Officials dismantle a ballot sorter at a demonstration of early voting and vote counting held by the Central Election Commission of the National Election Commission in Gwacheon, Gyeonggi Province, to address allegations of fraud in the April 15 general election. 2020.5.28
Contents

1. The Shadow of Elections Targeted by Trump's 'OBBBA Act'

2. Why Wasn't Election Manipulation Punished?

3. 'Unverifiable Technology' is the Enemy of Democracy

4. Who is Responsible for Election Monitoring?

5. South Korea, Redesign the Electoral System

The distrust surrounding Dominion electronic voting machines, which was at the center of controversy during the 2020 US presidential election, has ultimately led to institutional reform. Through the 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA)' signed by former President Trump on July 4th, the dependence on electronic vote counting has been reduced, and manual counting has been established as the principle.

While electronic vote counting machines have the advantage of being fast and efficient, criticism has been consistently raised that they have a 'black box structure' where their internal workings cannot be monitored or verified externally. In particular, the reason why investigations or legal responsibilities for vote counting manipulation allegations have been inconclusive is attributed to the institutional vulnerability of "a structure where technology cannot be monitored."

"Verifiability is More Important Than Speed"

While the OBBBA does not completely prohibit electronic vote counting, it includes key principles such as △ mandatory manual creation of physical ballots △ manual count results as the final counting standard △ preservation of audit logs for electronic vote counting machines and allowing external access.

The Trump camp emphasized, "The existing system, which assumes the perfection of electronic vote counting machines, cannot guarantee trust," and "It is not the accuracy of technology, but the possibility of monitoring and transparency that is key to protecting democracy."

German Constitutional Court: "Electronic Voting is Unconstitutional"... Trend Towards Manual Counting Spreads

Legal judgments on electronic vote counting are not limited to the United States. In 2009, the German Federal Constitutional Court ruled that "electronic vote counting, which voters cannot directly verify, violates the principles of publicness and transparency required by the constitution."

The OBBBA follows a similar trend. It posits that the standard for democracy should not simply be whether technology is adopted, but whether that technology can be subject to monitoring and auditing.

Why are Electronic Voting Machines a 'Black Box'?

The controversy surrounding the Dominion system in the United States stemmed from issues such as △ discrepancies between early voting ballots and physical storage △ instances of malfunction or numerical discrepancies overlooked without correction △ unclear timing of vote counting software updates △ possibility of external communication connections and insufficient security settings.

The conservative election monitoring group, Election Integrity Partnership, pointed out, "Even if an electronic vote counting machine makes an error, if we cannot know it, it is not just a tool but a black box." The organization stressed, "What is more important than the perfection of technology is whether citizens can monitor it."

Korea Still at the Stage of 'Please Trust the Technology'

South Korea has also adopted and used electronic vote counting machines for a long time, but criticism regarding the transparency and monitorability of the system is even more severe.

△ The vote counting algorithm is not disclosed

△ Controversy over the inclusion of wireless communication modules

△ Refusal of technical verification by the National Election Commission

△ Observers cannot effectively verify the vote counting process

The National Election Commission repeatedly states, "There are no machine errors," but no specific verification has been conducted. Compared to the US, which is overhauling its systems through the OBBBA, criticism arises that Korea remains at the level of "administration demanding trust."

Technology for Democracy, or Democracy for Technological Power?

The direction shown by the OBBBA is clear. Technology is a means to democracy, not an end in itself.

And that technology must be monitorable and verifiable by citizens.

A return to manual vote counting is not merely a 'regression,' but may be the only way to protect democracy.

Even if the speed decreases, if a procedure is more suitable for ensuring fairness, that is the democratic choice.

 "What is more important than technological perfection is monitorability."
— Lessons from the OBBBA

Trump's Legal Action: Key Provisions of OBBBA (July 2025)

Manual counting priority
Mandatory manual ballots
Preservation of electronic vote counter audit logs
External audit and citizen access permitted

#OBBBA #ElectronicVotingMachine #ManualCountingPrinciple #ElectionMonitoring

#TechnologyAndDemocracy #TransparentElections #DominionControversy #HanmiIlbo

#ElectionReform #TruthOfTheBallotBox