Because it would increase turnout!
I'm against digital voting systems for security reasons too, but hypothetically if that problem were solved, the increased turnout would be a good thing.
I'm against digital voting systems for security reasons too, but hypothetically if that problem were solved, the increased turnout would be a good thing.
I'm not for disenfranchisement, but I don't automatically buy into this premise.
If anything, increased turnout has corresponded to increased partisan rhetoric and fear based motivations to vote.
The so-called swing-voters (or swing-participants) are (imho with no proof to back this up) generally the groups that are most likely to be influenced by misleading attack ads, Russian bots, or any other form of social engineering/manipulation.
Participation in elections is good, but only if it's for the right reasons... otherwise it becomes like any other targeted meaningless metric.
Artificial barriers/inconveniences to voting should be removed, but that doesn't mean it should be completely effortless to vote.
Some level of proof-of-effort is not a bad thing, imo.
The groups that have trouble turning out - because they're poor, working two jobs, got no car, got poor public transport because they live in the bad side of town, they speak a minority language - those are the same groups that are likely to find digital stuff inaccessible.
Also, there's another group that seems to have trouble turning out, and finds digital stuff perfectly accessible: young people.
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/states-make-harder...
If polling stations are closed, strategically, and people cannot afford the time/money to vote, or wait to vote, are they truly accessible?
Mail-in is a different situation, so I am not considering this.
Otherwise, I agree with much of your thought.
Define minority language people? Spanish (primary) speakers in the US are more tech savvy than maybe we're giving them credit for.
As an extra method on top of existing options it would probably help, but then you lose a lot of the other suggested benefits around faster counting and etc. which require it to be the only form of voting.
I don't think the two should be equated or conflated.