the Credibility of our electoral system is under threat. We are public servants working in the municipal authorities and want to draw attention to the shortcomings we see in the Swedish valsedelssystemet. Valsedelsystemet has long been debated within the electoral administration and has now also attracted the attention of the professors of political science Jörgen Elklit and Olof Petersson the debate article in dagens nyheter on January 25, 2019. Furthermore, it is clear of regeringsförklaringen on 21 January this year, the valsystemets resistance against manipulation must be improved and, in our view, this means a change in the valsedelsystem.
in Addition to all the trees that will be ballots, leading the system to a huge logistical management, with extensive transport and warehousing.
We valkanslier that set us behind this op-ed is responsible to carry out elections for more than 25 percent of the voters in Sweden. Many of us have a long and solid experience of working with options and looks with concern at how the voters ‘ confidence in the Swedish electoral system is compromised, then it has major flaws as well as experienced easy to comprehend and complicated:
1 It is for voters, an incomprehensible system. A large part of the appeals submitted to the Valprövningsnämnden with the occasion of the general elections in the autumn is all about the voters believe that the ballots for the party they wanted to vote on the not been on the röstmottagningsstället. Other types of misunderstandings have also arisen.
Many argue, moreover, that it had been a conscious action by the röstmottagarna and appeal on the grounds of ”fraud”. In most instances, the voters do not understand the difference in the namnvalsedlar and partivalsedlar. Partivalsedlarna has been in valsedelställen but parties have not always been in place and left their namnvalsedlar.
2 Unclear rules for the laying of the ballots. According to the electoral law shall the parties be responsible for the distribution of namnvalsedlarna to the polling stations and premises for förtidsröstning. There are several true who made the decision that, in addition to the partivalsedlar as the electoral law requires municipalities to provide, even offered to distribute and make available to all authorised parties ‘ ballots.
the Parties are allowed to come during certain times and submit namnvalsedlarna and the electoral administration takes on the responsibility to distribute them to the röstmottagningsställena. This is handled differently in the municipalities, and it becomes unclear what is what, and that, for large municipalities is impossible to take on such responsibility. Such a procedure requires considerable resources and it complicates the municipalities ‘ handling significantly, which also increases the risk of error. The parties that do not receive their ballot papers out by electoral administration perceive the system as unfair and undemocratic.
3 Foreclosure makes it harder to keep an eye. Those who work in the polling stations, röstmottagarna, has the obligation to monitor and keep order on the ballots, while voters do not feel monitored. The new legislation means that valsedelställen shall be screened to increase would.
at the same time as the protection of the individual selector to increase, then the prospects for röstmottagarna to carry out their mission more difficult. Foreclosure means that it will not be as easy for röstmottagarna to have the overview of the scheme or to discover if the ballots are exhausted. All this will mean more and longer queues.
4 Resurskärvande keep order among the ballot papers. the Ballots removed, the ballots are moved around, the ballots for one party are added and covers for another party, the ballot with the ticked name in the valsedelställen, ballots for a party mixed in among a different party ballots. These are common events in a röstmottagningsställe.
in Addition to the required large resources to keep order in the valsedelställen means only the possibility that it is easy to sabotage in valsedelställen, that some voters suspect ”fraud”, which in turn leads to loss of confidence in the entire electoral system.
5 New rules will not protect would. the Voters own their valhemlighet and to protect the voters do get their voice behind the screen. This applies even if the valsedelställen to be shielded. The risk is instead that the voters believe would be protected in and by the voter shall take the ballot paper in peace.
Taking the voters ballots for only one party will valhemlighet yet revealed when the voters stand in the queue to enter the polling station and get their ballot envelopes. The new legislation may mean that the voters believe that election takes place at the valsedelstället. Avskärmningarna have not solved the actual problem, but they will create new problems.
6 Unreasonably large impact on the environment with hundreds of millions of ballots. the electoral administration pressed at the last election 673 million ballots. The system is based on voters to take several ballots, actually one of each available in the valsedelstället. It would be better to review the system and thereby pushing fewer ballot papers and at the same time protect would.
We believe that there is an environmental aspect that cannot be ignored. In addition to all the trees that will be ballots, leading the system to a huge logistical management, with extensive transport and warehousing. This will all ballots shall be placed in a ballot envelope, one for each election and the voters. It is costly to produce and may be considered as an unnecessary burden on the environment, then the ballot envelopes would not need to be necessary with a different valsedelssystem. This huge use of paper flies in the face of all miljöpolicys in our country.
7 , Extraordinary personvalssystem. We have a complicated personvalssystem, where it is difficult for voters to understand the difference on a ballot where the party has notified its candidates, and a ballot where the party does not have the ”locked in” to their list. Voters also need to know if the parties notified the candidates have agreed to stand as a candidate, which the candidate can make up to two days before the day of the election. For most within the electoral administration and for voters, this is difficult to explain and are often perceived as incomprehensible. The difficulties leading to the vote is rejected unnecessarily and may further reduce the confidence in the Swedish electoral system.
There are internationally many examples in which only one ballot paper is used. Voters get a ballot, go behind the screen and perform their valhandling. These valsedelssystem requires significantly fewer parts and less material. And it will be much easier for voters to make their choice and for röstmottagaren to carry out its mission. By extension, implies it would be considerably easier to secure.
We have an extremely complex system with many built-in risks and shortcomings, which also causes an unnecessarily extensive logistics, and large differences in the municipalities ‘ local management. The Swedish valsedelssystemet is also difficult to explain and understand.
Overall, the risk of our current valsedelssystem lead to a decreasing confidence in our democracy, both voters and in our world. Moreover, our current system is a complex and comprehensive administration and a significant environmental impact, as election after election has increased. Our valsedelssystem is outdated and needs to be modernised.
