THE sixth phase of India’s protracted general election took place on April 24th. Voters trooped to polling stations in 117 constituencies in various states including Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra, Kashmir, Uttar Pradesh and Bihar. As with other rounds there was much to cheer: first-time voters, enthusiasm in cities and villages, determination to take part despite the heat. Momentum seems to be with the opposition Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) led by Narendra Modi. A late surge of support for the BJP is reported even in places—West Bengal, Odisha—where the party has traditionally not done well. If true, its prospects of forming the next government look stronger by the day. Three more rounds of voting are due, the last on May 12th, before results are published on May 16th. It constitutes a marathon election. The voting period is eight days longer than last time, in 2009. Count in all the official campaigning and India will have been busy with its general election for a whopping 72 days. The local devotion to voting looks more remarkable with each successive election. As the population grows, and so the electorate, the process will presumably get more protracted yet. The next national poll is likely in 2019, by when more days of voting, and further rounds, may be needed to accommodate many more tens of millions of new voters.

Are long elections a problem? They can certainly grow tedious, as some rightly point out that other big countries hold elections much quicker. Brazil, Indonesia and America can all get it done in a single day. The European parliamentary elections next month, across the whole of the European Union, will wrap up within four days. One of the reasons Thailand’s recent general election was annulled was because of a failure to abide by its constitution and hold it in a single day.

The Election Commission in Delhi retorts that India is different. Its electorate is massive at some 815m people, spread across some difficult areas (mountains, islands, forests, slums) and in many places there are worries about security. Though the poll is generally clean and well run, there are examples of attempted rigging, of terrorist attacks (left-wing Naxalites or Maoists have struck in this campaign) and other meddling. To preserve legitimacy, all voting booths must be guarded by police under the control of the central government, not states. It takes time to shift these central forces between constituencies, especially while respecting national holidays and schools that double as exam halls for students and polling stations. In any case, 2014 is likely to see a decent turn-out, perhaps not far short of 70%. That can be taken as evidence of satisfaction with the process.

Yet a protracted vote does look problematic. Devoting two or three months almost exclusively to elections—the government in limbo, many businesses holding off investment decisions to see who rules next—seems an unnecessarily long distraction. Prolonged campaigning is presumably a lot more expensive than the shorter sort: all those additional helicopter rides for politicians, rallies, TV and newspaper ads mean a bigger final bill ($3 billion? more?) for the election.

Most important, a stretched out election violates the idea that all voters should have, in theory, equal knowledge about candidates and parties in the contest. The asymmetry of knowledge between a voter on April 7th and one on May 12th is obvious. Those extra weeks bring news of what candidates say, indication of how earlier rounds of voting went, debate of whether there is a “wave” of support for one party or another. It seems likely that early rounds of voting influence behaviour of voters later on. Imagine, for comparison, if in an American presidential election New Yorkers cast ballots in September, but Californians waited until November.

Perhaps all this mattered less when India's general elections were generally considered the sum of different contests within various states. But general elections are now increasingly national: given pan-Indian media, the spread of TV, phones and the internet, a more mobile population, along with intense discussion of the role of prime-ministerial candidates. It appears, too, that voters take an increasing interest in national issues, such as corruption, the state of the economy, perhaps even India’s role abroad.

What of the Election Commission’s concerns about security? In fact much more could be done to speed things up, to make the process more efficient. India, more than many countries, is well placed to do so because of the spread of technology. Already India uses electronic voting machines, which make it easy to cast votes and then to count them. Now India should find ways to take advantage of its near-universal mobile phone coverage, rising literacy and the world’s biggest biometric database, Aadhar, which has so far registered 600m people, who can each be given a secure digital identity.

Voters should be offered quick and secure ways to take part in the election by phone or online. For a start, India should study how small countries have successfully done this. Estonia has allowed e-voting, for different sorts of polls, since 2005. Other countries, such as Norway, let you file income tax returns with text messages. Now India should start imagining how to do so on a much bigger scale, beginning with the 600m people who are registered with Aadhar.

If large numbers of voters are able to take part in elections digitally, then two good things could follow. Turn-out might well rise even higher than 70%—the famously reluctant urban middle classes could be more willing to vote if it could be done from the sofa or desk. Second, the pressure on bricks-and-mortar polling stations would be reduced, so fewer would be needed. In turn, the central police force can be spread more easily around the country, so the election can happen quicker.

It may prove impossible to start everyone voting online anytime soon, but the process could at least begin in India's better-off and smaller states and territories (for example in Delhi, Puducherry, Chandigarh and Goa) and then, if successful there, spread elsewhere. Eventually more Indians are likely to grow intolerant of queuing in the fierce heat of April and May to cast an electronic vote. The technology exists to let them cast the same electronic vote digitally and quickly. Ways should be found to make it happen.

(Picture credit: AFP)