Ireland’s €50 Million Voting Machine Disaster: The Costly Tech We’re Too Scared to Use

Ireland invested millions in electronic voting machines to bring elections into the digital age, but those machines now sit in storage, unused and unloved. Why did we buy technology we refuse to use, and what risks make paper ballots still our go-to? Discover the pitfalls of digital voting, the hidden risks of paper ballots, and why Ireland’s costly tech venture turned into an electoral ghost story.

Ireland made a bold leap into the future in the early 2000s, investing around €50 million in electronic voting machines (EVMs) to modernize its election process. Yet, those machines still sit in storage, unused and gathering dust. Despite the allure of a faster, digital voting system, Ireland ultimately opted to stick with its traditional paper ballots—a decision driven by cybersecurity concerns, trust, and practicality. But how does paper voting actually compare to electronic voting in terms of security? After all, no system is foolproof. Let’s break down the risks on both sides to better understand this modern dilemma.

Why Ireland Invested in Electronic Voting Machines

The idea of EVMs was simple: speed up vote counting, minimize human error, and eliminate spoiled ballots. Imagine Election Day becoming as efficient as scanning groceries at the checkout! These machines were meant to take the guesswork out of voting, offering a sleek, touch-screen process that would instantly tally results. But as the machines were tested, cybersecurity experts, government officials, and the public began to voice concerns about whether these systems were ready for the real world (TheJournal.ie).

In the end, Ireland decided to hold off on using EVMs. The reasons ranged from concerns about cyber threats to a lack of transparency. Meanwhile, paper ballots continued their long run as the trusted standby. But let’s dive into the specific pros and cons of each method to see why this decision has stood the test of time.

The Risks of Electronic Voting Machines: Cybersecurity Meets Democracy

1. Cyberattacks and Hacking Potential

One of the main criticisms of electronic voting machines is their vulnerability to hacking. Imagine a hacker finding a way to manipulate the machines remotely or altering results from within the system itself. EVMs need regular security updates to stay protected, but given the constantly evolving cyber threat landscape, keeping these machines secure can be a monumental task. (NIST)

2. Software Glitches and Bugs

Technology is only as good as its software, and EVMs are no exception. A glitch in the system could lead to vote miscounts, errors in tallying, or even data loss. Studies have shown that the software behind some EVMs is vulnerable to issues that could impact vote accuracy. (Tufts Now)

3. Physical Tampering Risks

Despite their digital nature, EVMs are still physical devices that could be tampered with if improperly secured. This risk could arise from someone gaining access to an EVM’s hardware and modifying it undetected. Safeguarding thousands of machines would require resources, oversight, and stringent security measures that add up quickly. (Brennan Center)

4. Transparency and the Lack of a Paper Trail

One of the most significant criticisms of EVMs is the lack of a voter-verifiable paper audit trail. With paper ballots, recounts and verifications are simple; each ballot can be checked by hand. But without a paper trail, EVM results are harder to verify if a recount is needed, which could undermine public trust. (Brennan Center)

Risks of Paper Ballots: Old-School Doesn’t Mean Perfect

Although Ireland ultimately chose to stick with paper ballots, this choice doesn’t come without its own set of risks and vulnerabilities. Let’s take a look at the potential downsides of sticking with paper.

1. Human Error in Counting

Paper ballots are counted by hand or using scanners, both of which rely on humans who can make mistakes. In Ireland, counting teams are carefully trained, but the possibility of human error or oversight is always present. Miscounts, accidental skips, or other issues could theoretically impact results.

2. Fraud and Ballot Tampering

Paper ballots are also vulnerable to tampering. While they may not face cyber threats, traditional fraud can still occur. Ballots could be tampered with or swapped, although stringent security and oversight measures help to mitigate these risks. Ballot tampering is more challenging on a large scale but remains a potential vulnerability.

3. Storage and Chain of Custody

Paper ballots need to be securely stored before and after Election Day to maintain integrity. Ensuring the security of thousands of ballots across polling stations and storage facilities is no small task. The “chain of custody”—the process of tracking the movement and handling of ballots—must be closely managed to prevent any potential breaches.

4. Time-Consuming Counting Process

Counting paper ballots is inherently slower than using electronic machines. It requires careful attention, multiple stages of review, and is a labor-intensive process. In high-turnout elections, this could mean delays in results, which sometimes raises concerns about the timeliness of the democratic process.

Comparing the Two Systems: Security vs. Speed, Transparency vs. Convenience

When it comes to election security, EVMs and paper ballots each have strengths and weaknesses. Let’s take a look at how they measure up.

Why Ireland Opted to Stick with Paper

In the end, Ireland decided that the risks associated with EVMs—cyberattacks, lack of transparency, and physical security challenges—were too great to justify the switch. Paper ballots may have their drawbacks, but they offer a level of transparency and security that the public trusts. When voters can see and feel their ballot, and when they know a recount is a simple matter of counting again, confidence in the process remains high. (TheJournal.ie)

This decision reflects a broader trend of caution in election technology adoption. While some countries, like the Netherlands, opted to fully switch back to paper after trying EVMs, others, like Estonia, have embraced digital voting. The debate is ongoing, and there’s no one-size-fits-all solution. But Ireland’s decision reflects a desire to maintain public trust and secure a voting system free from the potential cyber risks associated with EVMs.

The Future of Voting in Ireland: A Hybrid Approach?

As technology advances, some advocates suggest that a hybrid approach could offer the best of both worlds. Electronic voting machines with voter-verified paper audit trails (VVPATs) could combine the convenience of digital voting with the transparency and accountability of paper. This approach would allow voters to confirm their selections on paper, which would be securely stored in case a recount or audit is needed. For now, though, Ireland is sticking with its trusty paper ballots, keeping the machines in storage until a solution that meets the country’s security and transparency needs becomes viable.

The story of Ireland’s electronic voting machines is one of both ambition and caution. The machines represent a forward-looking approach to voting, but they also serve as a reminder that not all technological solutions are foolproof. As cybersecurity threats evolve and public trust remains crucial, Ireland’s decision to pause on EVMs shows that, sometimes, old-fashioned methods have their own enduring strengths.