SGER: Electronic Voting Technology

摘要在2000年的总统选举中，我们各州选举制度的固有弱点以戏剧性的方式暴露出来。由于发生了史无前例的事件，在数周内无法确定佛罗里达州总统选举的结果，因此无法宣布美利坚合众国新总统选举的胜利者。重新计票不仅是对选票的重新计票，也是对“意向选票”的重新计票，诸如“蝴蝶”选票和“吊牌”之类的术语成为每日新闻讨论的常规词汇。最终在美国最高法院以微弱优势做出裁决的认证程序，几乎令人喘不过气来制造宪法危机。那次选举中几乎超现实的事件促使人们重新考虑投票的方式，并要求提供新的资金，以使各州和地方的投票程序现代化。因此，出现了一些努力，以探索和评估投票中的新技术选择，包括互联网，并开展研究，以提高对现有投票系统的局限性以及与各种投票系统备选方案相关的潜在收益和限制的了解。自2000年选举以来，提出和/或尝试了替代投票制度，最近一次是在2004年春季的初选中。今年早些时候，五角大楼出于对可靠性和安全性的担忧，拒绝了海外军事人员通过互联网投票的想法。2003年11月，弗吉尼亚州费尔法克斯县的机器出现了重大故障，没有登记某些选票。美国科学促进会(AAAS)将组织和召开一个研讨会，将25-30名技术和网络安全专家、选举官员、社会和行为科学家以及公共利益代表聚集在一起，制定研究议程。讲习班将利用全体会议和分组会议，以便编写一份关于优先研究需要的说明，代表对专家组的最佳评估。这份研究议程旨在指导研究人员就这些重要问题开展工作。为了确保研究议程受到广泛关注，项目工作人员将准备和传播：(A)突出关键议程项目的快速会议总结；(B)一份简明易懂的报告，详细说明优先研究领域及其理由。在分发这两种产品的同时将发布新闻稿，研讨会总结会议的简短部分的网络直播将在研讨会结束后的星期一张贴。研究议程将通过突出将受益于额外的重点研究的问题，并通过这样做，将研究人员(和资助者)指向跨学科研究和跨领域合作的潜在途径，从而对电子投票技术的研究做出重要的智力贡献。研究议程也将产生更广泛的影响。它将创造机会，让公众更多地参与决定如何分配对此类研究的支持。最终，基于这项研究议程所做的工作得出的结果可能有助于两个重要领域：(1)未来对各种投票制度的利弊进行审议，以及(2)关于美国投票的关键个人和政策决策。

AbstractIn the 2000 presidential election, the inherent weaknesses of our states' systems of voting were revealed in dramatic fashion. Due to an unprecedented occurrence, it was impossible to determine for many weeks the outcome of the presidential voting in the State of Florida and, therefore, to declare a winner in the election of a new President of the United States. Recounts were undertaken not only of votes but also of "intended votes," and terminology such as "butterfly" ballots and "hanging chads" became routine vocabulary of discussions in the daily news. The certification process, eventually decided by a narrow margin in the U.S. Supreme Court, came breathlessly close to creating a constitutional crisis.The almost surreal events of that election led to reconsideration of the ways in which balloting is done, and also to requests for new funding to modernize the voting processes in states and localities. As a result, efforts have emerged to explore and assess new technological options in voting, including the Internet, and to undertake research that can improve understanding of the limits of existing voting systems as well as the potential gains and limits associated with various voting system alternatives. Since the 2000 election, alternative voting systems have been proposed and/or attempted, most recently in the Spring 2004 primaries. Earlier this year, the Pentagon rejected the idea of Internet voting by military personnel overseas because of concerns about reliability and security. In November 2003, Fairfax County, VA, experienced major "glitches" with machines that did not register certain votes.The American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) will organize and convene a workshop that brings together 25-30 technical and cyber-security experts, election officials, social and behavioral scientists, and public interest representatives to develop a research agenda. The workshop will employ both plenary and breakout sessions in order to produce a statement of priority research needs representing the best assessment of the expert group. This research agenda is intended to direct researchers to work that could be done about these important questions.To ensure that the research agenda receives widespread attention, project staff will prepare and disseminate: (a) a rapid summary of the meeting that highlights key agenda items; and (b) a succinct and accessible report detailing the priority research areas and their rationale. Press releases will accompany the distribution of both products and a webcast of a brief segment of the workshop's wrap-up session will be posted the Monday after the workshop.The research agenda will make an important intellectual contribution to the study of electronic voting technology by highlighting issues that would benefit from additional focused research and, in doing so, point researchers (and funders) to potential avenues of interdisciplinary research and collaboration across fields. The research agenda will have broader impacts as well. It will create opportunities for greater public involvement in deciding how to allocate support for such studies. Ultimately, the findings that emerge from work done based on this research agenda could contribute to two important areas: (1) future deliberations about the advantages and disadvantages of various voting systems, and (2) critical individual and policy decisions about voting in the U.S.