Clever satire or base corruption? The remarkable story of voteauction.com
What is the value of democracy? No, that's not a philosophical question. I mean, literally, how much is a single vote worth in the race for President of the United States? The answer, apparently, is approximately $20. And if you want to sell yours, you can do it safely and conveniently through the magic of the Internet.
Voteauction was the brainchild of James Baumgartner, a student at New York's Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. Conceived as the subject of his master's thesis, the project was, quite simply, a Web site where American voters could sell their votes to the highest bidder. It opened to the public in August of this year and closed again later that same month.
The process would have been simple. Voters who register at the Voteauction Web site signify that their vote is for sale. Interested parties then bid for that vote. The winning bid receives the votes, to use as they wish, and the bid is shared out among the voters.
So, lets say that 1000 people in New Hampshire register that their votes are for sale. Voteauction offers the block of votes to auction. Now imagine that a particular New Hampshire company would benefit if, for example, Al Gore was President of the United States. The company bids for the block of votes and acquires them for, perhaps, $20,000. Voteauction takes the $20,000 and shares it among the registered voters, giving each one $20. In return, each voter fills in an absentee ballot, casting his vote in favour of Gore. Voteauction collects the ballots (to ensure that nobody is cheating). And, hey presto, 1000 additional votes for Gore! Everybody's happy!
Baumgartner's argument, by the way, is that this is exactly what happens anyway! Somebody donates $20,000 to a presidential campaign fund and that $20,000 is used in an advertising campaign that convinces 1000 extra New Hampshire residents to vote for Gore. Baumgartner is simply ensuring that the money flows directly to the people instead of lining the coffers of a slick advertising agency. He cuts out the middle man, you might say. Baumgartner conceived of Voteauction as a satire, to expose flaws that already exist in the system.
Baumgartner intended to run auctions in September and October. As things turned out, that never happened. You see, buying and selling votes directly seems to be illegal in the United States. (Buying votes indirectly is legal, acceptable, and expected. The Supreme Court ruled so in 1976.)
Not surprisingly, Baumgartner's scheme upset an awful lot of people. Defenders of democracy were appalled that Americans could make money from their fundamental right to vote.
Making money is the "American Way", Baumgartner pointed out.
The people registering their votes for sale were likely from among those 100 million voters who never cast a vote anyway, Baumgartner pointed out.
The person who raises the most money invariably wins, Baumgartner pointed out. He was simply ensuring that some of that money reached the individual voter.
Nevertheless, "the system" stepped in, in the shape of the New York City Board of Elections. Selling votes is illegal in the state of New York. Voteauction.com was shut down on August 18.
But by that date, the voteauction.com Web site was getting 80,000 visits per day and 200 people had expressed an interest in selling their vote (although no contracts had been signed).
That wasn't the end of the road for Voteauction.
On August 22, Austrian businessman Hans Bernhard bought the voteauction.com Web site from Baumgartner.
But where Baumgartner was conducting a political experiment for his thesis, Bernhard was out to make a profit. Bernhard is a businessman and American votes are a valuable commodity. Furthermore, Bernhard is Austrian and his Internet servers were housed in Bulgaria. This Voteauction was not going to be bound by American legal issues.
By September, according to Bernhard, more than 6,000 Americans signed up to auction their Presidential vote and bids worth over $75,000 had been received. And Voteauction was planning a huge advertising campaign to reach more "customers".
Baumgartner has released a few observations about the operation:
These facts appear to match the profiles of buyers and sellers in other "cash for votes" schemes in American history. This suggests that Internet-based ballot rigging is not a new form of corruption, it's just a new way of facilitating what has always happened.
Voteauction.com has shut down. Last night (October 20), I was unable to reach the site at www.voteauction.com. [Please note: if you are an American citizen and you manage to reach this site, and register to sell your vote, you are probably committing a felony! I do not, of course, endorse this site in any way. This link is provided for educational purposes only.] I don't know how, why, when, or by who it was shut down. I can't find any piece of news relating to the fate of the site.
But Voteauction isn't just a Web site. It's an idea. And you can't shut down ideas. What worked once (and worked very well, it appears) will work again. Not just in America, but in any country with a democratic system.
Political corruption is nothing new. Politicians have been buying votes for as long as democracy has existed. Even politicians legendary for their honesty have done it. In the 1757 race for the Virginia House of Burgesses, George Washington is said to have bought each of the 391 voters in his district a quart and a half of alcohol in exchange for his vote.
But, as in many things, the Internet has made political corruption faster, easier, and safer.
James Baumgartner has created the most fascinating, and possibly the scariest, social experiment in history. I'm watching very carefully to see where it goes next. I think we all should.
Thanks for listening.
© 2000 by David Meadows. All rights reserved. 21 October 2000