Editorial: Online voting not perfect, neither is proposal

The Voting Rights Student Initiative seems simple enough.

It is advertised as a guarantee that all students
““ regardless of their race, ethnicity or age ““ get
a vote in undergraduate student government elections.

But before signing petitions to get the initiative to qualify
for the ballot, students should read the fine print.

The initiative calls for the elimination of electronically
enforced voting delays now placed on computers. Last year, when
elections were held online for the first time, a system was put in
place to identify off-campus internet addresses and prevent voting
multiple times in succession.

General Rep. Josh Lawson, who is sponsoring the initiative,
apparently views a provision ending the delays as necessary to
ensure that people have an easier time casting their votes
““ that they are guaranteed the right to vote.

But there are other concerns that should be considered.

The delay was originally put in place as a deterrent to bloc
voting: If organizations were prevented from lining their members
up and having them vote in rapid succession, they would not be as
able to manipulate how they voted. Those who implemented the online
voting system recognized that students should have rights not only
to vote easily, but also to vote in privacy.

Despite good intentions, however, there may be some problems
with the delays. An apparently unforeseen technical glitch means
the system could potentially mistake some off-campus computers as
being the same unit when in fact they are different machines. A
person could be prevented from voting on his or her computer if
someone had just voted on a different computer that was part of the
same network. It is not yet clear how much the delay affected
students last year ““ if they were at all ““ but it
is worth investigating whether the process is overly
cumbersome.

Yes, the technical problems presented by online voting must be
addressed. Anytime a body switches to a new mode of operating
elections, it should take particular caution to ensure voting
happens fairly.

But the problems need not be addressed through an initiative.
There is an established board whose job it is to run undergraduate
elections ““ and they are not being used.

Instead, Lawson is asking students to ditch the voting delay via
popular vote. The initiative is written so it would seem no one in
their right mind would oppose it. Who at UCLA wants people of
certain communities to be prevented from voting?

But that’s not all it’s about.

People already can vote without being discriminated against. The
only substantive change that will come if the initiative passes is
the end of the voting delay.

Lawson should take his concerns to the USAC table or ask the
Election Board to look into the matter.

If he pushes ahead with an initiative, students must take care
not to sign it ““ especially if they don’t really know
what it is all about.