Electronic voting is controversial. People have doubts about the machines and the companies that make them. According to editorial from the New York Times, the nation would be using almost 70 percent of machines made by a single company which would make it difficult to negotiate prices and guarantee quality. The editor argues that justice department should reject it because it is against the public’s interest. He has also given some of the evidences of 2000 presidential election debacle in Florida which had highlighted the deep flaws in voting machine technology with the hanging chads and uncounted votes. He also adds that it would not create any robust competition rather it would disappear.
According to the article, various studies have shown that many voting machines are vulnerable to remove software glitches and intentional vote theft and having the large percent of the nation’s vote counted on machines made by a single company increases vulnerability to these problems. I agree with the writer of this article because we cannot totally rely on the machines and the services provided by a single company like Diebold and expect fair voting. Therefore, the Justice Department should use its authority to ensure the trust of people before the situation gets worse.
I chose this article because I think that the writer has been able to raise the questions that are on the top of the head of people. The author has focused all the range of people by raising the issue of this unsecured voting system that most of the people are unsatisfied with. He is successful in supporting all the range of people by choosing this topic and has successfully conveyed the message that we should be more careful about what decisions government makes about voting machines. The article clearly sets the example that we should try to use the Justice Department to protect our voting.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/26/opinion/26fri3.html?ref=opinion
No comments:
Post a Comment