Online Voting - Would You Vote For It?

I am calling for voting in elections to be placed online (see me actually calling for change here). I first wanted to change this because I have seen first hand what happens when there is too much of an opportunity cost to vote--people just won't vote (as shown in this post).

In talking with others about this idea, I have received quite the array of feedback. Someone commented about how a change like this would affect tradition. Many people commented on how we are using technology in many other areas, so why not use technology in this one? One person mentioned the possibility of eliminating voting and using statistics and random assignment of the population to get us a true representative government (as shown here), others disagreed with that idea. Those who disagreed felt that we didn't want a "fully representative" government. This brought up interesting ideas about what we want when we say we want a voice. Do we actually want one? Or do we just enjoy the idea of it without actually putting it into practice?

The whole matter was further complicated when I heard what Coolidge had said. Did he really just say that being a consumer is more important? Given how much each vote means, and how much each person is capable of buying, was he right? If people want to have a strong country, with strong leaders and not a statistically representative government, then is it more important for us to be consumers?

The history of this issue is fascinating (see more of the history here). Should people be allowed to choose or not? The enlightenment, and especially the age of revolutions centered on this idea. For centuries people have been fighting for it, although their approaches have been very different. Marx wanted to give the people a voice, but so did the leaders of his capitalistic rival nations. The debate rages on today. Novels and movies of dystopian societies force us to think about whether we want the masses to have a voice.

Whether these ideas are promoted through modern media, or debated in historical salons, these ideas about the power of having a voice are intimately connected to communication. In order for these ideas to spread they must be shared. Perhaps it is fitting that voting be put online so that the idea can advance as far as people talking about it has.

UPDATE-

Kevin brought up a good point. Do people not vote because they don't have the time? Or is it because they don't care? Both are definitely involved. As for determining which one is the bigger player we will need to place voting online so that only those who don't care wouldn't vote. Then we can know better the answer to this question.

Kekoa, Thanks for your response. I agree that involving people makes it more personal. Perhaps once people become more vocal about their inability to vote then we can take a harder look at putting it online.

From here I plan to continue to ask people why they didn't vote, and when appropriate I will share my voice to support placing voting online.