Sign of the Times in Honolulu

While not necessarily a demonstration of campaign possibilities, the recent Internet vote in Honolulu does reflect a change in voter attitudes to technology and government. Considered a minor story by most news outlets, Honolulu's neighborhood council election was determined by a combination of Internet vote and phoning in. It was considered a minor story because there were only 115,000 voters. But, according to Yahoo! News, this marks the first all digital election in the United States.

So, what does this mean for your campaign? After all a vote submitted online counts just as much as one marked on a piece of paper. Ignoring the lessons from this election would be a big mistake. The lessons I am talking about have more to do with voter attitudes and less to do with the actual outcome.

First, in a democracy, elections are sacred. All people receive one vote. No outside circumstance is allowed to disfranchise a citizen. This means you cannot create obstacles to voting based on such things as race, gender, and religion. But it also means you cannot block an individual's voting rights based on ability, i.e. the method of voting should not excluded any group. Poll taxes and literacy tests were attempts at disfranchising targeted groups which often did not meet required
thresholds of a certain ability. Ten years ago, one could make the argument that an all digital vote was also excluding those that either did not have access to a computer or were not comfortable using one. Honolulu's election has marked a turning point. Most people own a computer and they are also comfortable using it. Even if you do not own a computer, going to the local library to vote on a computer is just as difficult as going to the local library to vote on a piece of paper. To be honest, I believe that using the Internet as the method to vote is the ultimate expression of usability. Computer knowledge is no longer a barrier in our society, but on the list of standard competencies and expectations. In other words, your Internet resources will have the same potential reach as the election itself.

A second point, perhaps not as significant as the first but nevertheless important, is that of security. We are a society that values privacy. Along with our personal data, we have the right to a secret ballot. Individuals' voting records cannot and will no be kept in elections. On a related note, during an election, the voter must confirm their identity. Nonexistent or deceased people cannot vote. This has been a concern about the Internet for some time: how to do we confirm you are who you say you are and then how do we protect your data? Honolulu has shown us that society is beginning to get over that fear and that we now the technology to do both. The firm that put together the system, Everyone Counts, has pointed out that their system is more secure than Internet banking. This is a comfort everyone can relate to.

The final point is efficiency. This is a story that any organization can appreciate. By voting online, the city saved about $100,000. Looking at preliminary estimates, this would mean the city saved about 56% on total election costs. Just because you are taking a totally new and different approach to campaigning by moving to the Internet does not mean it will be expensive, it may even be more cost effective. I cannot say it will always be cheaper but it is worth looking into.

The next post will be June 9th.

References:

Yahoo! News Article:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090523/ap_on_re_us/us_web_voting_1