The number one season of 2020 unprecedented to say the least. Amid COVID-19, which is wreaked havoc in the country, states have several resolutions in their resolutions on whether to send their electorate to the polls. Drastic last-minute action was taken in some areas, while others saw the consequences of their resolution later. Now, as they move on to the general election, it is imperative that states take an early resolution with 3 types of threats in mind. The most productive action plan for this pandemic is a combination of mail voting and face-to-face voting.
In February, we saw the Iowa caucus struggle to report the effects due to disorders with an app. That was before the scope of the pandemic was discovered in the United States. Over time, the prospect of sending Americans to the polls has become more disastrous. Ohio canceled its face-to-face vote the night before the election, while Wisconsin held the election as planned and then saw an increase in COVID-19 infections a few days later. Michigan took its top spot just before the onset of widespread infections and saw polling stations running out of staff, especially in the Detroit suburbs, which was attributed to the fact that voting staff reported pneumonia in poor health on Election Day.
The question of whether to vote by mail or on the user remains for general elections, as many public fitness officials, as well as the White House, are predicting the option of a momentary wave of more fatal infections this fall. President Donald Trump Donald Trump Trump suggests that some states “pay nothing” under Trump’s unemployment plan denies that the White House has asked to raise it to Mount Rushmore Trump, the United States facing the U.N.’s fundamental vote on Iran PLUS has expressed its view that the mail vote increases the likelihood of fraud. However, studies show that voter fraud is traditionally low in elections, especially in elections where states already vote by mail. Regardless of the voting method, the possibility of foreign interference remains. We detect that the most productive solution lies in a combination of postal and user voting.
As states make those voting decisions in the coming months, it is to have all the facts, not only about COVID-19, but also on 3 other known threats to elections:
The first is cyber threats.
This is the kind of maximum, non-unusual risk involving election officials and expert groups even before 2016. Cyber risks are connected to virtual devices and media, whether those devices are connected to the Internet. Cyber risks come with piracy of voter registration data, which Russia tried in 2016, and compromising memory cards used to collect votes in user voting. Cyber risks are a major fear in face-to-face and mail-order elections, mail elections particularly reduce cyber risks, as the maximum votes are made outside computers that use paper and pen ballots. Cyber risks can be mitigated by strong encryption and the use of frequently replaced strong passwords, paper lines and voting audits.
They’re internal threats.
These threats come from people who are part of the voting process. This could include a poll worker who makes an honest mistake by accidently discarding or incorrectly counting the number of ballots, a voter who disrupts the process by using a cell phone, and mail-in ballots being accidently discarded. The riskiest insider threats include forged signatures and attacks at mailboxes to steal or compromise ballots. Insider threats have been generally ignored or downplayed by the academic and policy communities, but they are one of the biggest concerns, because people cannot be controlled. Systems and computers can be protected from hacks through best practices and security software such as malware detection, but people are not machines. They make choices and take action. Insider threats are a bigger concern with mail-in elections, as so much of the process is dependent on people and are not done electronically. Mitigations for insider threats include thorough training of poll workers and bipartisan teams of watchers while mail-in ballots are being counted and processed.
The third is physical threats.
Physical hazards arise from the handling or interruption of the appliance. These dangers come from leaving voting apparatus unattended, by not being able to safely access the compartments in the devices and sometimes climatic (such as wind and rain) that destroy ballots by mail. The biggest dangers come with workplace disorders and missing ballots, but they are pale compared to internal and cyber dangers. Physical risk mitigation measures come with pre-voting test devices and preserve the chain of ownership of ballots and voting materials.
There is no evidence that any of these risks compromised the votes in 2016, however, the risk of interference and interference from foreign adversaries, such as the Russian Federation, is, according to a special suggestion by Robert Mueller, Toobin (Bob) MuellerCNN warns that McCabe is in ‘A Dangerous Condition’ with a Trump CNN presenter criticizing Trump at Stone while referring to the assembly on the Clinton-Lynch track at 12:30 p.m. New Hampshire Fallout The testimony of the MORE Congress, ongoing and continues to happen. The most productive action plan for this pandemic is a combination of mail voting and face-to-face voting.
Mail voting would avoid unrest in the Georgia and Wisconsin primary of long queues, while an in-person component still promises access to those who want it, have not won a ballot, are disabled, or simply feel better when voting in person. In addition, disorders with lines, damaged devices, and inadequate number of ballots in Georgia basically occurred in neighborhoods populated by other people of color, now known to suffer the effects of COVID-19 on a disproportionate scale. The key is access. Now more than ever, as the pandemic continues to catch its price, tens of millions of people are unemployed and inequalities in this country are exposed, all Americans will have to vote and have the ability to do so in a moderate way. .
States and localities want to be aware of all kinds of threats and how those threats evolve over time and how others vote. Mitigating all 3 types of threats is entirely possible, and the time has come for states to receive funding for the team they want for safe, loose and fair elections.
Natalie M. Scala, Ph.D., is Associate Professor and Director of Graduate Programs in Supply Chain Management at the Faculty of Business and Economics at Towson University. She is an active member of the Institute of Operational Research and Management Sciences (INFORMS) and is lately president of the institute’s military and security society.
Look at the thread.
The Hill 1625 K Street, NW Suite 900 Washington DC 20006202-628-8500 tel.202-628-8503 fax
The content of this is © 2020 Capitol Hill Publishing Corp., a subsidiary of News Communications, Inc.