Should America Adopt An Electronic Direct Democracy?
At first glance, an electronic direct democracy sounds like the next logical step for voting in America. The technology we have developed today is more than enough to support this system. As Americans, we take pride in our rights to shape the country through our ballots. Implementing an electronic direct democracy, or voting electronically, would theoretically extend our voice as democratic citizens. Yet it’s unlikely that such a system would increase citizen participation and general interest in the democratic process. On the flip side, however, there are also people who desperately need this new use of technology to be able to vote.
First of all, the convenience that is created through electronic direct democracy might not necessarily benefit Americans. Being able to vote is a privilege, one that comes with responsibility and maturity. With an electronic direct democracy, how can we make sure people are not voting just because they can do it while stuck in traffic or waiting in the line for their Starbucks? If Americans are voting merely because they have spare time and not after thorough consideration, this would decrease informed decision-making. As a result, more citizens could unknowingly be making decisions that actually go against their interests.
In addition, a lack of trust by the people could stem from this electronic direct democracy due to issues regarding national security. Having voted through a system that uses optical-scan ballots and/or DRE devices for years, it is reasonable for Americans to initially distrust a foreign process. This in turn could decrease voter turnout, resulting in votes that represent only a portion of the population. Furthermore, while the electronic direct democracy may come off as a more convenient method to some, it can be a much more complex and difficult means for others unfamiliar with such advanced technology, especially to the older generations.
However, there is a need to address the positive impact an electronic direct democracy would have on patients, especially those who are bedridden. While much of the concern is focused on having proper representation of the general public, patients need their voices to be heard as well, perhaps even more than healthy citizens. How are patients supposed to stand up for themselves, at a time when no one else will? Humans are naturally egocentric; during difficult times, every person will speak for him/herself before others.
Currently, in order to vote, people who are hospitalized must fill out a medical emergency/ absentee ballot, which must be picked up by another person at their city clerk’s office within a time frame. This method is not only inconvenient, but also brings up another security issue. While the person must swear the ballot is for the patient’s use, in this day and age, who really knows what could happen with the ballot? By implementing an electronic direct democracy, patients can easily vote from their beds through technology and reduce the possibility of fraud, allowing them to express their opinions.
Additionally, a single representative, or even more, would not be able to speak on behalf of all patients, each certainly from varying backgrounds and suffering from different conditions. With each bill or law, every person has their own opinion and these opinions must be accounted for. For example, in Wauwatosa, Wisconsin, several town hall participants confronted their GOP representative Jim Sensenbrenner about voting for the Trumpcare bill, a legislation that would cripple their lives. Evidently, he did not “represent” for all, rather defending his own viewpoint of the bill. Due to the differing situations and needs of families, it is nearly impossible for a representative to speak for everyone. With a direct democracy, however, all individuals can share their viewpoint on a particular matter.
While I understand that these patients might not put an election or other political matters first and foremost, it is important to at least create the opportunity for their thoughts to be heard. And it is America’s responsibility to make this happen.
