Bradley Tusk, a New York City-based political consultant with a history of making high-stakes deals for tech companies, has made it his mission to revolutionize the way Americans vote. For millions of dollars, he's been working on mobile voting systems, convinced that the solution lies in using our smartphones to cast ballots.
Tusk claims that by leveraging the widespread use and trust we place on our phones, mobile voting could significantly boost voter turnout – an estimated 37% increase, according to his own numbers. He believes this would have a profound impact on democracy as a whole, allowing politicians to be more accountable to their constituents. "If primary turnout is 37 percent instead of 9 percent, the underlying political incentives for an elected official to change—it pushes them to the middle, and they're not rewarded for screaming and pointing fingers," he argues.
To achieve this goal, Tusk has developed a cryptography-based protocol called VoteSecure, which would allow voters to securely cast their votes on iPhones and Androids. The protocol is open-source and available on GitHub for anyone to test, improve upon, and build out. Two major election technology vendors have already expressed interest in using it.
Tusk's plan involves running legislation in smaller cities like school boards or councils, with the aim of proving its feasibility before scaling up to larger elections. However, his critics – including security experts Ron Rivest and David Jefferson – argue that mobile voting is far from ready for prime time due to significant safety risks and lack of verification mechanisms.
They caution that introducing a new technology without robust safeguards would be like putting cordite into the electoral process, inviting suspicion and distrust among voters. Even if a mobile system was 100% secure, it would still be vulnerable to allegations of hacking or interference.
Tusk's dismissive attitude towards his critics suggests he believes they're too focused on the technical details and aren't considering the bigger picture. "They've never seen what we've built," he says, dismissing their concerns about a peer-reviewed paper being necessary before deploying the system.
Ultimately, Tusk's mobile voting plan is driven by a desire to address the low voter turnout in America – which has led to distrust in the electoral process and erosion of trust in institutions. By making voting more accessible and convenient, he hopes to restore that trust and encourage people to participate more actively in democracy.
Tusk claims that by leveraging the widespread use and trust we place on our phones, mobile voting could significantly boost voter turnout – an estimated 37% increase, according to his own numbers. He believes this would have a profound impact on democracy as a whole, allowing politicians to be more accountable to their constituents. "If primary turnout is 37 percent instead of 9 percent, the underlying political incentives for an elected official to change—it pushes them to the middle, and they're not rewarded for screaming and pointing fingers," he argues.
To achieve this goal, Tusk has developed a cryptography-based protocol called VoteSecure, which would allow voters to securely cast their votes on iPhones and Androids. The protocol is open-source and available on GitHub for anyone to test, improve upon, and build out. Two major election technology vendors have already expressed interest in using it.
Tusk's plan involves running legislation in smaller cities like school boards or councils, with the aim of proving its feasibility before scaling up to larger elections. However, his critics – including security experts Ron Rivest and David Jefferson – argue that mobile voting is far from ready for prime time due to significant safety risks and lack of verification mechanisms.
They caution that introducing a new technology without robust safeguards would be like putting cordite into the electoral process, inviting suspicion and distrust among voters. Even if a mobile system was 100% secure, it would still be vulnerable to allegations of hacking or interference.
Tusk's dismissive attitude towards his critics suggests he believes they're too focused on the technical details and aren't considering the bigger picture. "They've never seen what we've built," he says, dismissing their concerns about a peer-reviewed paper being necessary before deploying the system.
Ultimately, Tusk's mobile voting plan is driven by a desire to address the low voter turnout in America – which has led to distrust in the electoral process and erosion of trust in institutions. By making voting more accessible and convenient, he hopes to restore that trust and encourage people to participate more actively in democracy.
! I mean, who wouldn't want to vote on their phone? It's soooo 2023! Bradley Tusk is a genius for trying to make it happen 
. I think he's onto something big here - imagine if we could get more people to vote! The numbers are insane: 37% increase in turnout? That would be EVERYTHING 
. And VoteSecure seems legit too, especially if it's open-source and stuff 
.
... Ron Rivest and David Jefferson saying it's not ready for prime time? Meh, I think they're just being overly cautious 
. Tusk says his critics aren't thinking about the bigger picture 
, but like, isn't that what we need more of in politics? Someone willing to take a chance on innovation? 
... we could really use a shake-up in our electoral system 
. And if it works, Tusk's gonna be a hero 
!
... but at the same time, I'm worried about those safety risks 
... like, what if hackers try to mess with our votes? 
... and don't even get me started on the verification mechanisms 
... how would we know for sure that our vote is being counted correctly?
... and isn't it kinda weird that two major election tech vendors are already interested in using his system without even doing their own testing? 
... it's like, we need experts to help us make sure our voting systems are safe and secure, not just tech-savvy folks who think they know better 
. What if someone hacks into it or the system is compromised in some way? I get that Tusk thinks he's got a solution but let's not rush into this without more testing and verification. We can't afford to have our democracy compromised by tech issues 
, but then again im not a security expert and i totally trust my iPhone to keep me safe online 
. I mean, 37% increase in voter turnout sounds amazing, maybe its just what america needs to get people more engaged 
. But seriously, mobile voting sounds like a game-changer – imagine being able to cast your ballot while you're waiting in line at Starbucks 
️. I mean, 37% increase in voter turnout? That's like finding a 20-dollar bill on the sidewalk! 
Tusk's got some serious cred with his cryptography-based protocol, and if it's open-source, that means anyone can test it out... unless they're a super villain trying to hack into the system 
. Let's hope he can prove it out in those smaller cities first before scaling up to the big leagues – no need for a mobile voting meltdown just yet 
!
It'd be so much easier for people to get involved and make their voices heard. Plus, it'd be awesome to have the numbers go up like that – 37% is crazy! 
)
)