Do electronic voting machines improve the voting process?
About This Topic
Direct recording electronic (DRE) voting machines were introduced to enhance the voting process, but their helpfulness is still contentious. Originally developed in the 1970s, DRE usage has increased nationwide in each subsequent local and federal election. However, it was not until after the 2000 U.S. Presidential Election's issues with pregnant and hanging chads and the passage of the 2002 Help America Vote Act (HAVA) that voting technology became more widely argued. There is considerable debate between election officials, computer scientists, politicians, advocates for the disabled, and concerned citizens as to whether electronic voting machines improve the voting process or not.
PRO Electronic Voting Machines
CON Electronic Voting Machines
PRO: Some proponents argue that electronic voting machines make the voting process more efficient. They publicize DREs as being secure, able to unambiguously capture the intent of a voter, capable of preventing residual votes, reliable, easy to use, and accessible to disabled, illiterate, and non-English speaking voters.
CON: Some opponents of electronic voting machines believe DREs give too much power over public elections to their private manufacturers, are vulnerable to hacking and other forms of tampering, do not allow for meaningful audits and recounts, and do not offer voters a trustworthy form of verification.
