cost of polling 600 million people, this level of instability deters investors because they don't know when a new government will come in and change policy.
That said, things seem to be maturing to a degree with parties that have caused governments to fall over minor issues suffering heavy losses in subsequent elections, so maybe we will see some happy middle ground where no party has a free hand, but the government mostly lives out its full term.
* Actually they did decide to hold elections a little earlier than otherwise scheduled for political reasons
Don't care about an issue? Don't vote. Care passionately? Vote! We'll have an electorate that is much more knowledgeable. We'll eliminate the graft and corruption that is inevitable when big money pays for a campaign to elect someone who is supposed to represent the electorate. Cut out the middle man and vote on the issues directly. And no more pork filled bills with hundreds of items snuck in there, allowing politicians to claim they voted for something very noble and patriotic, when they actually voted themselves a raise and everyone traded votes for their favorite pork barrel projects.
>> My ultraviolent Linux switch video.
You know, 2 parties aren't good for expressing your exact political opinion, but the likelihood of either of them going too far from center as the party line is pretty low, since they'd only lose people. I'll take centrist, inclusive parties that only "pretty much" represent the majority of political views, rather than spawning a hundred extremist parties. That is to say, moderate politics tends to be the dominant mode of government, rather than the exception.
It's like the gas station paradox of economics - the best place to put your gas station is dead center in the middle of town. And if you're starting a new one, it's still best to put it dead center in the middle of town, or as close as possible to it.
There's also something to be said for not having your government fall apart every time a coalition has divisive issues to deal with. The Israelis, for instance, have this problem. Evacuate the settlements? Well, that's a great way to alienate UTJ and Likud, and if they happened to be part of the ruling coalition, well, the Israeli government falls apart until they can put a new coalition back together.
I'm not trying to say that I think two parties is better or worse than 2+ parties - only that I think there are some advantages to the two party system that people don't talk about.
I do agree with your sentiment that political participation in this country doesn't receive as much cultural emphasis as it should, though.
-Erwos
Plausible conjecture should not be misrepresented as proof positive.
And did US used that enormous experience to aid the implementation of a e-voting there? No...
So what would make anywone think they would follow Indias foot steps?
I dont think so.
I squeezed in just before the polls closed at 5:00 PM in Bangalore. I was a little rushed because all the security people kept telling me to hurry up so that they could go home. However the election in my constituency was very peaceful, unlike some other areas.
Interestingly Indian media is not as vocal about the relatively small incidents of violence when compared to the international media.
The electronic voting machines felt a little awkward. There was no feedback to tell me that I had actually voted for the right person, and no mechanism that I could tell to correct myself had I pressed the wrong button. In fact one of the instructions for voters that came out in the Times of India today mentioned that we should make sure the election commission employees monitoring the election didn't "accidentally" press one of our buttons for us.
I would have liked the machine to somehow tell me (either through a display or by printing a little paper receipt) that I had voted for the right person.
Also, one of the women election commission workers was looking down on my machine as I proceeded to push my button. I had to give her a really ugly look, "Do you mind?". She shrugged and went and sat down on her chair. There were representatives from all the political parties contesting for the seat from my constituency.
What's probably not as common in the West is that there were about 10 people contesting from my constituency alone. One each from the major national parties (BJP/NDA, Congress), a couple from the major state parties and a few independents. I think the choice in the West is usually never more than 3 or 4.
After voting each voter is marked with a small drop of ink between the nail and the skin on the forefinger of the left hand. Not sure what they do if you are handicapped.
A state-wide holiday was declared to encourage people to vote. However in some areas it was just too hot in north of the state so the turnout was quite poor (40%-ish) whereas in my state on average I think it is around 60%. I'm sure there were many other factors that affected the voter turnout.
The national parties are promising between 10-12% economic growth, which has probably never been achieved in India's post-independence history. Let's see how things pan out, although it appears the ruling BJP-led alliance will dominate. The question is by how much.
All in all, it still felt good to cast a vote, although numerically the bigger the democracy the smaller the net value of each vote.
Will it work?
Oh, yes.
The officials responsible for the decision to use electronic voting will herald its use as part of India's grand entry into the technology revolution.
Companies providing the equipment will highlight its features, talking about security and speed with which results are available.
Winners of the elections will be too elated to spend time dwelling on the nuts and bolts of the technology used to bring them to power.
Losers of the elections will call into question any irregularities as well as the inherent problems with the electronic voting machines that motivated some of the world's best computer scientists to disapprove of electronic voting.
More complaining will occur for closer elections. Media coverage of the complaining will vary depending on how close the elections are.
In the end we'll all accept the inevitable results:
[Damn! Applied the wrong firmware again!]
"Provided by the management for your protection."
Electronic voting systems are all very good. They are simple enough to use - push the button with your favorite party symbol - that people didn't seem to have a problem even though we have a lot of uneducated folk.
However, where the electronic voting was nice, the human factor wasn't. You still have to fill out a ton of forms to get your name on the lists. You need to produce all kind of proof of ID, age and address. You need to go to the office several times to make sure your name gets on the voting list and after all that, sometimes, it just isn't.
Why? because some politicians feel that if they wipe out an entire area that may be hostile to their party from the polling lists, it would be better for them. A lot of my neighbours came away really frustrated and dissappointed because their names were not there even though they had gone through the entire procedure.
So basically, what I'm saying is, e-voting and all is very nice, but given a choice, I'd rather color a circle with a pencil if that's what it takes to be sure that my name will be on the list next time around.
I mean, after all, why do we propose e-voting? To streamline the process right? From experience, I feel that the machines are a very small part of the process and that they should be considered onlt AFTER other issues have been ironed out.
Find a job you like and you will never work a day in your life.
I hope Diebold rememberd to localize the voting software on those machines since Dubya seems to be having a hard enough time running this country.
See subject.
Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
In the Netherlands, there are currently 5 sizable parties with a good likelyhood of being part of the government. They are Social-democrats, Christian center, Reactionists, Liberal and Conservative. I'll vote conservative, but they might (and have in the past) make a coalition with any of the other parties. If they team up with the liberals, they will compromise on government reform. If they team up with the Socialists, they will compromise on wage levelling and higher tax for rich gits. You get the idea... So, what exactly am I voting for?
Aside from the uncertainty of the resulting policies, a coalition will always have to compromise on their differing principles and choose a middle ground, which can make for a very dull and rudderless government. At least a single party in power can take decisive action.
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
Then you have to be both colour blind and illiterate to make the wrong choice (Pepsi max BTW).
Of course, as the second placed cola maker, Pepsi added a bit of red to it's logo to sow confusion among Coca-cola drinkers.
Government of the people, by corporate executives, for corporate profits.
The Recounts were not messed up by the Supreme Court of the USA. Sorry but to the Democrats out there in the USA who are bitter [I don't like Bush either] take a chill pill. The Florida Supreme Court messed up by trying to make law and the US Supreme Court called them down.
To further educate (assuming it is possible) these people if Al Gore had not lost Arkansas or Tennessee the whole issue would not have come up. The actual decision was made in Tennessee which had a barf attack at their native son Al Gore. The reasons for this were obvious to those who traveled either of the two states (Ar or Tn). Frankly neither state got any benefits from having their people in High Office. As soon as Al and Bill left their respective states, they left them behind forever! Coming back and asking people you just stiffed to vote for you is not a good prospect for success. Cheated people tend to be a bit angry at who cheated them.
Regards Electronic Voting and cheating, well those remain serious issues. The problem is that electronic voting doesn't necessarily "work properly" just because the election went off without any evidence of misdeeds. Frankly electronic balloting eliminates the evidence of misdeeds. This is like the banks who announced that tellers quit making errors when they went to computers. The reality was that the banks just eliminated evidence of the errors by computers.
Never Politically Correct ~ I prefer the facts If you don't like what I say, get a life, or comment yourself.
With that line of thinking, why not have one party state? One "centrist" party will solve the problem all together, no?
The flaw with your opinion is that you fail to realize that the more parties you have, the greater the number of opinions, and hence dissent. The more the dissent, the more likely something will be thought out and debated.
Even though goverments may fall apart under British-style systems, it is much better. Isreali government, for example, might fall apart but that is actually a good thing. The reason it happen is because the issue at hand is very important (at least from their perspective). In a one party, or two party state (like USA), such important debates will be watered down. I'm sure the two parties will "agree" and just end up passing a bill. For instance, consider how the existence of only two parties (that get more than 1% vote) means that something like war (say the Iraqi war) has zero dissent. Both the Democrats and the Republicans "agree" on everything. There might be some rhetoric one way or another but in the end it's all the same. In contrast, countries with more viable parties are far more democratic. Things like wars won't get a free pass with everyone "agreeing" on everything.
(SIDE NOTE: I put agree in quotes because parties never agree in words. However, they do agree in practice under two party systems. For example, Kerry doesn't agree with Bush's Iraqi war if you just listen to his rhetoric. But in reality, he agrees with everyting Bush has done. In fact, he even voted for nearly all of Bush's decisions).
Sivaram Velauthapillai
Sivaram Velauthapillai
Seeking the meaning of life... @slashdot of all places
I voted this morning. As an aside, I need to mention that this is actully the SECOND time my constituency used the EVMs. the last time was around 1999.
anyway, one thing i noticed about the EVMs while voting was that there is no way for me to know that the vote got registered against the candidate I actually voted for. of course, these machines have been tested fairly well enough [manufacturers Bharat Electronics Ltd (www.bel-india.com)]. But I need to know for sure too.
The other issue has to do with the number of candidates that can be accomodated on the EVM (perhaps 20 or so). The last general elections in 1999 in India threw up a logistical problem. One particular constituency had, well, 400 candidates. The Election Commission had to revert to paper. Why there were 400 candidates is besides the point(not relevant here).
The primary reason not to trust the fate of a democracy to a centralized voting system (electronic or not) is that any such system can be taken over. The stakes are much higher with a single system -- a party successfully taking it over wins all. So scumbags will be trying much harder to find flaws in it, than designers and implementors securing, or reviewers checking it.
The danger still holds partially true, BTW, even with a decentralized, but uniform election system -- the same flaw (software, hardware, or administrative) once found can be exploited everywhere.
For example, there are strong indications of elections rigging in the past in different states of the Union (by crooks from both major parties). But those only affected that particular state with nation-wide effects muffled.
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
simpler and more complicated. See, to get a job -- any regularized job... -- you have to be a registered and showing voter. You have to show your Voter ID (called "Título de Eleitor") and a ticket showing you voted in the last election. If you don't have such ticket, you can't vote in the next election, too. But, most important, you can't get a job in government. In the next year, you won't be eligible to receive any $$$ from the government, including tax returns. If you don't show up to vote, you have to go to your Electoral Court and justify why you were absent (can be done by snail-mail, too, but even so you can be called to testify on Court) and pay a small fine.
So, every mandatory voter (literate 18-65yo people) has its Voter ID regularized.
You get in the section, show your voter id to the "mesário", sign a sheet, vote, get your "showed up" ticket, and go away.
Here, there is no transit vote (you can only vote in your section), and the Voter ID is nationwide (the database is central). It's fairly difficult to vote twice (but not impossible).
It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048