Why not keep it simple?

I'VE ALWAYS WONDERED why people in the United States (and some other countries) have been so anxious to use voting machines when it has been shown in Canada that the tried-and-true manual method is the most efficient and foolproof.

The way we do it up north is that each voter receives a ballot, enters a voting booth, marks the ballot with the necessary check mark or marks (using a soft pencil provided), folds the ballot, exits the booth, and puts the ballot in a ballot box. That sums up the voting part.

When the polls close, the ballots in that box are counted manually by the poll clerk and deputy clerk (who are chosen from opposing parties), together with observers from other candidates. The poll clerk then phones the results to the riding returning officer and each party representative does the same to their party headquarters. The ballots are next sealed in bundles in the box, which then goes to the returning officer, who will arrange recounts as required or requested before the results are announced "officially."

Typically the process is over in an hour--except in the infrequent cases where the returning officer has to arrange recounts. Up here we prefer this old-fashioned system because it is simple, more direct, and less corruptible. Perhaps that's one reason why we haven't had the election scandals in Canada that have lately plagued Americans.

Don Page, a former editor of the International Humanist, Humanist in Canada, and the Humanist, holds a Ph.D. in electrical engineering from Imperial College, London, UK, and has been a New Democratic Party candidate for the Ontario legislature as well as for the federal Parliament in Ottawa.