You've probably seen the headlines or the frantic Threads posts. After the 2024 U.S. presidential election, a theory started bubbling up in the darker corners of the internet: that Starlink used in election cycles was the secret weapon for rigging the vote. People were pointing at Elon Musk’s support for Donald Trump and claiming the satellites were "uploading" votes from swing states or "switching" tallies in mid-air. It sounds like a high-stakes techno-thriller. Honestly, though? The reality of how this technology actually touched the voting process is a lot more boring—and a lot more practical—than the sci-fi theories suggest.
Starlink did show up in the 2024 race. But it wasn't there to count ballots. It was there because some rural polling places literally couldn't get a decent Wi-Fi signal any other way.
The "Rigging" Myth vs. The Air-Gap Reality
Here is the thing you have to understand about American voting: the machines aren't on the internet. Period. Election officials from North Carolina to Pennsylvania have spent the last year repeating a very specific term: air-gapping.
An air-gap means the computer that tallies your vote is physically isolated from the outside world. It has no Wi-Fi card, no ethernet port connected to a router, and certainly no hidden link to a satellite constellation. In Georgia, for instance, state law is incredibly strict about this. Mike Hassinger, a spokesperson for the Georgia Secretary of State, famously called the Starlink conspiracy theories "utter garbage." He explained that memory cards containing vote data are moved by hand, in locked bags with tamper-evident seals. They don't fly through the air; they ride in the back of a car with a paper trail.
👉 See also: Texas Internet Outage: Why Your Connection is Down and When It's Coming Back
So, if Starlink wasn't "uploading" votes, what was it doing? It was mostly handling the front-of-house paperwork. In Tulare County, California, and certain rural parts of Arizona (like Coconino and Apache counties), officials used Starlink to sync electronic poll books. These are the digital tablets workers use to check your ID and make sure you’re at the right precinct. They need internet to make sure someone doesn't try to vote twice in two different locations, but that system is entirely separate from the machines where you actually cast your ballot.
Why Australia is Taking a Different Path in 2025
While the U.S. keeps its distance, other countries are looking at Starlink with a more open (if cautious) eye. The Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) made waves in early 2025 by announcing a $1.38 million contract with Telstra that includes Starlink as a backup.
Australia's geography is famously brutal for traditional telecom. When you're running a federal election in the middle of the Outback, a 4G signal is a luxury you don't always have. The AEC is planning to use Starlink to transmit encrypted election data specifically as a "business continuity" measure. If the primary fixed-line internet goes down, the satellites kick in. It’s a pragmatic move, but it has sparked a massive debate about sovereignty. Sarah Hanson-Young, a Greens senator, basically asked the million-dollar question: what happens if a single billionaire decides to "switch off" the network for a country during an election?
✨ Don't miss: Why the Star Trek Flip Phone Still Defines How We Think About Gadgets
Global Use Cases and the Trust Gap
We are seeing a massive split in how Starlink used in election infrastructure is perceived globally.
- The United States: High skepticism and strict air-gaps. The focus is on preventing even the appearance of connectivity to avoid feeding the conspiracy beast.
- Brazil: A complicated relationship. Starlink is essential in the Amazon, where it's used in over 90% of municipalities. However, the 2024-2025 legal battles between the Brazilian Supreme Court and Elon Musk’s other company, X, created a tense environment for using his tech in official government capacities.
- The Philippines and Indonesia: These island nations have been eyeing LEO (Low-Earth Orbit) satellites to speed up the reporting of results from remote provinces, where physical ballot transport can take days or even weeks.
One major concern that experts like David Becker, founder of the Center for Election Innovation and Research, point out is that the mere presence of a Starlink dish at a polling site can be used as "evidence" by bad actors. If a voter sees a SpaceX logo outside a building, and then their favorite candidate loses, it's very easy to weave a narrative. This "perception risk" is often more dangerous than the actual technical risk.
Facts Matter: What the Satellites Can and Can't Do
To be crystal clear, Starlink is an ISP. It provides a pipe for data. While it's technically possible for an ISP to see that data is moving, the encryption used by modern election boards is incredibly robust. Most results are encrypted from the source to the destination.
🔗 Read more: Meta Quest 3 Bundle: What Most People Get Wrong
Moreover, the "exploding satellite" theory that made the rounds on social media—claiming SpaceX was destroying satellites to hide evidence of hacking—is just standard orbital maintenance. Satellites are de-orbited and burned up in the atmosphere all the time to prevent space debris. It’s not a cover-up; it’s just how the hardware works.
Actionable Insights for the Future
If you’re worried about the integrity of an election involving satellite tech, here is what you can actually look for to verify things for yourself:
- Check the "Paper Trail" laws: Does your state require a physical paper record of every vote? If they do, any digital "switching" would be caught immediately during a manual audit.
- Look for Post-Election Audits: Reliable jurisdictions perform "risk-limiting audits" where they randomly sample paper ballots to ensure they match the electronic totals.
- Distinguish Between Poll Books and Tabulators: If a poll worker says they have Starlink, ask if it's for checking in voters or for the machines. In the U.S., the answer is almost always the former.
- Monitor Vendor Transparency: Watch for contracts like the one in Australia. Transparency about how the data is encrypted (and who owns the "kill switch") is the only way to maintain public trust.
The intersection of private satellite constellations and public democracy is only going to get messier. As we move into the 2026 midterms and beyond, the challenge won't just be securing the data—it will be convincing a skeptical public that the signal from the sky isn't being tampered with.