Ed Morrissey reports that the recount in Minnesota’s Senate race shouldn’t be very ugly, for two reasons. First, Minnesota uses optical scan ballots, which are immediately checked and returned to the voter to try again if they cannot be read clearly. Consequently, there’s shouldn’t be very many unclear ballots at all. Second, Minnesota law gives clear standards for a hand count, unlike Florida 2000 where individual counties were making it up as they went along. Barring a Washington 2004 scenario (where hundreds of new ballots were “found” during the recount), the recount should go smoothly and is unlikely to change the result.
So why doesn’t everyone use optical scan ballots? They have nearly all the advantages of electronic voting machines with none of the drawbacks. What’s the attraction of electronic voting machines? I can’t remember where I saw this theory, but I think it’s spot on: People like them for the same reason they once preferred canned vegetables, they’re more “modern”!
IRRELEVANT ASIDE: Come to think of it, that’s kind of the same reason people like object-oriented programming too.
Internet Scofflaw 