Automation of Elections

The Manual Election System

1. Ballots tallied by BEI in each precinct and ERs prepared 2. BEIs bring ERs to CMBOCs 3. CMBOCs canvass ERs and prepare SOVs and COCs; bring them to PBOCs 4. PBOCs canvass COCs and prepare provincial COCs and SOVs; bring them to NBOC 5. NBOC (Comelec) canvasses COCs; Congress canvasses Pres/VP COCs

Manual Tallying/Canvassing Time Line

5-12 hrs 10 days 20 30 40

PRECINCT TALLYING

CITY / MUNICIPAL, PROVINCIAL AND NATIONAL CANVASSING (25 40 DAYS)

Given the above time line, it becomes obvious, which phase of the election process should be automated.

Looking at it from another perspective

If we change the voting system, then we have to train 40-50 million voters on the new system; we also have to train some 500,000 teachers. If we automate the precinct counting, then the process loses its transparency; counting will not be seen by the voting public; automated cheating becomes a real possibility. If we automate only the canvassing, then we still cut down the election process from 40 days to maybe 5 days. We can still prevent wholesale cheating (dagdag-bawas).

Features of the most suitable automated system for Phil. elections

All steps transparent to the voting public

Manual voting and precinct tallying Two trusted documents the ballot and the ER ER data and canvassing results available to the public All data quickly verifiable all the way to original source documents (the trusted documents)

Can be completed anywhere from 2-5 days (automates canvassing) All official Comelec sites/databases secure Minimum or no training required for >40M voters Cost-effective

Minimum or no storage concerns after each election process

Not dependent on the trustworthiness of the implementers

IF we can design an election system that has those features, then we can greatly minimize, if not completely eliminate, cheating.

Direct Recording Electronic System

1. 2-4 Units per precinct
2. Touch screen, mouse, or keyboard 3. Voters choices printed for audit purposes 4. At end of voting (3:00pm), ER is printed 5. ER transmitted to CMBOC and NBOC

CITY/MUNICIPAL BOARD OF CANVASSERS

PROVINCIAL BOARD OF CANVASSERS

NATIONAL BOARD OF CANVASSERS

DOMINANT PARTY

DOMINANT OPPOSITION

CITIZENS ARM

MEDIA & OTHERS

6. NBOC transmits data to interested parties

7. CMBOC produces SOV and COC; transmits to PBOC 8. PBOC produces SOV and COC; transmits to NBOC 9. NBOC produces SOV and COC

PRECINCTS

Direct Recording Electronic System

PROs
Instantaneous tally of votes at precinct level If all precincts connected, almost instantaneous canvass at City/Mun., Prov., & Natl. levels; ergo, theoretically, national results known 1 hr. after close of voting Less work for BEI With one printer per precinct, printing of 30 copies of ER at precincts is easy No ballot box snatching

CONs
Cost prohibitive, estimated at P15-20B (some est. >P30B) Logistics can be a nightmare (750K units to 250K locations) Thousands of technical people reqd (but where to deploy?) BEI training staggering 40 Million voters to be trained Where online connection is unavailable, difficult to secure electronic media (CDs) After each election, storage of 750K units is major concern Not transparent. Voters will distrust vote-counting that they did not see (a big issue in the US)

Optical Mark Reader - OMR

1. Voters mark preprinted ballots 2. Ballot boxes brought to school tab (OMR) center.

3. Ballots fed into OMR then ERs printed; signed by BEI

4. ERs posted on the web
CITY/MUNICIPAL BOARD OF CANVASSERS PROVINCIAL BOARD OF CANVASSERS NATIONAL BOARD OF CANVASSERS

5. CMBOC will access database, produce SOV, COC 6. All interested parties may access and process the data by themselves

DOMINANT PARTY

DOMINANT OPPOSITION

CITIZENS ARM

MEDIA & OTHERS

VOTING CENTER

7. All interested parties can send SMS to watchers to verify figures 8. PBOCs access DB; produce Prov SOVs and COCs 9. NBOC accesses DB for final results

OMR PRECINCTS

DOMINANT PARTY

DOMINANT OPPOSITION

CITIZENS ARM

MEDIA & OTHERS

Optical Mark Recognition

PROs
Ballots are pre-printed so voters simply mark choices Voter training minimal, relative to DRE Faster, because tally of votes automated Less work for BEI at precinct level Cost less than DRE; approx. P8B (using $2,000 OMRs)

CONs
Internal tallying. Voters wont see and may not trust count Wholesale cheating, usually possible only at canvassing level, can happen at precinct level Sensitivity to external marks or smudges Difficult to fairly resolve overmarked ballots Easier to add to under-marked ballots Need to store specialized OMR machines

Option 2: Open Election System PC Encoding

1. Votes cast & tallied as in manual voting 2. ERs brought to school encoding (PC) center 3. ERs validated then posted on the web w/ BEIs digital signature

CITY/MUNICIPAL BOARD OF CANVASSERS

PROVINCIAL BOARD OF CANVASSERS

NATIONAL BOARD OF CANVASSERS

4. CMBOC will access database, produce SOV, COC 5. All interested parties may access and process the data by themselves 6. All interested parties can send SMS to watchers to verify figures 7. PBOCs access DB; produce Prov SOVs and COCs

DOMINANT PARTY

DOMINANT OPPOSITION

CITIZENS ARM

MEDIA & OTHERS

VOTING CENTER

PRECINCTS

ENCODING CENTER

DOMINANT PARTY

DOMINANT OPPOSITION

CITIZENS ARM

MEDIA & OTHERS

8. NBOC accesses DB for final results

Open Election System

Most transparent - voters and watchers observe tally at precinct level No need for voter training Once ER is encoded, result (web database) becomes accessible to the public Cost affordable at about P2B (Comelec only buys PCs/servers) PCs/servers can be passed on to DepEd after each election No storage concerns, because machines can be passed on to DepEd Ballot box snatching/switching will not affect results

PROs

CONs

Manual tallying is tedious ERs will have to be encoded Looking for tens of thousands of encoders is a challenge Since its still manual tallying, public may think that election is not automated

Thank you!