Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Iowa results will be compiled over the internet, hacking threat aside

Hacker on smartphone
xijian/Getty Images

The first votes of the presidential election will be tabulated after the Iowa caucuses next month using the sort of internet-connected system that worries election security experts. They say preventing the sort of interference that sullied the 2016 election should be more of a priority than speed in compiling the returns.

But the Iowa Democratic Party plans to deploy a smartphone app to officials running the caucuses across the state for use in calculating and transmitting the results the night of Feb. 3. Putting such vote totals into cyberspace makes them readily vulnerable to nefarious hacking.

Party leaders say they are aware of the potential problems but believe their system will repel them. If that doesn't happen, the opening round of the intense contest for the Democratic nomination will be condemned to global ridicule.


The aim of the new app is to get the caucus results to the public quicker, Troy Price, the chairman of the state party, told Iowa Public Radio. He declined to detail how the app was designed, or by who, or what has been done to guarantee security.

He said the state party worked with the national party's cybersecurity team, and with Harvard University's Defending Digital Democracy project. But Price declined to say whether any third party has investigated the app for vulnerabilities, as many cybersecurity experts recommend.

Unlike many states in which local and state officials oversee presidential primaries, in Iowa the responsibility for administering, staffing and funding the caucuses rests with the state party, which in turn relies mainly on unpaid volunteers.

The Iowa Democrats' plan is for caucus leaders to compile the results from the in-person gatherings and send them to party headquarters in Des Moines using their smartphone apps — assuming the software works and the network does not become overwhelmed or compromised. In the past, making a telephone call was the default method, and phones will still be used as a backup this time.

Because caucusing and the climactic vote counting in hundreds of locations are open to the public, it's highly unlikely a hack to alter the results would go unnoticed. But the damage to the public confidence in the 2020 elections would likely be catastrophic.


Read More

Fueling the Future: The Debate Over California’s Gas Tax and Transportation Funding
person in red shirt wearing silver bracelet holding red and black metal tool
Photo by Wassim Chouak on Unsplash

Fueling the Future: The Debate Over California’s Gas Tax and Transportation Funding

This nonpartisan policy brief, written by an ACE fellow, is republished by The Fulcrum as part of our partnership with the Alliance for Civic Engagement and our NextGen initiative — elevating student voices, strengthening civic education, and helping readers better understand democracy and public policy.

Key Takeaways

Keep ReadingShow less
A person looking at social media app icons on a phone

Gen Z is quietly leaving social media as algorithmic feeds, infinite scroll, and addictive platform design fuel anxiety, isolation, and mental health struggles.

Matt Cardy/Getty Images

Gen Z Begs Legislators: Make Social Media Social Again

Lately, it seems like each time I reach out to an old acquaintance through social media, I’m met with a page that reads, “This account doesn’t exist anymore.”

Many Gen-Z’ers are quietly quitting the platforms we grew up on.

Keep ReadingShow less
Open Letter to Justice Roberts: Partisan Gerrymandering Is Unconstitutional
beige concrete building under blue sky during daytime

Open Letter to Justice Roberts: Partisan Gerrymandering Is Unconstitutional

The Supreme Court, in holding that partisan gerrymandering is permissible—unless it "goes too far"—stated that the argument made against this practice based on the Court's "one person, one vote" doctrine didn't work because the cases that developed that doctrine were about ensuring that each vote had an equal weight. The Court reasoned that after redistricting, each vote still has equal weight.

I would respectfully disagree. After admittedly partisan redistricting, each vote does not have an equal weight. The purpose of partisan gerrymandering is typically to create a "safe" seat—to group citizens so that the dominant political party has a clear majority of the voters. It's the transformation of a contested seat or even a seat safe for the other party into a safe seat for the party doing the redistricting.

Keep ReadingShow less