Note: my comment on this point.
The author claims on the fifth page of the research paper, that the open vote had a negative impact unlike the secret vote, which had positive results, what the author said contradicts logic because the open vote is transparency, truth and clarity, the secret vote is prone to corruption because it is secret and hidden, no one knows about it except the sect that counts the counting of votes, so the fate of the government and the outcome of the electoral process is in the hands of those sect may have taken the bribe. But an open vote is a public and clear performance in front of everyone and therefore it is less likely to receive a bribe or to fall under threat, the issue is very clear and the difference is very clear as the difference between darkness and light, secret voting is closer to darkness and open voting is closer to light.
ISSN 1936-5349 (print)ISSN 1936-
5357 (online)
HARVARD
JOHN M. OLIN CENTER FOR LAW,
ECONOMICS, AND BUSINESS
OPEN-SECRET VOTING
Adrian Vermeule
Discussion Paper No. 674
07/2010
Harvard Law SchoolCambridge,
MA 02138
Page number 5
open-Secret Voting
This rationale yields a clear
implication about sequencing: the
secret vote mustfollow the open
vote.
Secresy [sic] ought only to
be admitted as a kind of
appeal [from the open
vote] . .. . To take the oppo-
site direction – that is to say,
to proceed from secret vot-
ing toopen voting – would
be wrong. The natural
order is to pass from the
false, orwhat is suspected
to be false, to the true. The
real wish once ascertained,
whatgood purpose would
be served by taking another
vote, which would not be
thereal vote if it differed
from the former? (PT 148)
To illustrate the falsif-
ication of preferences or judgments
that an appeal to thesecret ballot
may cure, Bentham gives an ext-
ended example from Polish his-
tory. Amulti-member Council,
“intimidated or corrupted
, was only
the instrument of the will of
Russia” (PT 147) . on two separate
occasions the Council voted first
openly and then by secret ballot on
whether to raise an army, under lea-
dership independent of the Council,
to protect Polish territory. on the
first occasion the proposal was defe-
ated by a large margin on an open
vote, and lost only narrowly by
secret ballot. on the second occa-
sion, “the open vote gave for the
independence of the commission
114, against it 148; but the secret
vote turned the majority on the
other side – for the independence
140, against it 122” (PT148) . on
Bentham’s interpretation, threats or
bribes by Russia or Russian sympa-
thizers caused the Council mem-
bers to vote falsely by open ballot
but to vote their true (i.e.natio-
nalist) preferences under the secret
ballot.
II. Why Bentham’s Rationale Fails
A Bentham-like procedure
of dual voting under alternating tra-
nsparency regimesis useful under
certain conditions, or so I will argue
in the next section. Unfortunately, I
believe that we cannot defend that
procedure on the grounds Bentham
offers. There aretwo main prob-
lems: Bentham’s diagnosis is tend-
entious, and his prescription does
notfollow from that diagnosis.
As to the first problem, it is
unclear that Bentham’s initial diag-
nosis of preferenceor judgment fal-
sification is correct. To be sure,
Bentham’s Polish example captures
areal phenomenon. But the cor-
rect interpretation of the pheno-
menon is hardly selfevident.
5
Note: my comment on this point.
The author claims on the fifth page of the research paper, that the open vote had a negative impact unlike the secret vote, which had positive results, what the author said contradicts logic because the open vote is transparency, truth and clarity, the secret vote is prone to corruption because it is secret and hidden, no one knows about it except the sect that counts the counting of votes, so the fate of the government and the outcome of the electoral process is in the hands of those sect may have taken the bribe. But an open vote is a public and clear performance in front of everyone and therefore it is less likely to receive a bribe or to fall under threat, the issue is very clear and the difference is very clear as the difference between darkness and light, secret voting is closer to darkness and open voting is closer to light.