Re: Users need to be able to speak for themselves(Was: Re:Position of SOs)

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Joop and all,

  Interesting statement from Lou G.  It is utterly amazing to find out that Lou
G. is this far behind the curve or what HAS been happening for nearly 4 years
now.
In 1996 national US election, 28 states had applications running tat allowed for
people to vote over the internet.  I did it myself in 1996.  Where is Lou G. at?
What planet is he on?  Is he really this ignorant of what is already happening, 
and has been for almost 4 years now?

Joop Teernstra wrote:

> At 03:57 3/12/98 -0500, Jay Fenello wrote to Ronda:
>
> >
> >Actually, you and Esther are not far apart on this one.
> >
> >Esther Dyson also wrote:
> >
> >http://www.ibm.com/services/newmark/mature.html
> >
> >The Net's long-run impact on democracy, I believe, won't be one of
> >propaganda or information dissemination; CNN and the various national
> >broadcasters (private and public) do a fine job of that. The real impact,
> >if it works, will be to encourage citizen participation, to make people
> >feel that they can influence the discussion. Instead of choosing from
> >what's on offer, they can actually make suggestions and arguments of their
> >own. If you think a politician is brain dead, you can say why instead of
> >just giving your vote to someone slightly more alive. People want to
> >contribute their ideas as well as their votes.
> >
> >++++
> And this is what Lou Gerstner  thinks of cyber democracy:
>
> USA TODAY * MONDAY, NOVEMBER 16, 1998  15A
>
>        THE FORUM
>
>        Next time, let us boldly vote as no democracy has before
>
>        By Louis V. Gerstner
>
>         The number of eligible American voters who took time to go to their
> local polling places and cast a ballot this month was predictably
> anemic.  At 34%, the turnout marks a 50-year low, ranking the U.S. at or
> near the bottom of the world democracies in voter participation.
>
>         Once again, our national post-election dialogue is punctuated by
> laments over what we, by rote, label "voter apathy."  But while it's
> easy to lay the blame for poor voter turnout on an uninterested
> electorate, or perhaps the politics of meanness, or television, one
> simple truth is that the act of voting is antiquated, inconvenient and
> just too hard.
>
>         It's time to harness technology to the service of democracy.
>
>         Most Americans are working longer hours, struggling harder to balance
> work and family, and the process of voting is turning people off.  We
> trek to a polling location in a school or firehouse, stand in line, wait
> to be authenticated and then finally cast our ballot (an interesting, if
> intimidating, exercise in chart-reading, lever-pulling, switch-flipping
> and, in some precincts, poking pinholes in paper).
>
>         All this in a day when information technology--especially the
> Internet--is in the process of transforming everything from how we
> design cars to the way we buy them.  We can pay our bills, secure a
> mortgage, renew a driver's license or trade a stock from our den or
> office.
>
>         We've improved the speed, efficiency and convenience of many of the
> daily patterns of American life, with more to come.
>
>         Yet the vote--the defining ritual and central task of American
> democracy--stands stiller than a mastodon entombed in the tarry pits of
> La Brea.
>
>         It's time to ask how this technology might improve participation in our
> national elections.  It's time we acknowledge that the process of voting
> is at least an equal partner in this problem, and we have to commit to
> make it easier, faster and more convenient.
>
>         Oregon has stepped up to this by promoting mail-in balloting.  State
> residents like the system so much, they voted last week to make the mail
> the state's preferred voting method, replacing polling places.
>
>         The message is clear:  We either improve convenience or resign
> ourselves to the status quo.  I don't believe the latter choice is
> acceptable--not when the technology exists to allow us to cast a ballot
> over the Internet from the comfort of our home, or with the convenience
> of an ATM-like kiosk at work or at a traditional polling location.  The
> technology is here today.
>
>         In rethinking the process of voting, it's inevitable that we'll have to
> confront human nature and institutional inertia.  We'll have to answer
> questions about security and privacy.  American citizens will have to
> know that the confidentiality of their votes will be maintained.  We'll
> all want to be assured about the integrity of our system of one person,
> one vote.
>
>         The combination of large-scale computing behind the scenes of our
> government infrastructures and technologies such as smart cards
> biometrics for digital identification will deliver all the security we
> take for granted in the current process:  that any individual is, in
> fact, entitled to vote; that they are who they say they are; that only
> official vote counters can see their ballots; that it can't be changed,
> and you can't later deny you cast it.
>
>         The technology exists today to do all this.  Much of it is at work
> every time you go to the Net to transmit a confidential document or buy
> a book. We know these questions will come because similar questions have
> already been asked and answered across a variety of industries and
> inside thousands of institutions that are embracing the Net to become
> "e-businesses" and make fundamental changes to existing processes.
>
>         Perhaps more important, we'll have to address concerns about whether we
> can make Net-based voting possible for all our citizens or only those
> fortunate enough to have a PC at home.  Only about 20% of Americans use
> the Net today.  While that number is increasing at a galloping
> pace--more than 50,000 people come on line every day--the net won't be
> in every American home for the foreseeable future.
>
>         Obviously any system, including the current one, is more convenient for
> some than for others, but this challenge can be addressed by making if
> possible for people to vote using computers at work or at walk-up kiosks
> in public buildings and places.
>
>         Bear in mind that no one is suggesting that Net-based voting will
> supplant the traditional physical process.  They'll exist in parallel,
> with the Net as a complementary option for some who will choose it--and
> I believe, for many who will choose it over their current practice of
> abstaining on Election Day.  This effort would augment other initiatives
> that occasionally bubble up, such as creating a two-week voting window,
> or holding elections on Saturday.
>
>         Finally, let's go down this road with open eyes.  Applying the
> available technology is not insurance against knaves or fools in high
> office. That's always the great gamble of democracy and what caused
> Winston Churchill to say, famously, that "Democracy is the worst form of
> government--except for all those other forms that have been tried from
> time to time."  Increasing voter participation must continue to be a
> priority for democracies because, in the aftermath of the midterm
> elections of 1998, this much is certain:  The approach we've tried for
> so long simply doesn't work.  We should confront the fact that there's
> more to the problem of low voter turnout than complacency or a bored
> resignation over the rate and pace of change in state, local or federal
> government.
>
>         Having demonstrated that cajoling, lecturing and even trying to shame
> people to the polls isn't the solution, we owe it to ourselves and our
> country to try something new.
>
> Louis V. Gerstner is chairman and CEO of IBM.
>
> ------------------------------
> Joop Teernstra LL.M.
> Democratic Association of  Domain  Name  Owners
> http://www.democracy.org.nz

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number:  972-447-1894
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208