Automation of
Elections
Ano ba talaga ito?
Agenda
Why we need to automate
elections
The manual election system
Alternative solutions
Why do we need to automate elections
Process is too long. It takes 25-40
days before national positions can be
proclaimed.
To eliminate wholesale cheating, incl.
DAGDAG-BAWAS
The Manual Election
System
Basic Election-related Data
83 Provinces
200 Congressional Districts
1,600 Cities and Municipalities
40,000 Barangays
250,000 precincts
40M+ voters
Elective Positions
National Positions
President
Vice-President
24 Senators (12 elected/3 years)
Party List
Local Positions
Congressman
Governor
Vice-Governor
Provincial Board
Mayor
Vice-Mayor
Councilors
Definition of Terms
BEI - Board of Election Inspectors (250,000)
CMBOC - City/Municipal Board of Canvassers (1,600)
PBOC - Provincial/District Board of Canvassers (200)
NBOC - National Board of Canvassers (Comelec/Congress)
ER - Election Returns
SOV - Statement of Votes
COC - Certificate of Canvass
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
10 days 20 30 40
CITY / MUNICIPAL, PROVINCIAL AND NATIONAL CANVASSING (25
– 40 DAYS)PRECINCTTALLYING
5-12 hrs
Given the above time line, it becomes obvious, which phase of the
election process should be automated.
So now, we want to apply technology in our elections ...
1. to speed up the process and to be able
to proclaim the winning candidates
earlier;
2. to minimize, if not eliminate, cheating;
Ahh … but we have added a third ...
3. to make the election process
transparent to the public
Election processes that can be
automated
Voters list
Voting
Tallying
Canvassing
Reporting
In automating elections, two issues immediately come to mind:
How do we secure the system?
Which technology should we adopt?
Two ways of securing a system
Fence it in very tightly so no
intrusion can ever occur
(security by obscurity).
However, implementor must
prove to all interested
parties that system is indeed
extremely secure.
Not easy to convince all;
there will always be
doubters.
Secure the system, but make a copy of all software and data (read only) accessible to all interested parties and to the public.
Proof of veracity and accuracy
of results becomes automatic.
We favor this because
it is the transparent
alternative.
Features of an ideal automated
election system for the Philippines
Automates canvassing
Tight security measures
All steps transparent to the voting public
Software used available to the public
Digital counts and results, in all steps, available to the public (any one can do his own tabulation)
Results quickly verifiable all the way to original source documents
Cost-effective (P4-8 billion, depending on the solution)
Minimum or no training required for >40M voters
Minimum or no storage concerns after each election process
Not dependent on the trustworthiness of the implementors
Alternative election automation
technologies
1. DRE (Direct Recording Electronic) System – “touch-screen”
2. OES (Open Election System) - manual voting & counting, and automated canvassing
PC-based data encoding of ERs
3. OES-OMR (Optical Mark Recognition) System – pre-printed ballots, read by OMRs at the voting centers (schools)
Option 1: Direct Recording
Electronic System1. 2-4 Units per
precinct
2. Touch screen, mouse, or keyboard
3. Voter’s choices printed for audit purposes
4. At end of voting (3:00pm), ER is printed
5. ER transmitted to CMBOC and NBOC
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
55
4
3
7 8
6
9
Direct Recording Electronic System
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
Not transparent. Voters will distrust vote-counting that they did not see (a big issue in the US)
Cost prohibitive, estimated at P15-20B (some est. >P30B)
Logistics can be a nightmare (750K units to 250K locations)
Thousands of technical people req’d (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
PROs CONs
But … wasn’t the automation of the last ARMM election successful?
From Dr. Aviel Rubin’s book, “Brave New Ballot”
“Past performance is no guarantee of
future results, especially when it comes to
security.”
“Success on a small scale does not
guarantee success once the scale of a
project is enlarged.”
Besides (and very few people realize this), …
The ARMM election is a non-event!
These statements are quite disturbing
"DRE was well-received but was seen by
some as too expensive. OMR was cheaper
but it still requires human intervention."
"DRE is suited for areas where there is
good infrastructure including electricity and
connectivity. OMR is more suitable for rural
areas where infrastructure isn't that
reliable."
TransparentElections.org
TransparentElections.org
We are NOT vendors of election systems
We are a team of similarly-minded IT
practitioners who have implemented
election-related projects in the past, using ICT
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
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
8. NBOC accesses DB for final results
CITY/MUNICIPAL
BOARD OF CANVASSERS
PROVINCIAL
BOARD OF CANVASSERS
NATIONAL
BOARD OF CANVASSERS
DOMINANT
PARTY
DOMINANT
OPPOSITION
CITIZENS
ARM
MEDIA &
OTHERS
DOMINANT
PARTY
DOMINANT
OPPOSITION
CITIZENS
ARM
MEDIA &
OTHERS
VOTING CENTER
ENCODING CENTERPRECINCTS
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
Manual tallying is tedious
ERs will have to be encoded
Looking for tens of thousands of encoders is a challenge
Since it’s still manual tallying, public may think that election is not automated
PROs CONs
Open Election System OMR
1. Votes cast & tallied as in manual voting
2. ERs brought to school encoding (OMR) center
3. ERs validated then posted on the web w/ BEIs digital signature
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
8. NBOC accesses DB for final results
CITY/MUNICIPAL
BOARD OF CANVASSERS
PROVINCIAL
BOARD OF CANVASSERS
NATIONAL
BOARD OF CANVASSERS
DOMINANT
PARTY
DOMINANT
OPPOSITION
CITIZENS
ARM
MEDIA &
OTHERS
DOMINANT
PARTY
DOMINANT
OPPOSITION
CITIZENS
ARM
MEDIA &
OTHERS
VOTING CENTER
OMR
PRECINCTS
Optical Mark Recognition
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)
Internal tallying. Voters won’t 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 over-marked ballots
Easier to add to under-marked ballots
Need to store specialized OMR machines
PROs CONs
What does the OES Alternative need?
1. COMELEC’s approval of concept
2. COMELEC’s bidding out the development
of the system and computer programs
3. Making system/programs available to IT
community and to public
4. Adopting good contributions
5. Making the system available to all
interested parties, free of charge
Once the OES system has been developed, the COMELEC would need to …
Bid out the PCs, servers, (the inexpensive
OMRs), and the communications
requirements
Bid out the management and
implementation of the project
All 3 systems …
will speed up the process, in varying
degrees
will minimize cheating, in varying degrees
but only OES will be transparent to the voting public
Now, you can make an
informed choice of
which solution to
support.
Should you believe (passionately, we hope), that OES is the right election system for the Philippines, then please …
… join us in convincing the COMELEC, its
Advisory Council, and Congress to adopt
OES; and
… sign up to be a member of
TransparentElections.org
If we can’t see it,
we can’t trust it!
TransparentElections.org
Thank you!