Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

How risky is online voting? Very, the federal government says.

Online voting
sorbetto/Getty Images

Three states plan to offer voters with disabilities the option to cast ballots online this fall, but the federal government says this is too risky an endeavor even with all the recommended controls in place.

In an eight-page report sent last week to state officials, four federal agencies analyzed the risks associated with electronic ballot delivery, marking and return. While accessing and completing ballots online can be low-risk, digital ballot submissions pose significant cybersecurity concerns, the report said.


Delaware, New Jersey and West Virginia plan to use a new system by the Seattle-based company Democracy Live to allow electronic voting for military and overseas voters as well as those with disabilities. The report says these states should limit the online system to "voters who have no other means to return their ballot and have it counted."

The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, the Election Assistance Commission, the FBI and the National Institute of Standards and Technology collaborated on the report to identify potential security risks at each step in the voting process.

Their warning against allowing any part of the voting process to connect to the internet comes in response to the attempts by Russian operatives to hack into voting systems in the last presidential election.

Although delivering ballots electronically is allowed by all 50 states, this system at best poses information security risks and at worst can result in missing or altered ballot choices, the report said. Risks can be mitigated by implementing proper security controls and verifying voter identity before the ballot may be accessed.

To minimize risks associated with marking ballots electronically, the agencies suggest using an auditable paper trail so voters can print out and verify their selections before submitting their ballot.

Returning a ballot using the internet poses the highest risk, though. Doing so could compromise not only the voter's data and privacy, but also the system's integrity as a whole.

"Securing the return of voted ballots via the internet while ensuring ballot integrity and maintaining voter privacy is difficult, if not impossible, at this time," the agencies reported.

State election officials should provide a way for voters to verify the status of their ballots after submitting them, the report recommends.

Arizona, Colorado, Missouri and North Dakota currently allow military voters in "hostile zones" to use a web-based portal to submit ballots. West Virginia is the only state with a mobile voting app for people with disabilities.

Twenty-six states, plus D.C., allow some voters to return their ballots via email or fax, but these methods aren't perfect either, the report says. Fax machines typically have no security protections and emails are often subject to cyberattacks.

Election security experts have warned against electronic voting for years because the U.S. does not yet have the technological infrastructure to prevent widespread online ballot interference.


Read More

California Voters Don’t Like Either Party. Good Thing the Primary Doesn’t Belong to The Parties.

California voters increasingly distrust both major parties. Here's why the state's Top Two primary gives independent voters more power to shape elections.

Image: Duncan Shelby on Alamy.

California Voters Don’t Like Either Party. Good Thing the Primary Doesn’t Belong to The Parties.

SAN DIEGO, Calif. - California voters have already received ballots for the June 2 primary, and the message they have going into these elections may not be what the political class wants to hear: They are not thrilled with either major party.

A recent analysis from the Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) found that majorities of likely voters have unfavorable views of both parties—61% unfavorable toward the Democratic Party and 70% unfavorable toward the Republican Party.

Keep ReadingShow less
How the Voting Rights Act Reshaped Texas’ Electoral Maps

President Lyndon B. Johnson, Martin Luther King Jr., Clarence Mitchell Jr., Patricia Roberts Harris, and other guests at the signing of the Voting Rights Act on August 6, 1965.

Yoichi Okamoto - Lyndon Baines Johnson Library and Museum

How the Voting Rights Act Reshaped Texas’ Electoral Maps

In 2002, U.S. Rep. Henry Bonilla, a Republican, nearly lost his South Texas seat to Democrat Henry Cuellar. So when the GOP used its newfound majority in the state Legislature to redraw the voting maps the next year, they sawed through Cuellar’s hometown of Laredo and scattered Latino voters, who tended to vote Democratic, into other districts.

Latino advocacy groups sued under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, the cornerstone provision of the law that prevents government bodies from diluting the voting power of specific groups. The Supreme Court found Texas lawmakers had taken away Latino voting power “because they were about to exercise it.”

Keep ReadingShow less
A group of people wait in line to get their ballots to vote in the election.

The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact could reshape presidential elections as Midwest states debate Electoral College reform, political polarization, and the future of winner-take-all voting in America.

Getty Images, SDI Productions

700+ Proposed Amendments Failed, Midwest Voters Can Succeed

The Midwest served as the vanguard and ideological heartland of the Progressive Era, acting as a crucial laboratory for political, social, and economic reforms that later adopted national significance. Midwestern states (the cradle of the movement) pioneered anti-monopoly efforts, democratic, and social improvements.

After 770+ failed proposed U.S. Constitutional Amendments (the most on record for one issue) to remedy the factionalism (21st century polarization) feared by the Framers of the U.S. Constitution.

Keep ReadingShow less
“We Can’t Afford It” Is Never an Acceptable Excuse To Deny Independents a Vote

DC voting rights advocate Lisa D.T. Rice criticized the DC City Council for failing to fund Initiative 83’s semi-open primary system, leaving 85,000 independent voters unable to participate in taxpayer-funded primaries despite overwhelming voter approval in 2024.

Photo by Getty Images on Unsplash.

“We Can’t Afford It” Is Never an Acceptable Excuse To Deny Independents a Vote

WASHINGTON, D.C. - Lisa D.T. Rice spoke before the DC City Council during a Budget Oversight Hearing on May 1 to talk about Initiative 83, the semi-open primary and ranked choice voting measure she proposed that was approved by 73% of voters in 2024.

- YouTube youtu.be

Keep ReadingShow less