How to Reform the Election System in America

In the past two Presidential elections voter confidence has been compromised. The adoption of electronic voting machines and inherent flaws in the process have left many wondering if the General Election even matters anymore. Over fifty years ago we faced a time a time when certain segments of society were disenfranchised of their votes. While it isn't as blatant there are still people in this country who are being shut out. America has many hurdles to climb if they are to ever honestly claim "one man, one vote." To make U.S. elections truly democratic there are many things that need to change.

The biggest hurdle in fair Presidential elections is the persistence of the Electoral College. This organization is the actual entity responsible for selecting the President. The Electors in a state are expected to vote in the same way their state did. While they can change their mind the majority of Electors do stick with the way their state voted. On the surface it seems like a more formal way of documenting the popular vote, but the system is prone to being upset and not reflecting the true will of the American people.

The Electoral College robs the individual of their voice. A Conservative voting in a heavily liberal state does not nearly as strong of a voice in a state where political opinion is more evenly split. This unbalanced system can lead to the candidate with the most votes losing the election. It has only happened four times, most recently in the 2000 Presidential race. Unfortunately, there is no proviso in the Constitution to allow for this rare occurrence.

It would be hard to argue that the current Electoral system can be unfair. It is confusing that a country that claims democracy would not let the people have complete control over who leads them. Why in only the Presidential race does one man's vote not count as one vote for their chosen candidate? The logical solution is to pass an amendment allowing the popular vote to decide the outcome of Presidential elections. Unfortunately, this would only be a baby step towards healing voter confidence-- the last election left the American people with more technical concerns.

Imagine your casting your vote for Homecoming Queen your senior year. This year the Student Council has decided to "update" the way they tally the votes. Instead of sketching an "X" next to the name of the girl you find most deserving (or attractive) you must whisper it into the ear of the Math Club President. After everybody has filed through and whispered in his ear he calculates the final results in his head. He announces the results, and the new Homecoming Queen and the Math Club President walk to the lunchroom and start making out. This sounds a little fishy, so you approach the Principal to see if there can be a recount. He assures you that's okay and ask you to follow him. In the lunchroom the Principal breaks up the two love birds (the female lovebird looking relieved for the break) and demands a recount. The Math Club President takes a quick glance at the Homecoming Queen. "She won," he says, "go bother somebody else now.

This little scenario might sound ridiculous. What decent student would allow this sort of thing to go on? Surely the other potential Queens would not let this go? Unfortunately that's exactly what happened in the 2004 Presidential election. To bridge the "technological gap" of paper ballets many states adopted electronic voting machines. So many states did this that 80% of the results were supplied by two companies: Election Systems & Software and Diebold Election Systems.

In trying to get in line with technological standards election officials have compromised the security of the voting process. They claimed electronic voting would make the process more exact and secure, but it's done anything but. Voting machines used in the last election have since been shown to have many untraceable security flaws. Some were hacked over a network. Princeton later did a study proving how an intermediate hacker could influence the vote tally. Before the election the President of Diebold even said in a fund-raising letter that he would ensure Bush received more votes in Ohio. Senator Chuck Hagel, chairman of ES&S, was the first republican to win a Nebraskan seat in 24 years. His voting machines were used in the Nebraskan elections and lead to urban communities voting Republican (by a large margin) for the first time.

While no conclusive evidence has come to light regarding tampering with these machines there is no real way to validate the vote. The machines only store the data. There is no paper trail. This concerned many voters. Many requested paper ballets when they went to the poles. In many communities where a large investment had been made in the voting equipment people requiring paper ballets were quickly turned away. How can we trust the election results when the only way to verify them is by processing the data they may have been compromised? Who can be trusted to fix this?

Legislation is currently evolving that would require a paper trail, as well as a publicly accessible copy of the source code that runs the machines. Every citizen needs to contact their Representatives in Washington and let them know this is a top priority.

There are many factors contributing to the dearth of voter confidence in this coming election. Americans are honor bound to act. Would there even be an America if a few people hadn't stood up and said "This is wrong!" There may not be enough time to fix all the issues with the current election process, but if even one of these problems can be resolved before the 2008 elections it would significantly increased the chance that every voice is deafening.