Voting has always been a centralised process in the hands of those who depend on it. In developing countries in South America and Africa this has often led to questionable governmental behaviour. These countries might benefit most beyond saving cost or manual labour. In most countries human beings must count votes manually, which makes the cost per voter substantially high (UK 8.66 pounds) (Kelly, 2013). External influences such as the Russian influence in the 2016 US election are a danger to election security. Blockchain might be the answer to all these sorrows.
Many different Blockchain companies have produced and suggested online voting systems. Follow My Vote, for example, created an online voting booth. You register with the required documents in the region applicable. Votes are submitted in a blockchain based ballot box. One even has the option to change this vote, right until the deadline (Follow My Vote, 2017).
Many countries are currently testing and doing pilot runs, nonetheless, only few countries or regions applied the blockchain voting system in their societies. There are still too many ways in which the process could be compromised. Blockchain voting assumes that there is no malware on an end-user’s digital device. Furthermore, if it were to be hacked, everyone’s vote would be public. Experts also warn for the large population that will be online via these systems, they believe blockchain is not solid enough for this amount of online traffic (Mearian, 2019). They believe that paper voting is still the only proper way, since an attack can only target one vote, and blockchain offers the possibility to reach and entire population.
Despite these issues blockchain or other forms of internet voting will make their entry someday. It will boost democratic fundamentals such as participation. For instance, groups like overseas militaries will have the opportunity to also vote.
Estonia has been using online voting systems since 2005. Via digital ID’s Estonians could vote for local government elections, and later also the parliamentary elections. Does this prove that it works? Or does it merely mean that Estonian elections is somewhat less interesting for hackers and people seeking influence than for example the US? The same system was also used in the Utah 2016 republican party caucus. Voters from over 45 countries, including Japan and South-Africa, participated (Mearian, 2019). Are fundamental changes to blockchain and internet processes needed, or do we take a leap like Estonia?
References
Follow My Vote, 2017. Blockchain Voting: The End To End Process. [Online]
Available at: https://followmyvote.com/blockchain-voting-the-end-to-end-process/
[Accessed 14 September 2019].
Kelly, S., 2013. Voting using blockchain and smart contracts. [Online]
Available at: https://medium.com/swlh/voting-using-blockchain-and-smart-contractsd-8a277892732f
[Accessed 2019 September 15].
Mearian, L., 2019. Why blockchain-based voting could threaten democracy. [Online]
Available at: https://www.computerworld.com/article/3430697/why-blockchain-could-be-a-threat-to-democracy.html
[Accessed 15 September 2019].
