We hope voters, not courts, decide this presidential election. The 2000 hanging and pregnant chads, butterfly ballots, Katherine Harris, Al Gore, Supreme Court decision and the conspiracy theories are best left to the past.

That controversy still echoes loudest on days like today, though. Its resonance is attention on how Americans vote, instead of how Americans voted. In other words, the importance of political technology over political science.

Eight years out, the inability in the U.S. to develop a reliable, technology-based voting system is a spectacular failure. For a culture proud of its democracy and innovation, the intersection of these principles remains out of reach.

In 2002, federal legislation (the Help America Vote Act) threw money at the problem, like for incentives to invest in electronic voting machines to replace the inaccurate (and discredited) mechanical and punch card systems.

(The latter two are actually banned in Maine. Electronic voting is allowed, but unused)

Several companies make them, yet this competition has not produced a reliable machine for public consumption. Software and hardware miscues during recent elections, like the 2006 mid-terms, revealed instability and inaccuracy.

As an industry, electronic voting machine manufacturers suffered miserable public relations from these problems. Even if the perfect touch-screen or other solution is developed, government and the public are rightfully skittish.

This put the American e-voting landscape in turmoil. Public skepticism has turned the tide against technology and made optical scanning of paper ballots (marked with ink) the preferred voting method.

Like any voting system, though, optical scanning (which is used in Maine) is imperfect. In recounts, interpreting the markings on ballots could delve into the divinity of “voter intent,” which was so crucial and divisive in 2000.

Yet, as American society adopts further innovation in everyday life, this anti-technology trend is unsustainable. Future voters will expect more efficient voting methods than currently available.

We’re becoming an on-demand society. But voting is regressing. Adhering to dated voting procedures could become disenfranchising as citizens become unwilling to participate in such a methodical process.

Spikes in early voting and absentee balloting this year are evidence of this evolution; more voters than ever are choosing convenience over tradition. It makes sense for elections to reflect trends, rather than resist them.

Because by 2012 – if current trends continue – our cellular phones may remotely pilot spacecraft, while our voting machines could be glorified buckets for hand-marked ballots. America can do better.

Technological innovation in this country should be able to develop a reliable, responsible and efficient electronic voting system. We’re experts in democracy and technology, after all.

We should be able to make a machine that reflects the highest ideals of each.